Yeshiva World News

Attacking and spitting on a child is wrong, wrong wrong. We are meant to be a light onto the nations, and not in the headlines of the New York Times for such unbelievably appalling behavior.

Just as not every white person is a member of the Ku Klux Klan, not every Charedi is guilty by association for the despicable acts of a few. It’s somehow become that the seeming silence is being mistaken for agreement with a small but vocal minority. It is not.

While we are only human, one of the main things that religious Jews strive for is to make a Kiddush Hashem- To sanctify the name of G-d by doing the right thing.

This is Israel, a Jewish democracy. Israel is not Iran. We have our beliefs which we believe to be correct. However, it goes without saying that we respect others who choose to live life differently.

Knowing I am sometimes quoted in the media for my business expertise, I was asked if I would be willing to appear on CNN to give the Charedi view about “segregated bussing”. I declined. I have no interest in starting up with a bunch of hooligans, who are have decided that the laws of the Torah as the leading rabbis understand it is not enough, and taking matters into their own hands. Even if we share the same dress code!

When I get on a plane, I try my best not to sit next to a woman who is not a family member. And, in business, I don’t shake hands with women either. I always do my best to be gracious and explain that it is a religious issue for me, and have sometimes stood or given up a choice seat for a worse one in order to have my religious needs accommodated.

Most of us don’t read secular media at all. The seemingly muted response should not be seen as agreement, but rather as taking in a different medium within the Charedi world itself.

I am not the spokesmen for Charedi Jewry- but I am a member of that segment of society, and proudly so. That said- this turn of events does not represent me, nor 99.9% of the people I know.

Rabbi Issamar Ginzberg - is a business consultant and Jerusalem Post columnist. He is an awardee of the Inc. Magazine entrepreneur of the year designation.

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW.

It is disturbingly commonplace: the driver with eyes cast down as he texts. The teen behind the wheel chatting away on a Bluetooth device in his ear. Cellphones, Blackberrys, electronic tablets and other personal electronic devices have dramatically changed the way most people go about their lives and do their work — and largely for the better. But irresponsible use of these revolutionary instruments has also introduced serious hazards.

Last year, about eight people died each day in vehicle accidents linked to distracted driving and the use of electronic devices. These 3,029 avoidable tragedies were a catalyst for the National Transportation Safety Board’s groundbreaking and potentially life-saving “no call, no text, no update” proposal last week. The board unanimously urged states and the District to pass legislation banning the use of personal electronic devices while driving; this would include prohibiting the use of “hands-free” devices, such as Bluetooth earpieces or headsets. The board proposed a narrow exception for emergencies for personal safety, reporting an accident or alerting police to a drunk driver. It also called on the CTIA-The Wireless Association and the Consumer Electronics Association to encourage development of technology that would disable portable devices that are within reach of the driver when a vehicle is in motion but could be overridden in emergency situations. The proposal would not affect devices, such as OnStar, that are embedded in vehicles; NTSB Chairman Deborah A.P. Hersman says there are not enough data on the effects of embedded devices but that the board will assess these in the near future.

The dangers of texting while driving have been thoroughly documented, including in a study by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, which showed that texting renders drivers 23 times more likely to have an accident or a close call. Thirty-five states and the District have banned texting while driving in the last three years.

States have been slower to prohibit cellphone conversations. Yet studies show that speaking on a cellphone while driving distracts a driver more than listening to music or speaking with a passenger. The District and 10 states, including Maryland, prohibit talking on a hand-held device while driving, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

The use of a hands-free device does not appear to diminish the risks and in some cases may increase them. Research has shown that drivers who speak on hand-held devices at least tend to compensate by slowing down, while those on hand-free devices tend not to display more caution.

The American Insurance Association, which supports a total ban, calls the use of mobile devices by drivers “a major epidemic in our country.” Public awareness, legislation and enforcement are key to weaning drivers off of these devices. It should not take another 3,000 deaths.

(Source: Washington Post)

Jeffrey T. Kuhner – Washington Times:

A year ago this week, U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was murdered. He died protecting his country from brutal Mexican gangsters. Two AK-47 assault rifles were found at his death site. We now know the horrifying truth: Agent Terry was killed by weapons that were part of an illegal Obama administration operation to smuggle arms to the dangerous drug cartels. He was a victim of his own government. This is not only a major scandal; it is a high crime that potentially reaches all the way to the White House, implicating senior officials. It is President Obama’s Watergate.

Operation Fast and Furious was run by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and overseen by the Justice Department. It started under the leadership of Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. Fast and Furious enabled straw gun purchases from licensed dealers in Arizona, in which more than 2,000 weapons were smuggled to Mexican drug kingpins. ATF claims it was seeking to track the weapons as part of a larger crackdown on the growing violence in the Southwest. Instead, ATF effectively has armed murderous gangs. About 300 Mexicans have been killed by Fast and Furious weapons. More than 1,400 guns remain lost. Agent Terry likely will not be the last U.S. casualty.

Mr. Holder insists he was unaware of what took place until after media reports of the scandal appeared in early 2011. This is false. Such a vast operation only could have occurred with the full knowledge and consent of senior administration officials. Massive gun-running and smuggling is not carried out by low-level ATF bureaucrats unless there is authorization from the top. There is a systematic cover-up.

Congressional Republicans, however, are beginning to shed light on the scandal. Led by Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Rep. Darrell Issa of California, a congressional probe is exposing the Justice Department’s rampant criminality and deliberate stonewalling. Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer, who heads the department’s criminal division, helped craft a February letter to Congress that denied ATF had ever walked guns into Mexico. Yet, under pressure from congressional investigators, the department later admitted that Mr. Breuer knew about ATF gun-smuggling as far back as April 2010. In other words, Mr. Breuer has been misleading Congress. He should resign – or be fired.

Instead, Mr. Holder tenaciously insists that Mr. Breuer will keep his job. He needs to keep his friends close and potential witnesses even closer. Another example is former acting ATF Director Kenneth Melson. Internal documents show Mr. Melson directly oversaw Fast and Furious, including monitoring numerous straw purchases of AK-47s. He has admitted to congressional investigators that he, along with high-ranking ATF leaders, reassigned every “manager involved in Fast and Furious” after the scandal surfaced on Capitol Hill and in the press. Mr. Melson said he was ordered by senior Justice officials to be silent regarding the reassignments. Hence, ATF managers who possess intimate and damaging information – especially on the role of the Justice Department – essentially have been promoted to cushy bureaucratic jobs. Their silence has been bought, their complicity swept under the rug. Mr. Melson has been transferred to Justice’s main office, where he serves as a “senior adviser” on forensic science in the department’s Office of Legal Policy. Rather than being punished, Mr. Melson has been rewarded for his incompetence and criminal negligence.

Mr. Holder and his aides have given misleading, false and contradictory testimony on Capitol Hill. Perjury, obstruction of justice and abuse of power – these are high crimes and misdemeanors. Mr. Holder should be impeached. Like most liberals, he is playing the victim card, claiming Mr. Issa is a modern-day Joseph McCarthy conducting a judicial witch hunt. Regardless of this petty smear, Mr. Holder must be held responsible and accountable – not only for the botched operation, but for his flagrant attempts to deflect blame from the administration.

Mr. Holder is a shameless careerist and a ruthless Beltway operative. For years, his out-of-control Justice Department has violated the fundamental principle of our democracy, the rule of law. He has refused to prosecute members of the New Black Panthers for blatant voter intimidation that took place in the 2008 election. Career Justice lawyers have confessed publicly that Mr. Holder will not pursue cases in which the perpetrators are black and the victims white. States such as Arizona and Alabama are being sued for simply attempting to enforce federal immigration laws. Mr. Holder also opposes voter identification cards, thereby enabling fraud and vote-stealing at the ballot box. What else can we expect from one who, during the Clinton administration, helped pardon notorious tax cheat Marc Rich and Puerto Rican terrorists?

Mr. Holder clearly knew about Fast and Furious and did nothing to stop it. This is because the administration wanted to use the excuse of increased violence on the border and weapons-smuggling into Mexico to justify tighter gun-control legislation. Mr. Holder is fighting ferociously to prevent important internal Justice documents from falling into the hands of congressional investigators. If the full nature of his involvement is discovered, the Obama presidency will be in peril.

Fast and Furious is even worse than Watergate for one simple reason: No one died because of President Nixon’s political dirty tricks and abuse of government power. But Brian Terry is dead; and there are still 1,500 missing guns threatening still more lives.

What did Mr. Obama know? Massive gun-smuggling by the U.S. government into a foreign country does not happen without the explicit knowledge and approval of leading administration officials. It’s too big, too risky and too costly. Mr. Holder may not be protecting just himself and his cronies. Is he protecting the president?

Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a columnist at The Washington Times and president of the Edmund Burke Institute.

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

As I have made clear from day one, the main reason I got into politics is out of concern for the future of our great nation.  As a grandfather of 13 grandchildren, my priority is to improve our economy by helping foster an environment where businesses can create lasting jobs and to address our national debt crisis so that all of our children and grandchildren can prosper in this country.  These are the two fundamental issues that are keeping our economy from getting back on track. No other option will work until these two important factors are addressed. There have been a couple of opportunities missed, but there are still options available to us if we get serious about our situation and commit to taking action.

 One critical component to getting our spending under control is requiring the federal government to do what many of you do every month, balance the checkbook. Unfortunately, we missed an opportunity to put that requirement in place when the House was unable to pass the balanced budget amendment, which fell short of the two thirds vote needed to pass. Our national debt crisis is bringing our country to the brink of catastrophe.  We now have a federal debt that has surpassed $15 trillion and rising. We have another potential credit downgrade on the horizon and a growing deficit of consumer confidence.  The resolution of a balanced budget to address our government spending problem is paramount. I believe a balanced budget amendment is an important first step to getting our economy back on track and will keep it strong for the long haul. Though we were unable to make the balanced budget amendment a reality during this session of Congress, I plan to continue pushing for it as long as I am in Washington.
 
Another unfortunate opportunity was lost when the Super Committee was unable to agree on how to cut $1.2 trillion in spending over ten years in order to cut the federal deficit.  Our government is currently borrowing 40 cents from other nations for every dollar we spend and there is no end in sight. Some believe that the best way to fix this issue is to increase taxes and ignore the out of control spending that our country is accustomed to. However, this strategy has taken our deficit to $15 trillion and has kept our unemployment rate above 8% for the last 34 months. It is a short term band-aid for very deep wound in our economy. We must find common sense solutions that increase tax revenue in our country by increasing productivity and creating jobs. We are kidding ourselves by believing raising taxes before cutting our spending or getting Americans back to work will get our country out of the hole. We will be revisiting this issue in Congress over the next several months, and I can assure you I will do all that I can to ensure that our government focuses on scaling back its frivolous spending.
 
We all know that small businesses are unquestionably the economic engine of the U.S. economy.  The start up or small business of today is the Apple or Facebook of tomorrow. The best thing the government can do to grow the economy is to create an environment that allows American businesses and entrepreneurs to create real, lasting jobs for Americans. The House of Representatives has already passed more than twenty five bipartisan bills that focus on cutting regulations and increasing capital for businesses to get started and grow. One such bill was the 3% Withholding Repeal and Job Creation Act which waived the 3% withholding imposed on government contractors. This bill keeps money in the pockets of business owners so they can take on more opportunities and create jobs. The 3% Withholding Repeal and Job Creation Act is a step in the right direction but there is still much to do.
 
We must also create an environment that allows start up businesses to acquire capital by more creative means. One bill I voted for that addresses this is H.R. 2930, Entrepreneur Access to Capital Act. This bill will help start-up businesses raise capital by eliminating constraints and provide a crowd funding exemption that will enable them to collect up to $5 million in donations from an unlimited amount of investors. This strategy will allow businesses to acquire capital from other recourses during this time when lending restrictions prevent entrepreneurs from taking out traditional loans. This sort of out-of-the-box approach can be found in other bills still stalled in the Senate.
 
It is time we acknowledge that quick-fix stimulus spending at tax payer expense only digs America deeper in the hole and kicks the can forward for the next generation. Raising taxes on American’s without addressing our out of control spending or current business environment is not a sustainable plan for growth. Every elected representative who has the pleasure to serve their constituents must start making the tough decisions necessary to better our economy.  A $15 billion dollar deficit and 34 straight months of high unemployment are unacceptable. Unless significant reductions to our federal spending are made and our businesses have the best opportunity to compete and grow, we risk every safety net and will leave future generations with a tremendous burden.  We must stop worrying about what is politically advantageous at the moment and start focusing on what is right for our children and our children’s children.  We must take action now.
 
For more information on the bipartisan passed by the House and awaiting Senate action go to http://www.gop.gov/bill/112/1/hr2360

Congressman Bob Turner was elected to represent New York’s 9th Congressional district during this year’s special election and serves on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, and House Committee on Homeland Security.

[By Karl Rove]

According to a recent New York Times article, President Barack Obama and his aides believe he can win re-election mostly by mixing “the combativeness of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s 1936 drive” with the “anti-Congress zeal of Harry S. Truman’s 1948 campaign.”

Mr. Obama will find it easier to invoke these past presidents than to replicate their electoral successes. In many ways, his situation is significantly different than that of his Democratic predecessors.

For one thing, a year out from the 1948 election, Gallup measured Mr. Truman’s job approval at 54%, whereas Mr. Obama’s is 43%—substantially lower than any president who has won re-election. (Gallup wasn’t yet polling job approval in 1935, the year before FDR’s landslide re-election win, but it’s reasonable to assume he was far more popular than Mr. Obama is at the same point in his presidency.)

For another, Mr. Obama lacks the record on jobs of either Mr. Truman or Mr. Roosevelt. Unemployment was at 7.8% when Mr. Obama took office. It’s 9% today and is forecast to remain there through 2012. For FDR, unemployment was 17% in 1936—very high, but down from 20% the year before and 25% at its peak in 1933. In 1948, unemployment was 3.7% when Truman won.

Mr. Obama’s record on economic growth also trails that of his two Democratic predecessors. The Congressional Budget Office, the Federal Reserve, and the Office of Management and Budget all suggest growth next year will be lucky to be a smidgen over 2.5%. By contrast, the gross domestic product grew (in current dollars) by more than 10% in 1948. And under Roosevelt, GDP grew (again in current dollars) by over 14% in 1936.

Another issue is talent as a campaigner. Truman, a plainspoken Missourian, could connect with working-class voters in a way Mr. Obama never has and never will. And FDR’s “combativeness” was effective in part because he had restored confidence to a Depression-ravaged America.

At the 1936 Democratic Party convention, FDR combatively excoriated “the privileged princes” of a new “economic tyranny.” But his Chicago speech addressed a nation far different than the affluent, multi-car, appliance-packed households of today. It’s an open question whether Mr. Obama’s class warfare will pack the same punch, even given our economic hard times.

There are other dissimilarities. Truman denounced a “do-nothing Congress” both of whose chambers were controlled by Republicans. But the Senate today is Democratic—and “do-nothing” is a label that is better affixed to it than to the Republican-controlled House.

In 1948, Republican congressional leaders preached inactivity, counting on New York Gov. Tom Dewey replacing Truman. But today under House Speaker John Boehner, the GOP has pursued an active agenda, including passing 29 bills aimed at spurring economic growth, 21 of which are now stalled in the Senate.

The House Republicans are tracking their legislative progress for all to see at majorityleader.gov/JobsTracker. That’s evidence they plan to aggressively market their efforts to voters. For its part, the Senate hasn’t even been able to approve a budget using the normal congressional procedures—committee hearings and markups, amendments, floor debates and the like—in nearly three years.

While there are some turkeys remaining in the GOP field, it is also unlikely that Mr. Obama will face a sacrificial lamb like Kansas Gov. Alf Landon in 1936 or a Republican as overconfident as Dewey was in 1948. Dewey’s strategy, he told aides, was “when you’re leading, don’t talk.” There’s every sign this year’s GOP contenders all understand they won’t win the general election simply by showing up, that Americans will (rightly) demand a substantive, positive agenda as the price of admission to the Oval Office.

History can provide presidential campaign planners with valuable lessons. But no two situations are the same—and in this instance, what’s most striking about Mr. Obama’s circumstances compared to those of Truman and Roosevelt is how different they really are.

This article originally appeared on WSJ.com on Wednesday, November 30, 2011.

Karl Rove is a former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush. He is a Fox News contributor and author of “Courage and Consequence” (Threshold Editions, 2010).

(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)

Hey, Jon Corzine — where’s the cash?

The court-appointed trustee in charge of dismantling the former New Jersey governor’s now-bankrupt trading firm, MF Global, says $1.2 billion in client cash is in the wind.

That’s double the sum originally feared missing from the firm’s brokerage unit.

Forensic accountants tasked with reconstructing the firm’s books reportedly have separately confirmed that the shortage is much greater than originally feared.

If customer money was illegally used to cover trading losses in the days before MF filed Chapter 11, that could lead to criminal charges — and it makes it highly unlikely that any money will be recovered.

All of which has made Jon Corzine the symbol of all that’s gone wrong with Wall Street, right?

Wrong.

Corzine, so far, has been getting a pass.

Occupy Wall Street has been dumb as a stump on the scandal.

But so, too, have been Corzine’s fellow Democrats — who have ardently embraced OWS rhetoric in hopes of exciting the party’s hard-left base.

Not a word from Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who chairs the Democratic National Committee and who says OWS represents “the frustration that middle-class folks and working people feel that the wealthy always seem to have the wind at their backs.”

Or Vice President Joe Biden, who says the “core” of OWS is that “the American people do not think the system is fair, is on the level.”

(This is the same Joe Biden, by the way, who bragged that he and President Obama called Corzine for advice on their first day in office because “we knew he knew about the economy.”)

Or former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is now raising money by piggy-backing on OWS, which she called “a grass-roots movement working to hold special interests accountable.”

Or New York’s chameleon Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who — well, see below.

And especially not from Obama, who has said “the protesters are giving voice to a more broad-based frustration about how our financial system works” — and who has himself railed against “fat-cat bankers on Wall Street.”

Exhibit A: Jon Corzine and MF Global.

Or so you’d think, anyway.

Maybe they’ll all have something to say the day the FBI and federal prosecutors in both Manhattan and Chicago finish their ongoing investigations.

A day Corzine must be dreading.

(Source: NY Post)

Dissatisfied Republicans have looked everywhere for an authentic conservative alternative to Mitt Romney, everywhere that is, except for the one place where it might already exist.

First there was Michele Bachmann who shot to the top of the GOP field with an impressive victory in the highly touted Iowa straw poll. But she soon found herself out of the spotlight when the Governor of Texas, Rick Perry, made his highly anticipated entrance into the election.

The buzz for Perry was so strong in the media at first, that many commentators declared the election came down to Romney vs Perry. But Perry began to unravel in the GOP debates when his not so conservative views on illegal immigration and securing the border came to light. The intense scrutiny by the national media didn’t help either, and before you knew it there was one negative story after the other on Perry. Conservatives started asking themselves, if Perry can’t hold is own in a debate against his fellow Republicans, how can they expect him to fair any better against Obama. That’s when a new conservative star was born.

To the surprise of most pundits, businessman Herman Cain won the Florida straw poll, propelling him to the front of most national polls alongside Romney. His credentials on fixing the economy were boosted with his previous experience as CEO of a national pizza chain, and his catchy “9-9-9″ tax plan seemed to resonate with voters. But the Cain train was suddenly knocked off course when Politico reported that Cain had been accused of improper behavior with two previous female employers. The harassment allegations took on a life of there own, and before you knew it two more woman stepped forward with similar claims.

The fall of Cain has led to the rise of former speaker of the house Newt Gingrich. And that’s pretty much where the race stands today. Most polls have Romney and Gingrich leading the pack, with Cain rapidly falling and Perry nearly knocked out after his “oops” blunder in a debate when he forgot the third department of government he wanted to abolish. Ron Paul continues to have a steady showing of support by his loyal supporters, but his fringe policies make it unlikely he’ll be able to widen his support base any further.

And that leaves us with Rick Santorum, a former Senator from Pennsylvania. Santorum is arguably the staunchest conservative in the race, with strong conservative values across the board. His strong support for Israel and hawkish approach to Iran is not simply an election gimmick, he has a solid twelve year record in the Senate that backs it up.

In an earlier interview with the Washington Post, Santorum explained his foreign policy credentials. “During my time on the Senate Armed Services Committee, I chaired a subcommittee that worked on all military procurement issues, helped transform the military and our intelligence system as well as delved into the issues facing our nation in the Middle East. That is how I came to authoring legislation to protect Israel from the threat posed by Syria and to assist pro-democracy movements in Iran. I worked with my advisers, but I also dove into the issues, learned about them, weighed the advice of divergent viewpoints and then came to my policy decisions. This is the combination of experience and intangibles that our next president needs, and it’s what I alone bring to the table.”

Santorum is also unique in his strong pro-life and pro-family policies. In short, he’s a social and fiscal conservative with a hawkish foreign policy. He’s has the experience and track record to back up his rhetoric, but for some reason he continues to show up at the bottom of every poll. Even in Iowa, where’s he’s spent the bulk of his time campaigning and visited all 99 counties, he only has 5% support in the latest poll. He’s done well in the debates and has given three major policy speeches, but so far it hasn’t helped.

Republicans are tripping over themselves trying to find a true conservative to take on Romney in the primaries and Obama in the general election, so why not give Santorum a chance. Let’s see how he does under the bright glare of the media spotlight. Will he fumble on Libya like Cain did the other day? Does he have a strong moral past that can stand up to the controversy diggers in the media? There’s only one way to find out. Ronald Reagan is no longer alive to save the Republican party and defeat Obama, but Santorum is. It’s time to give him that chance.

Yechezkel Gordon lives in Jerusalem, Israel and is an independent political analyst and columnist. He can be contacted at yechezkelgordoncolumnist@yahoo.com

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW.

Whether you support a military strike on Iran or are against it, or you simply don’t care much about it, you better be prepared for it.

Over the past few weeks there has been much speculation and debate regarding Iran and it’s quest for a nuclear bomb. It originated in Israel with front page articles in the major newspapers and spread world wide when the IAEA, the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency,  released an intelligence report that Iran’s nuclear aspirations go far beyond civilian purposes.

If Israel does indeed attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, Iran and it’s proxies would be expected to retaliate. That means in a worst case scenario, Hamas in the south could launch hundreds of rockets and Hezbollah could terrorize the north with it’s deadly arsenal of missiles, and that’s before we even mention Iran!

The Iranians have the means to make the scud missile attack by Iraq look like child’s play,  chas visholom. It has been reported, that Iran has a vast arsenal of weapons, including weapons of mass destruction, that are within striking distance to every city in Israel. That means that even if you live in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem, cities that have been relatively safe from the rocket attacks, you will now find yourself on the front lines of a dangerous war.

Now, if you were expecting one of the cars with speakers to roll down your block announcing the military strike will start at 9pm tonight, you’re in for a surprise. It’s not going to happen! You will be just as surprised as the Iranians will be.

And that means that the time to prepare for such an attack, is now. Does you’re family know where the closest bomb shelter is? Do you have an emergency supply of food and water saved up? Do you have a radio to stay updated and informed inside the bomb shelter?

 Of course we all hope and daven that the above scenario won’t happen, but a little preparation now could have an enormous effect later if it does, so what’s the excuse not to be prepared?

Yechezkel Gordon lives in Jerusalem, Israel and is an independent political analyst and columnist. He can be contacted at yechezkelgordoncolumnist@yahoo.com

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW.

With Election Day rapidly approaching, now is the time for each of us to contemplate how we are going to cast our vote.  Now is the time to ascertain which of the candidates we believe will do the best job for our families and our community.

In the race for Town of Ramapo Supervisor, the choice is clear.  Only one of the candidates has a proven track record when it comes to fighting for our community.  Only one of the candidates has championed our community’s interests and advocated for our families time and time again.

Ever since he arrived at Ramapo Town Hall eleven years ago, Supervisor Christopher St. Lawrence has demonstrated a keen understanding of the various issues that face our community.  He has fought diligently against the forces that have worked assiduously to inhibit the growth of our community.  It is largely due to the dedication and resolve of Supervisor St. Lawrence that our community has had the opportunity to flourish and grow into a thriving and vibrant community.

The individual vying to unseat Supervisor St. Lawrence has been a vocal opponent of our community for more than two decades.  Robert Rhodes is the Chairman of Preserve Ramapo.  Mr. Rhodes wants to be the Town Supervisor and represent Ramapo families, but his actions and words over the past twenty five years speak volumes about how he truly feels about our community.

As one of the founders of the Village of Wesley Hills, Robert Rhodes was instrumental in forming a village whose initial intent was to control the growth of our community and limit the development of much-needed housing for growing families.  As Wesley Hills Deputy Mayor in the 1980’s, Mr. Rhodes played a key role in the troubling incident in which the Village mercilessly assailed a local rabbi and his family after they hosted a minyan on Shabbos.  Mr. Rhodes and the Wesley Hills Village Board initiated a nasty campaign to harass and intimidate the rabbi and his family.  Robert Rhodes and his Village Board brought a lawsuit against the family and tried to assess an outrageous $100,000 fine on the rabbi.  Is this the type of person we want in the Supervisor’s office?  Is this the kind of individual we want running our town?

Mr. Rhodes’ vehement opposition to growth in our community is well-known.  He is a perennial speaker at public hearings and meetings involving proposed yeshivos and shuls, where he voices his opposition to the growth of our mosdos with great pride.  Mr. Rhodes rarely passes up an opportunity to speak out against our community and the Torah institutions.  His suggestion that a study be commissioned to examine ways to curtail the growth in the frum community is appalling.

His candidacy is built upon his unbridled criticism of Supervisor St. Lawrence for his proven willingness to stand up and fight for our community.  Mr. Rhodes’ contemptible antics are no secret, as he wears his opposition to our community as a badge of honor on the campaign trail.

We cannot sit idly by and allow Mr. Rhodes’ racist rhetoric to resonate among Ramapo voters.  On Tuesday, November 8th, we must take a stand against Robert Rhodes and Preserve Ramapo. This Election Day, it is critical that we have a solid showing at the polls and strongly support Supervisor Christopher St. Lawrence and his running mates, Councilman Daniel Friedman and Brendel Logan.  We need to show hakaras hatov to Supervisor St. Lawrence and his team for their ongoing efforts on behalf of our community and all of Ramapo.

Yossi Gestetner is a New York-Based Writer and Marketing Consultant in the Orthodox Jewish/Hasidic Communities. His Firm “Gestetner & Co” Serves Political, Charitable and Corporate accounts. Yossi can be reached via yossi@yossigestetner.com

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW.

I write these words in response to the NASI Project’s latest initiative, which I will assume readers are already familiar with. I believe very strongly that this initiative and the presumptions behind it are terribly misguided and will cause more harm than good if implemented, even if it may lead to some marriages. Before systematically supporting these words, I ask the reader to keep the following points in mind:

1) I will assume that the people behind this initiative have their hearts in the right place and are not motivated by the potential for monetary gain or some other ulterior motive.  Whenever large sums of money are involved it is fair for people to be concerned about the integrity of the program and recommended (halachically and otherwise) for those behind it to be transparent.  However, for purposes of this discussion, their integrity is irrelevant and I will leave it to others to verify that all is Glatt Kosher.

2) Those who are familiar with my writings and activities in the shidduch world through EndTheMadness may take umbrage with some of my ideas and how I express them.  That is fine; I don’t expect to please everyone, nor am I trying to win a popularity contest.  I hope that readers will consider the merit of my words based strictly on their merit, not on their opinion of the messenger.

The same holds true for the words of those many readers may consider to be Gedolim.  It behooves us to make decisions for the welfare of the community based on careful reasoning and intellectual honesty, not blind adherence to any rabbi, no matter how knowledgeable and pious he may be.  A true Gadol is intellectually honest and preoccupied with the truth, not pushing dogma; he therefore welcomes open discussion and will be the first to acknowledge that he does not have a monopoly on the truth nor a direct spiritual line to it.  Those who feel otherwise are free to blindly adhere to whomever they wish, but they have no right to stifle intellectual discussion and attempt to bludgeon others into blind adherence; this is not a contest to decide if my rabbi is smarter and holier than your rabbi, and a letter signed by 70 rabbis does not need to be defeated with a letter signed by 71 rabbis.

Let the discussion be focused entirely on the issues; Truth is not decided by referendum or personality, but by facts and reason.  Let the most substantive and reasoned argument win.

3) I have no personal vested interest in this matter.   I have no financial stake in the shidduch world, am not affiliated with any organization, and my efforts through EndTheMadness have been 100% volunteer and transparent.  I am also not in this for the kavod, since I have received more flak than kavod over the years, and have no particular appetite for either.   This does not make my opinions right, but it should give pause to those who would attack me simply because I don’t wear a certain uniform and subscribe to whatever notions are fashionable.

4) Unlike the vast majority of people who comment on these issues, I stand behind all my opinions with my real name.  Again, this does not make my opinions right, but it should earn my ideas more serious consideration than those stated from the shadows of anonymity.  Historically, our heroes and Poskim stand behind their ideas.  Those who voice loud opinions but don’t stand behind them do not deserve serious consideration.

Now that we’ve been properly introduced, let’s take a look as the premises behind the NASI’s latest proposal, followed by the long-term ramifications of this proposal being implemented.

1) Their “technical definition of the shidduch crisis” is that there are far more eligible women than men.  In other words, the problem is strictly a numbers game, and does not include the values singles and others bring into the shidduch process, the methodology of shadchanim, and the methods of meeting currently available (or not available) to singles.  It’s simply a demographic problem.

This presumption is very troubling for a variety of reasons. First, the presumption is based entirely on anecdotal evidence.   “Word on the street” is that there are hordes of wonderful single women out there and not nearly enough men.   No concrete support for this presumption has been provided.  This presumption should be supportable from enrollment numbers in yeshivas and seminaries, birth records, or other data, yet this presumption is widely accepted as fact simply because it has been repeated many times.

Many people give strong credence to the claims of shadchanim that they know many more single women than men, or that dating web sites have more female members than males, or that many singles events attract more women than men.  This circumstantial evidence is faulty, because all these methods of meeting cater to the female mindset – women are far more amenable to approach shadchanim, sign up for a dating web site, or attend a singles event, whereas men are more reluctant to put a sign on themselves stating that they are looking for a wife. 

Indeed, those EndTheMadness events that have been perceived as being more like singles events have attracted more women than men, whereas those that were far less understated about meeting other singles generally have drawn significantly more men than women!  It is only because much of the community disavows meeting opportunities that are not entirely about meeting a potential spouse that it has developed a perception that there is a shortage of eligible men. In reality, there are plenty of fine eligible men yearning to meet their eishes chayil.

Second, the presumption runs into some serious theological questions that have not been adequately addressed.   The people NASI most directly speak to generally believe very strongly in the concept of “bashert”, that there is at least one ideal, intended person for everyone to marry. To suggest that there are not nearly enough men out there clashes with this concept.

In addition, it raises the very legitimate question of how or why God wouldn’t better manage how many of each gender He puts in the world.  That’s part of His job, after all.

Third, NASI’s definition of the problem and the resultant suggestions presume that it is moral and proper to manipulate the demographics of dating; we should control when people are allowed to start dating (even cryogenically “freezing” people for this purpose), what the age difference between a husband and wife should be, and even have major financial “incentives” for matchmakers to push certain shidduchim over others.  There are very serious ethical considerations here that are just not being given attention.  Even assuming there is a demographic problem (which I reject), how can the halachic and moral issues here be ignored?

The responsibility of matchmakers is to suggest the most appropriate match to the people they serve, not to push a demographic agenda or be influenced by monetary considerations.  If the most appropriate match for a particular man is a woman several years his junior, how can the shadchan in good conscience deliberately suggest someone else?  How does this jive with the concept of Bashert, the integrity of the process, and the goal of creating happy, stable homes?  Why should singles trust that matchmakers (or even the rabbinic leaders) have their personal best interests at heart, and are not just manipulating them for some external agenda?  Why are these questions not even being asked?

2) NASI presumes that the “undeniable (!) root cause of this tragedy”  is a so-called “Age Gap” problem – a theoretical illustration (“If we have an island…”) that is for some reason widely accepted as fact.  ALL illustrations of this theory begin with “suppose we have…” where the numbers are fabricated and manipulated to produce the desired problematic result.  But no actual factual support for the existence of this problem is provided.  Indeed, as I shall demonstrate, the facts available to us strongly indicate that there is no such problem and it all mere propaganda.

I direct readers to the following news item

“The average age gap between husband and wife in first marriages was 2.3 years among Jews. The number for the rest of the religions was more than twice as high – at about five years.”

So, first of all, the age gap between husbands and wives on average is actually quite small — which is exactly what our own eyes tell us. How many of you really know a great number of couples where there is a major age difference?  Me neither. Second of all, the age gap in the Jewish community is less than half that of the rest of the population. So this can’t possibly be the “root cause of the shidduch crisis”. It’s hard to argue that it’s even a factor.

The willfully blind would immediately dismiss this strong factual evidence and simply argue that things are completely different in the so-called Charedi world.  Of course.  Everything is different if you ignore facts, have no basis in reality, decry secular education, believe your leaders have a direct line to God and never make a mistake, and believe your community does not face the same problems as the rest of the world.

If the age gap theory is true, then the age disparity in this community must be so tremendous that it makes up for the fact that the rest of the Jewish community is marrying close in age.  Again, is that what you see around you? Do you know dozens of couples where the husband is a decade older than his wife, or is that an anomaly?  Can we finally put a tombstone on this ridiculous “Age Gap” idea?

NASI’s proposed solution is for men to be manipulated into dating and hopefully marrying women their age or older.  As noted above, this is morally reprehensible, since everyone should be encouraged to marry the most suitable match.  If the most suitable match happens to be a woman significantly younger, what moral right does anyone have to prevent these two people from meeting one another?  The potential halachic violations in such chicanery are numerous and staggering, and a letter from 70 rabbis neither addresses that nor changes it.

Furthermore, there is widespread belief that there is a problem with men dating women significantly their junior.  Our eyes and ears do not support this.  I ask readers to consider how many couples they know where the man is many years older than the woman.  I’m willing to bet the vast majority of couples anyone knows are fairly close in age.  NASI would have us believe that there are a lot of older singles running around with seminary girls.  It just isn’t true.

An approach that focuses more on values than theoretical math problems would observe some serious inconsistencies and double standards in the shidduch world.   Single women receive the vast majority of sympathy, to the extent that a single woman is considered a “tragedy”  worthy of extraordinary proposals, but a single man is presumed to be a bum who doesn’t want to settle down. Single men have “lists”  of women just pining to meet them, but women sit by the phone waiting for the shadchan to call.  Single women are incredibly refined and wonderful in every way, but single men are sloppy, uncouth, and far from marriageable.  These canards are all widely believed. Whoever is doing PR for the female population is doing quite a job.

What goes unmentioned is that the vast majority of rejections before a first date, after a first date, and after a relationship has progressed are done by the women.  Ask any shadchan.  The same women who are supposedly just desperate to get married, who want nothing more than to meet a nice guy who doesn’t drool all over himself, categorically reject the vast majority of men they come across without batting an eyelash – and then say the problem is there aren’t any good guys out there.  And everyone just accepts this as fact.

I ask readers to consider the men they know in their families and communities, and compare them to the women.  Are the men really all just a bunch of pathetic slobs, while the women are valorous and refined in every way?  Are all the shalom bayis issues in our community the fault of the men alone?  Do women categorically have the right priorities in dating, and do they always conduct themselves properly throughout the process?  I would posit that feminism and un-Jewish values have had a devastating effect on the shidduch world.  This is no numbers game, and to make a numbers game out of it is to ignore real and serious issues that threaten one of the foundations of Jewish life.  (Perhaps that is why many people want so badly to believe it is just a numbers game.)

3) NASI presumes that money is the answer to all the world’s problems.  Shadchanim simply have to be “motivated” to produce the desired results.  The fact is that shadchanim are paid more than ever before, wield more control than ever before, and are failing worse than ever before.  If a single goes out with many people but does not get married, no one would suggest offering a financial incentive for the single to get married.  Rather, people assume there is something wrong with the single that needs to be fixed.  However, if a shadchan sets up hundreds and thousands of dates but gets it right a tenth of a percent of the time, the shadchan is hailed as a success, showered with respect, and offered thousands more dollars than the already high rate through NASI.

To put it another way, if a single goes out with 100 people, it is widely assumed the single is either too picky or has some serious issues.  However, nowadays most or all of those dates will originate from a matchmaker.  Why is it assumed the problem is with the single and not with the matchmaker, who has exactly the same rate of failure?  Why does the single need therapy and graveside prayers, but the matchmakers just need a few thousand dollars more to motivate them?

If matchmaking is the overwhelmingly primary way for singles to meet like never before, and if singles are having a more difficult time meeting than ever before, why do the expert mathematicians at NASI believe that more dependence on matchmaking is the obvious solution as opposed to an obvious problem?

Even more astonishingly, NASI claims that shadchanim don’t make shidduchim, but only set up dates.  This is a notion I actually agree with, and in fact believe the minimum and maximum anyone should expect from a shadchan is an introduction that makes good sense.  However, NASI believes that we are entirely dependent on shadchanim to fix a dubious demographic problem and get people married, yet NASI concurrently absolves shadchanim of anything more than the responsibility to set up dates.

In fact, NASI even offers monetary rewards to shadchanim just for setting up dates!  That is like paying a real estate agent a fee just for showing you an apartment.  To take the analogy further, the client is forbidden to try to find a home on his own, and the real estate agent is being paid by a third party to only show you certain homes that are having trouble being taken off the housing market.  Oh, by the way, the real estate agent has no formal training, is held to no professional standards, and gets it right less than one percent of the time while often treating clients with gross insensitivity and disrespect, blaming clients for not being able to find the right home.

That’s your shidduch world in a nutshell.  Raising large sums of money to further motivate the real estate agents is not the best idea.  We would be better off if we just threw all the singles into a room together and let them figure it out themselves.

I will also note the hypocrisy of a community that purports itself to be all about ruchniyus placing a greater emphasis on money in shidduchim – both for shadchanim and as a basis for making a match – than perhaps any other segment of Jewish society, religious or otherwise.  This community needs a long, honest look in the mirror to contemplate what the real problems may be.

4) NASI presumes that matchmaking is the only acceptable way for singles to meet. As noted above, matchmaking as an institution is a colossal failure, and throwing no-questions-asked money at a colossal failure is a foolish investment.

Most of NASI’s target audience believes it is anathema for singles to meet much the way their own parents and rabbis met a generation or two ago.  Many people from this community complain about the shidduch world, but very discreetly.  They may post messages on the Internet or send letters to a newspaper, but will insist on remaining anonymous because they fear retribution on the shidduch scene – a shidduch scene they abhor.  Such people, to me, have forfeited the right to complain about the shidduch world, because, much as they may dislike it, they have chosen it and continue to choose it.  Those who are unwilling to step back and critically consider if some basic ideas and issues need to change should stop complaining and sleep in the bed they have made for themselves.

5) NASI’s proposal is nothing more than affirmative action, manipulating a situation so that those with a presumed disadvantage – in this case single women above a certain age – are given special treatment.  The moral implications have already been discussed, but affirmative action is unwise besides.  We have a widespread problem of singles having difficulty and taking longer to find a match. The solution should be to make it EASIER for singles to meet, in part by opening up more meeting opportunities and relaxing some of the strict rules that have been invented to control adults, prevent remote problems, and push a questionable religious agenda.

Instead, the proposed solution is to make it more difficult for younger singles to meet and to forbid singles younger than a certain age from dating altogether!  The outcome this is most likely to produce is simply a greater number of younger singles turning into older singles and forfeiting foundational years of marriage.  This is the sort of solution one would expect from Chelm.

In addition, NASI does not explain to us why affirmative action is not extended to other groups of singles who face disadvantages: overweight, unattractive women; short, balding men; converts; those of modest means; the ninth best boy in Lakewood; those who don’t adhere tightly to the social, pseudo-religious script.

In sum, NASI’s analysis of the problem is based on false premises, and their solution is terribly misguided and would cause more harm than good while perpetuating the un-Jewish values that are the true cause of the problem.  I urge readers to give the analysis of the problem on the EndTheMadness web site and the comprehensive, Torah-value oriented solution that is necessary for creating a better society.  It will require many people to seriously examine some of their beliefs and values, but that is what is required to address the real problems, and not take a shortsighted stab at some of the symptoms.  There is a solution for those who truly want it and are willing to do what it takes.

Rabbi Chananya Weissman – Founder, www.endthemadness.org

Please visit the YWN Coffee Room, where  heated debates are ongoing regarding this new initiative.

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/contact.php

The following Op-Ed appears on the NY Post website:

Time’s up: The Zuccotti Park vagabonds have had their say – and trashed lower Manhattan – for long enough.

They need to go.

Be it voluntarily – by packing their tents and heading off in an orderly fashion.

Or by having th NYPD step in – and evict them.

But go they must: Their lease on Zuccotti Park has expired.

And it’s their own fault.

What began as a credible protest against bank bailouts, crony capitalism and the like has, in large measure, been hijacked by crazies and criminals.

Beyond that, too many protesters demonstrate by their actions a level of contempt for residents, businesses and workers in the area that long ago crossed the line.

No one should have to put up with the incessant noise, filth and downright dangerous conditions the protesters have foisted upon lower Manhattan.

The drumming and tambourines.

The yelling and screaming.

The public urination and defecation.

The drugs.

The lewdness.

The criminals and their crimes.

It’s all got to end.

No one has greater respect for the First Amendment than this paper. Even radicals — especially radicals — have a fundamental right to public protest.

We don’t even quibble with some parts of the protesters’ message — such as their resentment of the massive bailouts of banks using taxpayer money.

And we certainly respect the right of Brookfield Properties, owner of the park, to permit the protests.

But there comes a time when enough is enough.

Certainly, Brookfield does itself no great honor by pretending to be satisfied with the status quo.

Sure, we understand the pressure the company’s been under — including, most shamefully, from cynical New York pols looking to cozy up to the heavily out-of-towner-based group, local radicals, and their manipulators in the labor unions seeking to capitalize on the “occupation.”

That pressure explains why Brookfield has been reluctant to push City Hall — publicly — for action.

Brookfield wasn’t speaking yesterday. But surely, it wants the nightmare to end — even if it’s too frightened to say so.

“My guess is that we basically look to the police leadership and mayor to decide what to do,” Brookfield’s chairman, John Zuccotti, said last month.

But passing the buck to City Hall solves nothing. Mayor Bloomberg & Co. have essentially been hiding behind the fact that Zuccotti Park is not city property.

“If Brookfield were to come to us and say that their rules are being violated … the Police Department will do what it has to do,” Bloomberg said last week. “But this is not a public park.” No, it’s not.

But it is a public nuisance — and it needs to be dealt with just like any other public nuisance.

Clearly, the city has the right to do just that.

What’s needed right now is mayoral leadership.

Could Mayor Bloomberg, at long last, be leaning in that direction?

“You know, I think increasingly you’re seeing that communities, businesses and residents in lower Manhattan feel that they are the ones that are being occupied,” Bloomberg said yesterday.

“This isn’t an occupation of Wall Street. It’s an occupation of a growing, vibrant residential neighborhood in lower Manhattan, and it’s really hurting small businesses and families.”

Added the mayor, “Other people have rights, too, and I am very concerned about the other peoples’ rights, as well as those of the protesters.”

Spot on.

Now he needs to take the next step — and start the process for an orderly end to the extravaganza.

That means giving the protesters fair warning that their party is over — and then standing firm in the face of the firestorm that surely will ignite.

If they choose not to leave — which they probably won’t — then Bloomberg needs to instruct the NYPD to clean the mess up.

Today wouldn’t be a day too soon.

(Source: NY Post)

There is hardly a person reading this column that does not know, at least indirectly, a friend or relative that is either in foreclosure or facing foreclosure. Despite the many promises from the Obama administration, as well as promises made by local and state officials that “help is on the way”, if the ever increasing amount of foreclosure conference cases that are scheduled on a daily basis in the courts of the State of New York is any indication, then help needs a helping hand. Unfortunately, judging from my frequent foreclosure conferences at various New York courts, it is all too evident as that the vast majority of borrowers do not understand what foreclosure is (other than that they may lose their home) or how to fight it. And, yes, foreclosure can and must be fought head on.

In this weekly column on Yeshiva World News, we will examine the myths, facts and realities of foreclosure. We will begin with a general overview the mortgage documents that the now in-foreclosure borrower signed and their relevance in the banks un-mitigating ruthless foreclosure process. We will then examine the legality, meaning and significance of the documents signed, along with waivers and disclosures.

After getting a grasp on what it is that the borrower quickly and hurriedly signed at the closing (usually, and unfortunately, without sufficient explanation from their closing attorney), we will discuss how we can use those jumbled, incoherent and confusing documents to our advantage to battle the money hungry and ruthless banks, as well as the attorneys that they employ, most notably: Steven J. Baum and Rosicki & Rosicki. Aside from the documents signed by the borrower, we will examine the “robo signing” accusations as well as accusations (most of which are likely true) of unethical practices by the banks and their attorneys in the course of the foreclosure process.

After familiarizing ourselves with the information above, we will examine and evaluate the different defenses, including affirmative defenses, that any foreclosure defendant should consider when served with a Summons and Complaint in a foreclosure matter. Following this familiarization, we will examine solutions and options available to homeowners who want to remain in their home and get their loan reinstated on fair(er) terms, such as with what is commonly known as a “loan modification” as well thru the process of settling in full one or more loans. We will also focus and examine the options for those homeowners who have decide that they have had enough with the “pleasantries of home ownership” and who now wish to secure a “short sale” on terms that they can swallow and walk away with a sense of calm.

Additionally, we will evaluate cases brought before the courts of the State of New York, at the Supreme Court and Appellate Level, dealing with foreclosures to better understand the workings and minds of the judges and referrers who have been entrusted to oversee the foreclosure cases in the State of New York. As will be seen, there have been milestone victories for the “little guys” and we must examine and learn from those winners how we, too, can be winners.

Lastly, I will take one or two questions from readers of The Yeshiva World News in connection with foreclosure as well as real estate and post the answers every Monday. The readers’ questions and comments will be greatly appreciated and will help me better guide my columns to meet the interest of this great readership.

Alexander Gofer is the managing partner of the Gofer Law Group and can be reached at 212-480-3400 ext 101 or via e-mail: Alexander@goferlaw.com

As I put pen to paper and contemplate a topic that’s on everyone’s mind, I’m left writing about the Gilad Shalit exchange deal.  As a huge fan of Israel, I needed to find a subject that is connected with the Holy Land!

On Tuesday, the 20th day of Tishrei, the fourth day of Chol Hamoed Sukkos, Gilad Shalit was released from Hammas captivity after 1,941 days of imprisonment.  As we celebrated our Zman Simchaseinu (time of happiness), Gilad celebrated his own personal Zman Chairusainu (time of freedom).  The world watched as he went through a gruesome interview before he was freed.  An Egyptian interviewer asked him questions that required him to stretch the truth quite far to obtain his freedom.  After he gave them the answers they wanted, he was officially in Israeli hands.  It was an exciting day for Jews all over the world, especially in his hometown of Mitzpe Hila, where they celebrated his homecoming waving Israeli flags and decorative posters.  Many of us cried in happiness (ok, maybe just the women!) when we saw or heard the news; it was a dream come true.  Some shuls have been reciting his name for years in a special mishabairach for kidnapped and missing Israeli soldiers.  Noam and Aviva Shalit’s request for the past five and a half years to bring their son home has been answered.  Their insistence that “Gilad Adain Chai” has proven to be true, Baruch Hashem!

However, the day was also bittersweet.  Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and the Israeli citizens paid for his return with the release of 1,027 terrorists, many of whom have blood on their hands.  The deal called for about half of them to be released now and another half in two months time.  For the family members of terrorist victims, this day opened up bitter wounds.  Some families were promised that these terrorists would never be freed.  They feel betrayed and are reliving the nightmare.

Many people seem to have opinions on this heated topic.  While some consider it pidyon shuvuyim (redeeming a captive), others can not fathom how returning one Israeli soldier for over 1,000 terrorists is going to stop the Palestinians from kidnapping others, a reason why pidyon shuvuyim would not apply in this case.  Shlomo Hamelech wrote in Sefer Koheles that there is a time for everything to occur. For some it was a time to cry out of happiness, for others it was a time to cry out of sadness.  Some people can not understand how the Prime Minister and a majority of the cabinet members agreed to the deal.  There must be more that we don’t know about.  However, many people also don’t know what to make of it all or prefer not to have an opinion at all.  We can’t play G-d, and therefore we don’t know with 100% certainty how this deal will play out.  We can only pray that this deal will result in good news and that Hashem will ease the chevlie Moshiach.  After all, Hashem controls what our leaders do, as they are just puppets in His Hands.

After reading many articles about the exchange deal, I’m left feeling happy for the Shalit family.  They’ve waited years to be reunited with Gilad after that tragic day in June when he was abducted.  They’ve campaigned for years for his freedom, including setting up a protest tent outside Netanyahu’s home for the past 16 months and traveling to far out places, including America.  And then, they merited seeing him free.  This event illustrates “yeshuas Hashem k’heref ayin.” Hashem’s salvation comes in a blink of an eye. When the time was right for Gilad to be released, the process went fast.  Gilad stated in the interview that he thought he would be in captivity for a much longer time.  However, Hashem had other plans. There is a concept of “golgol chozer bolam”.  The wheel of fortune is constantly changing.  As we are told in Sefer Eiuv, there is an end to suffering, an end to troubled times, and an end to despair.

All we need to do is believe.  Believe in Hashem.

Rabbi Lau, the Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv, stated that the emunah of the Shalits is a good example for all of us to follow.  Noam and Aviva Shalit never gave up hope that their son was alive and would come home.  Despite the fact that beasts kidnapped him and were torturing him, they believed that one day he would be released from Gaza alive and in one piece.  It happened!  Gilad also believed that he would see the day of light again.  This incident occurred during Sukkos, a time when we follow Hashem into the unknown, the sukkah, and place our emunah in Him.

In connection to waiting for Moshiach to arrive, we are told that in the zechus of just yearning for him (and obviously first believing in his arrival), he will come. That’s incredible!  If we would all just realize how much we are missing without a Bais Hamikdash and being able to serve Hashem to the ultimate degree, we would merit having it!

The phrase on so many tee-shirts and posters, “Gilad Adain Chai,” should motivate us to believe that we too will experience our own yeshuos.  As we enter the dark and cold days of the fall and winter months, let us stay inspired and pray our hearts out for bracha and hatzlacha, on a personal and communal level.

Tehillah Diamond – YWN

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW.

Listening to the international and local Israeli media, I was astonished by the fact that no one mentioned the fact that the prisoner exchange deal in Israel to free Gilad Shalit was orchestrated entirely by the Government of Germany. Adding insult to injury is the fact that Israeli President Shimon Peres and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu both made a point of publicly thanking Berlin and its leaders, while the actions of the German mediator compelled the release of 1,027 terrorists – and once again, the world sits by silently, and in this case, applauds.

There are those who feel the responsibility for the prisoner swap deal rests on the shoulders of Israel’s elected officials, which it does, but how do we permit ourselves to ignore the fact that Israel followed the lead of the German mediator, who has been working behind the scenes during recent years – the power-broker in this case. The deal signed by Israel begs a simple question. Why did you have to wait over five years? If you were going to release this many terrorists Shalit could have come home during the Olmert administration, but apparently, Olmert was not the pushover Netanyahu is, and he was not willing to kowtow to the Germans.

Like it or not, if chas v’sholom buses begin blowing up or terrorism strikes out in Israel in any form, Germany must accept a measure of responsibility, for the mediator could have easily pushed Hamas to retract demands, but obviously it did not. The same may hold true regarding France too, since Shalit is a French citizen and French President Nicolas Sarkozy promised to move mountains to gain Shalit’s release – those mountains translate to Israel releasing terrorists. Sarkozy however did not forget to send his congratulatory message, but in reality, what did he or his administration do? It is no secret that France and Hamas are not exactly enemies.

So as the sun set over Mitzpei Hila there was a feeling of pride and accomplishment in Berlin, Paris and Jerusalem, but for the people of Israel, fear and trepidation may be a more accurate description of the emotion that prevailed in many homes.

Daniel Schwartz – Ashdod

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW.

Yesterday, I got home from school a little earlier than usual. I sat down at my desk and opened my laptop. I was going to check the news on several sites that I read, and then I was to get back to working on my apps. I logged on to Cnet, and there was a banner on top of screen. “Apple Founder, Steve Jobs dead. Story to follow.” [sic] My chipper mood quickly faded away. I didn’t write any code that night. I spent the time following the technology world as they mourned the passing of someone who has been compared to Edison and Einstein. Steve Jobs, designer, inventor and innovator has died.

As a developer of several apps (including YWN Radio for iPhone and iPad), I suppose I have a greater feeling of connection to Steve than many other frum people. I spent a lot of time working with things he was directly involved in building. Much of the way I think about my profession has been influenced by him. That said, I think that his passing matters and should matter to every frum Jew. For those that say that this is not something for frum people to be concerned with, allow me explain why I think that is wrong.

Technology is a very tricky subject in hashkafa, because of all of its power. I’m not going to use any clichés here, as they’ve been exhausted.  To put it simply: as frum Jews, technology avails things we must avoid. That Steve Jobs devoted his life to progressing great technology is not a reason to call him “a rasha”, and neither is his personal life. There are several reasons that I feel that this assertion is true.

First of all, human nature is to view others through the lens of self. I imagine that many people may have asked themselves at one point or another if he was Jewish. It’s a perfectly natural question for a yid to ask, but the answer is that he wasn’t. From his perspective, he had no obligation to any Torah values. This man literally was a tinok shenishba. (Granted, his biological parents weren’t necessarily Jewish either, but that’s not the point here. The point is that his family situation contributed to the development of his outlook, which is how he ended up where he did.)

From a more general perspective, I feel that as we approach the Yom HaDin, it is imperative that we remember that we are all being judged by Hakadosh Baruch Hu. Judging others will surely put us in a bad light, r”l.

Once on the topic of teshuva, I am reminded of the directive from chazal to do teshuva every day, because it might be your last. Not to equate Steve Jobs with chazal, lehavdil, but there is a striking similarity between that memra and a commencement address that Mr. Jobs gave at Stanford University in 2005. In that speech, he mentioned his first bout with cancer, and how he learned to live with idea that we don’t know how long our life will be. He essentially quoted that chazal, without realizing it.

Steve Jobs’ innovations have enabled many people to do many great things for the frum world. To name a few of the more recent ones: YWN Radio for iPhone, iPad and iPod touch. Siddur, by RustyBrick, as well as several of my own apps, are potentially tremendous resources from frum Jews around the world. I am really excited about some of the things that I’m working on specifically for the frum community. Those projects which I’m working on revolve around yiddishkeit and the work of Steve Jobs and co.

I feel that Hashem sent a tremendously talented individual to help bolster the frum community. That person is now gone. Even one of the wealthiest and most poweful people in the world goes when HaKadosh Baruch Hu decides that their time is up.  Someone, with whom I was discussing Steve’s death, related the following to me:   When a relative of his died of cancer, he had thought that it was because they couldn’t afford advanced medicine or some ‘magical research’ that would cure them. Wealthy people, he thought, didn’t have that problem. He now realizes that this is not the case. It’s a tremendous lesson that we are being taught right before the gmar din. We need to recognized that and move forward with that in mind.

I reached out to several other frum developers and asked them to share their feelings on Steve’s passing. Alan Rosenbaum of Davka Corperation told me about Steve, that “his work has directly impacted the products and directions that we have taken in our software development, dating from the days of the Apple II in the 1980′s to the iPhones and iPads of today.” Barry Schwartz of RustyBrick, publisher of many Jewish iOS apps, had this to say: “RustyBrick is sadden by the loss of Steve Jobs, his vision for Apple has lead us to build software that aids the Jewish community in observance and education of orthodox Jewish customs. [...] Jobs has played a significant role in how many Jews observe their day to day religion.”

Wishing everyone a g’mar chasima tova.

Moshe Berman is a Frum App Developer.

CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE IT — THIS IMAGE WAS NOT SENT BY THE WRITER OF THIS OP-ED

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW.

Many Jews are feeling uncomfortable regarding the “Occupy Wall Street” protests which YWN has been reporting about. The reasons for these “uncomfortable feelings” don’t need to be elaborated on this page. Suffice to say that Jews have been blamed for the world’s troubles for thousands of years, and many are nervous that this finger-pointing will soon start – or , maybe it already has.

Columnist Yossi Gestenter, whose articles appear quite frequently on YWN, submitted an op-ed for publishing following President Obama’s speech Thursday morning. Before we publish his op-ed, we are publishing the following article from The Blaze. Unfortunately, only one of the videos (the main one) will be published due to the profanity and vulgar language in them:

The Blaze:

We’ve been reporting on the Occupy Wall St. protesters for some time now, but we haven’t seen any signs of racism. Until now. But are they the ramblings of a disturbed man?

National Review correspondent Charles Cooke posted video Tuesday of a young man berating an older Jewish man, calling him a bum (it seems in response to being called the same term), mocking him by asking him if he speaks English, and telling him to “go back to Israel.”

Cooke describes the exchange:

Moments after I arrived, I saw a Jewish gentleman being berated when he criticized a protester. (Shortly after my video camera was switched off, he (inexplicably) shouted the N-word at the same man.)

Here’s the shocking video (Click HERE to view from a mobile device):

As you can hear in the video, the man claims to be part of a local plumber’s union. But that could be erroneous, as Cooke notes he claimed to be a lot of things: “he told me that he was white, Puerto Rican, Jewish, and African-American. I suggested he was, in fact, Confused, but he didn’t take much to that.”

Also heard in the video is that the man goes by the name “lotion man” and tells Cooke to look him up on YouTube. We did, and what we found is quite disturbing.

According to one video, “Lotion Man” is actually someone named Danny Cline. In the video, he can be seen getting into another verbal argument, using extremely vulgar language, and repeatedly using racial slurs.

In a second video on YouTube, “Lotion Man” is seen trying to pierce his tongue with an earring and again saying some wild, whacky, and disturbed things.

And finally, a third video shows “Lotion Man” actually harassing some people while later bragging about meeting some of the celebrities that came down to the park to join the protests.

The latter videos raise the proposition that the first video could be the ramblings of a very unstable man.

YWN points out that there has been only one other video or report (that we know of) of an anti-semitic act at the protests. In that video a man is standing and holding a large sign which says “Hitler’s Bankers Wall Street”, and “Nazi Bankers Wall Street”. The man stood alone, and was confronted by dozens of people. The video, available on YouTube was not posted here due to the profane and vulgar language. (Click on image by Shimon Gifter to enlarge)

The following is the op-ed by Yossi Gestetner:

Blatant Anti-Semitism at Obama-Backed Wall Street Protests!

This morning at a press conference, president Obama came out in full support of the Wall Street protesters who are among others attacking banks and rich people. Here is the transcript between a Wall Street protesters and a Jew with a Kipa on his head:
 
Anti-Semite: I am against corporations because they don’t pay me money…. Seven dollars an hour…
 
Jew: Get a job.
 
Anti-Semite: I have got a job, Mo.

Jew: No you don’t.

Anti-Semite: I do have a job.

Jew: You are standing here… Bum.

Anti-Semite: You are a Bum, Jew!

Jew: What?

Anti-Semite: I am a Jew. Why are you fighting with us. O… YOU HAVE GOT THE MONEY THAT’S WHY YOU ARE Fighting, you Jewish man…
 
Jew: I have got the money because I have worked before.

Snip…
 
Anti-Semite: My mother died from a heart attack.
 
Jew: What?
 
Anti-Semite: What? Due? Du du du… you can’t even speak English. Are you Israeli? Go Back to Israel.
 
Jew: Why would I go back?
 
Anti-Semite: Go back to Sholom Israel.

If President Obama understands that ALL Republican presidential candidates needed to condemn the three four people out of 6,000 Republicans at a debate who boo-ed DADT, then the President should come out and condemn this too.

Or you accept that the people who occupy Wall Street are a load of clowns not worthy of any recognition, or – as the president did – you validate them and as such you denounce any hateful anti-Semitic rhetoric coming from that camp. Obama and his backers cannot have it both ways!

Yossi Gestetner is a New York-Based Writer and Marketing Consultant in the Orthodox Jewish/Hasidic Communities. His Firm “Gestetner & Co” Serves Political, Charitable and Corporate accounts. Yossi can be reached via yossi@yossigestetner.com

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW.

By: Joe Scarborough for Politico:

Republicans need New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie to run for president. So do Independents. I would even argue that Democrats, who loathe his very existence, would be well served by Christie entering the presidential race.

Why? Because once Christie announces his run, this silly campaign about HPV, Ponzi schemes and Tiffany credit lines will become a deadly serious debate about America’s uncertain future.

Unlike Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, Christie paints in primary colors. It is hard to imagine any voter ever complaining about the indifference of President Christie toward a particular issue. Unlike Obama and Romney, Christie rarely seeks the safety of a mushy middle ground.

The governor will oppose government-controlled health care, whether he ends up running a state, or the entire nation. He will always believe that teachers unions must be reformed or they will remain broken. He mocks those who suggest job growth can be micro-managed from inside the White House or any other government bureaucracy. Christie also embraces immigration reform and rational gun regulations. And in a year when too many GOP politicians shamefully shouted nonsense about the coming threat of Sharia law on our shores, Christie appointed a Muslim judge in his home state without apology.

For all of his newfound strengths as a political candidate, Romney can never escape the fact that he was for gun control before he was against it. Just like he was for abortion rights before embracing life, and was for government-managed health care before discovering it to be an existential threat to American capitalism.

As for President Obama, what can be said about a politician who lambastes Wall Street at the same time he holds record-breaking fundraisers hosted by hedge fund managers and investment bankers?

What can be said about a president who found George W. Bush’s war on terror to be an affront to basic American values, right before he doubled down on those very efforts, tripled the number of troops in Afghanistan and began launching drone attacks into a handful of countries (and this was before the commander inchief bothered to declare war).

Like Romney, Obama seems to take great pride in his efforts to be all things to all people. Christie, on the other hand, just doesn’t give a damn.

Will that unique strategy work in 2012? Maybe not. But you can be sure that facing Christie in a primary fight will make Romney a better candidate in the general election. Just like a rough-and-tumble general election battle between Christie and Obama would make the latter a better president over the next four years.

In the end, America needs a candidate like Christie on the national stage. It’s time to raise the game.

A guest columnist for POLITICO, Joe Scarborough hosts “Morning Joe” on MSNBC and represented Florida’s 1st Congressional District in the House of Representatives from 1995 to 2001.

(Source: Politico)

The massive chilul hashem that I warned about last week here on YWN, has come to pass. Sadly, despite outrage by rank and file Hatzolah members and a very clear statement by the CEO of Hatzolah that this proposal is absolutely forbidden based on halchic rulings by our gedolei hador, Attorney Ruchie Freier and Assemblyman Dov Hikind are continuing their crusade to force women into Hatzolah.

Even more disturbing, they have apparently enlisted the help of New York’s secular newspapers to do so. Earlier this week the New York Post, which has a circulation of over 500,000, splashed an article in its paper with the salacious headline: “Jewish ‘Siren’ Ladies” chock full of quotes by Ms. Freier and Mr. Hikind. (Crain’s Business Magazine also had an article) The story had a preposterous exchange where Hikind proclaimed, “I’m sure Hatzalah will listen and consider [admitting women into Hatzalah].” Of course, to no one’s surprise, the story continues: ‘But Hatzalah CEO Rabbi David Cohen said it’s a non-issue. “This was discussed years ago by the rabbinic board. They said not to do it, and that’s pretty much where we stand,” he said. “It’s not on the agenda. There’s no reason to put it on the agenda.”

The obvious question is how dare Hikind tell the New York Post that he was “sure” that Hatzolah will consider going against Das Torah? What’s more, as a member of Hatzolah, I know for a fact that the leadership reached out to Hikind immediately after his radio show to make it clear to Hikind that Hatzolah’s rabbanim are against this proposal. What chutzpah does Hikind have to continue to promote his agenda after the leadership of Hatzolah reaffirmed directly to him that the gedolei hador are oppose to this proposal?

Mr. Hikind, it’s not too late. You have a few hours to do teshuva before the start of Rosh Hashona and publicly renounce your support of forcing women into Hatzolah. Or at the very least, identify the Daas Torah that instructed you to go against the Gedolei Hador that ruled for reasons of tznius women may not join Hatzolah. Unless that happens, Mr. Hikind, you will continue to be responsible for the massive chilul hashem. And Chas V’Shalom if this blows back on Hatzolah and hurts this life-saving organization in any way, I shudder to think what kind of achrayas beis din shel mayla will assign to you.

Sincerely,

A long-time New York Hatzolah member.

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW.

As reported here at YWN today, former NYC Mayor Ed Koch, a Democrat, is fully supporting President Obama’s re-election effort. Koch wrote, “The President should be praised for intervening with the Egyptian army to save the Israeli diplomatic personnel from physical assault, and providing the Israeli military with bunker buster bombs, advanced military technology and providing military intelligence cooperation far exceeding his predecessors. I’m now on board the Obama Reelection Express.”

This is Ludicrous! First, the Egyptian incident took place before the NY9 vote and I don’t recall Koch coming out in the last few days of the campaign asking people to reconsider their “message” to Obama. Secondly, the sale of the Bunker Busters was approved back in 2007 by former President George W. Bush whose administration made it clear – according to Newsweek – it will be delivered within two-three years. Obama didn’t block the transfer. Great! In this case, how about Koch backs Obama for not blocking the $3 billion in aid that Israel receives each year from the United States?

Yossi Gestetner is a New York-Based Writer and Marketing Consultant in the Orthodox Jewish/Hasidic Communities. His Firm “Gestetner & Co” Serves Political, Charitable and Corporate accounts. Yossi can be reached via yossi@yossigestetner.com

NOTE: The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of YWN.

DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTED ON YWN? SEND IT TO US FOR REVIEW.