Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I strongly suspect that the editors of YWN were “trained” in the English-studies programs of our yeshivos, and had little or no formal training in journalism – and that their native languages are some combination of “Brooklynese” and “Yeshivish”. Looking at it this way, they are doing very well (and elite intellectual snobs with fancy academic degrees, such as myself, should refrain from criticizing them on such matters).
BarryLS1: Israel already deports (or incarcerates) terrorists. That is established party. What the Religious Zionism party is talking about, is getting rid of all Arabs, or at least those Arabs who don’t support the zionists (they seem unclear on the matter, though it appears that a very considerable percentage of Israeli Arabs prefer to be living under zionist rather than Palestinian or Islamic rule). To “remove” someone from a country is rarely easy. Typically one “removes” them by putting them in a truck, or railway car or ship, and dumping them somewhere (e.g. the British use of coffin ships to get rid of rebellious Celts, the German use of railcars to get rid of us, etc.). Sometimes you can convince them to go peacefully, albeit at gunpoint (e.g. the American’s “trail of tears”). One should note that all these techniques of “removing” undesirable ethnic groups from one’s country, are now considered to be crimes against humanity, which along with terrorism, enslavement and piracy get you the legal status as “Hostis humani generis”.
Most Jewish communities have been frequent involuntary migrants (e.g. the goyim tried to kill us, so we moved). Yemen and India and perhaps Ethiopia have stayed in one place. North Africa had some disruptions. Europe was always a mess (that’s how you had German speaking Jews in Ukraine, and Spanish speaking Jews in the Balkans). What is now Iraq and Iran were fairly stable. But even a place with stability, you had constant migration. And remember that living cultures tend to be constantly changing since that’s the way Ha-Shem programmed humans – if you constancy, stick to dead things.
If you really want to reenact life in the time Amoraim (late Classical and early Dark Ages, using the European perspective), consider getting a time machine.
1, The paper ballots usually favor Likud, and especially disfavor the Arab parties and the Chareidi parties – since most of them are cast by soldiers.
2. If Balad has allied it self with another Arab party, and if Meretz had allied itself with another far-left party (e.g. Labor, which barely passed the threshold), the result would probably have been another stalemate.
3. While the Chareidi parties have options other than supporting Likud (and have some bargaining power with Netanyahu), the “Religious Zionist” party does not, so if Netanyahu rejects any of their demands they have no choice but to accept. This is because the left wing does not have to be viciously anti-Chareidi (and in the past, the Labor party tried to avoid alienating the Chareidi), whereas the “Religious Zionists” demands (such as “transfer”,i.e., “ethnic cleansing” of Arabs) are intolerable to the groups that will now be in opposition.
1. Very few Chederim (elementary schools) teach any Tanach other than Humash and the first few historical books. These books have been “best sellers” among Yidden for the last few millennia. Siddur and Talmud are okay, but if you tried teaching them to little kids it would bore them to death. Much of the rest of Tanach (with a few exceptions, such as Megillas Esther and Yonah) would not go well with kids learning to read.
2. The goyim’s “Bible” is an adaptation based on several intermediate translations of dubious accuracy, and in many ways reflecting Hellenic culture. Yidden learn the original with Rashi, which gives an entirely different result. It is not surprising the goyim are easily confused (from out perspective, they are functional illiterates). A good way to shut them up is to make it clear you have never heard of “Genesis” or “Psalms” or “Moses” or “Isaac”, and after they explain remind them what the real names are (note that the number of goyim with even cheder-leval literacy in Hebrew is negligible).
MenhemShmei: then almost everyone in the world (or at least places settled by Europeans or Middle Easterners) is a safek Jews. One Jew going off the derekh (or kidnapped) a few thousand years ago has lots of descendants, none of whom have any idea they are related to us.
Of course, one could argue, that everyone created in the image of HaShem is special, and according to Humash, everyone in the world was a relatively close cousin of Avraham Aveinu (remember that at least one of Noah’s kids was still alive at the time). But that sort of argument is very annoying to anyone who wants to feel that he is “special”, and being in Ha-Shem’s image and related to Avraham Aveinu is not special enough for him (and is very anti-racist and is total heresy to the scientific community).
“Most” in this case is largely a function of total population. A small village of lamed-vav’niks will probably have fewer tzaddikim that a large city most of whose inhabitants are evil, but only a small minority are tzaddikim.
Then you have to define time periods and “country”. In terms of total population with a “sovereign” country, the United States in recent generations is roughly tied with Medinat Yisrael as it is today with total population, though many would argue that the Roman Empire at one point had a great population of Jews (probably at the start of the period in which Nero was elected imperator, since he started the process of many Jews looking for non-Roman areas to migrate to combined with “ethnic cleansing” of Jews in Eretz Yisrael.
So in raw number, the most “tzaddikim” would probably be found in either Eretz Yisrael today, or the Roman Empire at the end of Bayis Sheini (estimating populations in ancient times is a problem). While the US has as many persons of Jewish descent as Eretz Yisrael today, most are assimilated.
If you look at percentages, you will have to deal with many Jewish communities in which almost everyone was frum, and many were in “sovereign” city states – but until the modern period (largely due to improved medicine and food supply) populations were much lower.
Coffee addict:
1. The “half” is if you choose the lump sum, which is roughly half of the amount paid if you wait 20 years to get it all.
2. In some years, you can donate the entire amount to charity and avoid all taxes, though usually there is roughly a 50% (or your income) cap on how much you can give away. Sometimes the government suspends the cap and you can donate your entire income to charity and thereby avoid paying income tax.
MenachemShmuel: If you use the halachic definition then you have a problem since a great many Jewish women have been assimilated (perhaps they went OTD, perhaps they were enslaved), and over the millenia, a not inconsiderable number of goyim are actual Jews (one Jewish girl enslaved during Roman times has a tremendous number of descendants scattered throughout Europe and the Middle East) . That is in addition to the fact that in recent times (the last 200 years), most members of the frum community have gone OTD, and within a generation are then absorbed in the larger population. Most Jews living today, based on the halachic definition, think they are goyim, and they are in no way tsaddikim.
I suggest limiting the use of the word “Yid” to refer only to the small minority of Jews who identify as Jews, and keep at least some of the mitsvos (particularly Shabbos and Kashrus, which more than anything set us apart for the goyim) and by doing so show great mesiras nefesh even if they don’t realize it, so that my answer to the original question is that “Yes, all Yidden are great tsadikkin”.
1. One would only get about half that since the “billion” is based on getting it in 20 year installments.
2. It would be a metsiah (something found), not income, so probably not subject to the usual limits on
giving tsdakah.3. There might be some taxes to pay.
4. One can always use a donor advised trust to send the money to the institutions in the name of “Piloni Almoni”.
If you define a “Yid” as someone who is Shomer Shabbos (meaning, most importantly, not working at your “real world” job on Shabbos), and Shomer Kashrus (meaning the for all purposes you can never eat outside the home unless you bring your own food or make special arrangements such as locating a kosher restaurant), you could say the every “Yid” is showing such tremendous meserias nefesh that they can be considered a tsaddik. Just being Shomer Shabbos and Shomer Kashrus (not to mention many other mitsvos), means you give up perhaps 90% of the employment opportunities in the United States (either because the job involves work on Shabbos, requires schooling that involves work on Shabbos, or involves travel or geographic locations where observance of Shabbos and Kashrus is not practical).
1. “religious matters” was defined vary narrowly to exclude any involvement by Orthodox Jews in public affairs. Remember that in the first elections, Ben Gurion’s principal opponents were parties on the left (who advocated banning yeshivos and changing the day of rest, among other things). If you are in to alternative history, consider what if Ben Gurion lost (e.g. Israel as a member of Comecon and the Warsaw Pact).
2. In part because they believed their own propaganda, it was assumed that in a generation there would be so few Orthodox Jews left that it would be no problem to wait and then get to work on closing yeshivos, conscripting all frum children, and realizing the long term zionist dream of being an “Am Hofshi” (secular state, free from the yoke of Torah). It took awhile before it dawned on them that the socialist revolution would end up in the dustbin of history.
“hecksher”??? for a student club?
What does the hecksher entail (what refreshments they serve? what they do on Shabbos? off campus “social” (sic) activities?)
Would they give a hecksher to a club studying how to make money engaging in Ribis (buying and sell securities, including bonds, stocks on margin, leveraged loans, etc.)?
There different is a global community of frum Jews, perhaps most broadly defined as including all halachic Jews who are Shomer Shabbos and Shomer Kashrus – which is probably broader than any member would probably acknowledge.
1. In the UK, if the Head of State (who has minimal political importance) can be replaced by a regent, which under current law would not be a problem. The Head of Government not only tend to be younger (than American presidents) but are very easy to replace (since, in theory, they serve at the pleasure of the monarch, so with approval of the majority party, they can be replaced if disabled).
2. The United States combined Head of State with Head of Government, and we have no easy way of replacing a disabled president (other than with the vice-president, which itself raises problems. There is no provision for a special election. And the US tends to elect only someone who is well established (and therefore old). And since American president is Head of Government, he has manage the government on a day to day basis. So it is reasonable that many Americans are concerned that both parties seem to be oriented towards nominating presidential candidates who are well past their “sell by” dates.
The number of online shiurim is tremendous. “Kol Halashon” has dozens, and there are many such sites. Since virtually all shiurim learn the Talmud Babli according to Rashi, you probably have to sample the various shiurim to see what you like. While a directory, covering all webwsites, describing each shiur in detail would be nice, that doesn’t exist.
They are not police station. They are undercover agents, who can be prosecuted as unregistered agents of a foreign power (and if they are diplomats can be expelled for engaging in inappropriate activities).
China has not had a “communist” economic system for over a generation. It has system of “free” enterprise with heavy involvement by the government in guiding the economy. Its political system, while showing some traces of its “communist” origin, is basically a standard authoritarian dictatorship. In most ways, China more closely resembles Germany during the Third Reich, or Italy during the fascist period, than a “communist” country such as China during Mao’s leadership, or the Soviet Union.
I heard from someone (I believe one of my rabbanim, a very long time ago), that the best analogy is to a country’s embassy, which under modern international law is considered to be the territory of the country who owns the embassy rather than the country within whose territory the embassy is located.
In the past a country could simply conquer territory and annex it, but that is no longer considered acceptable behavior, hence the need to stage a referendum. International law in the 21st century requires the consent of the governed, even if that consent is obtained at gunpoint through a fraudulent election.
P.S. I wouldn’t put too much weight in reports about Russia hitting any specific target, as there is growing evidence suggesting the Russia military is incapable of aiming at a given target and then hitting the target.
If a statute (act of Congress, signed by the president) mere says the president can declassify documents without specifying a formal procedure, meaning they left it for the president to decide on the procedure (which would be the procedure under administrative law theory), then Trump as president could declassify by “thought” or more significantly, by physically removing the documents from the White House and taking them to his personal residence.
If the statute has a formal procedure that Trump didn’t follow, Trump doesn’t have a valid argument, since the president is subject to all statutes. However if the procedure is a matter of administrative law, the president has head of the administration can largely do anything he feels like unless it violates the constitution or a statute.
One should note that for most of the last 80 years, the Congress has tended to pass laws that tell the administration to make the rules to implement the law, and leave all the details to the administration (rather than putting the details in the statute).
The zionist left perceives its raison d’etre to be to free Jews from the yoke of Torah, thereby realizing their dream of being a secular people (Am Hofshi).
How are the acts complained of in the posting anything but consistent with the overall zionist policy.1. The busing of the somewhat illegal immigrants is a (very successful publicity stunt).
2. One should note that many people on the “blue” side are not supportive of increased immigration, and many on the red side are. The complication is that the “illegals” tend to be hard working and upwardly mobile (meaning they may take away jobs from less industrious American workers), and that they tend to be economic conservatives (most are from socialist-leaning governments, which is why they tend to be pro-capitalism) and social conservatives (anti-abortion, anti-gay and pro-religion).
3. If the government were run by rational people, and given that the US has a serious labor shortage, the federal government would place them in jobs which are otherwise going unfilled, with the federal government bearing the costs (rather than state and local government located by the border). However rationality seems to have gone out of style (it was so 20th century).
1. Gainful employment is Bitual Torah, so of course the secular school curriculum is probably as well?
2. Is it mutar to speak and write languages other than Lashon Kodesh (whether mash-ups such as Yiddish, or 100% goyish languages such as English)?
3. It is permitted to make use of modern technologies (e.g antibiotics, surgery, computers, electricity, refrigeration, mechanical transportation, etc.) which can not be created or implemented without secular education? Was it permitted to use math developed by the Egyptians and Mesopotamians to calculate the calender?
4. Is it permitted to use numbers and do math (presumably beyond counting with ones fingers)? Is it permitted to engage in employment that involve interacting (as bosses, employees, customers, suppliers) with persons other than frum Yiddhe?
5. It should be noted that the rabbanim cited in the Talmuds routinely gave evidence of knowing non-Jewish languages, being familiar with the history, sociology and governance of the local goyim, doing complicated mathematical computations, and of having learned about the most advanced sciences of their day. Many of them engaged in businesses that required intimate knowledge of the goyim and their customs and sciences and culture.
So while the answer to the question is probably that while secular studies are almost by definition bitual Torah, they are permitted in a variety of conditions.
One option is to have the secular curriculum run by a separate corporation and in effect the Torah portion would have the same status as the goyim’s “Sunday schools”, except ours would be running 20-40 hours a week. That would free the yeshiva from government interference, but whatever alternative schools we set up (and homeschooling is just a type of alternative school) would still have to deal with a hostile government. We need to remember that the hostility is against the yeshivos per se, but is actually directed against all religious and ideological community who reject the “woke” religion or militant secularism, and as long as the Democrats have solid control of the state and local government, Yidden (and many others) will have reason to fear persecution. If the litigation fails, and the electorate continues to support the “freedom from religion” regime, the only option is migration to a jurisdiction that support freedom of religion (and if you are a home owner in New York State, the forced migration of Yidden will have a devastating effect on your investment).
If YU wishes its “frum” schools (YU College and Stern, as opposed to ones open to goyim and frei “Jews” such as Cardozo) to be limited to Shomeri Mitsvos, they have to say so clearly, and understand that the government is likely to be reluctant to give them money (including tax exemptions), and employers, and graduate schools, will be biased against the alumni. If YU has successfully limited to school to Shomrei Mitsvos, they should win the current case (when it finally is fully litigated), but the state could revoke accreditation as well as tax exemption.
And if the government can tell Yeshiva, or any yeshiva, that observance of law takes precedence over religious teachings, you have effectively repealed the 1st amendment. Could a synagogue or mosque be punished for using a language other than English, or refusing to serve American cuisine such as port? Could politically incorrect religious institutions lose tax exemption status? If schools fail to meat a “woke” test, can they lose accreditation. This is a test case, with very high stakes as to whether America will continue its tradition of “Freedom of religion” which goes back to the 18th century and has become the best example of American “exceptionalism”, or whether the US will shift its approach to religion to the minimialist toleration of “freedom from religion”.
1. The Soviet Union played a major role in winning World War II. Russia and Ukraine were provinces, not countries. The Soviet Union was much larger than Germany, and Germany was fighting a two-front war against enemies that were larger in terms of population and resources. Note the Russia is half the size of the USSR in terms of population, and has an economy the smaller than several NATO members (US, UK, France, Germany). By threatening the EU and NATO, Russia is in over its head,
2. Had the Allies reached a separate peace, something Stalin was terrified of (those into alternative history would probably focus on acceptance of the very generous terms Hitler offered Britain in 1940, or perhaps if D-Day had failed),the war probably would have ended with the the Third Reich intact but the Soviet Union probably including little more than they had when the war started.
3. Russia is using tactics that worked very well in the 1940s, but the Ukrainians have been trained by NATO in modern warfare (think of major armies launching infantry charges against machine guns in the 20th century – just because the tactic worked in the 19th century when charging muskets). Also, if as reported in the free world, Russian has led its people to believe they are fighting neo-nazis and fascists, and they might expect a problem if they send a large conscript army that realizes it has been lied to. Also, if Russia does general mobilization, the countries on its borders that were formerly under Russian rule (Poland, Finland, Moldova and the Baltic countries) would panic and that panic would spread – and if the “big boys” in NATO start calling up reserves, the Russian situation starts looking very bad. USSR vs. NATO would have been close. Russia vs. NATO/EU would be a disaster for Russia (and perhaps the world).
The Orioles are competing for a spot in the playoffs.
King Charles appears to be a lot more popular than Prince Charles ever was.
The US elected Donald Trump and then Joe Biden, and the sky hasn’t fall in.
So how shocking is it that Russia (the modern Federation, not the former Soviet Union, not the former Empire, but a country with a GNP equivalent to Italy but with three times the population) turns out not to be superpower, and whose open desire to restore lost lands has totally backfired (they even managed to get Sweden to give up 200 years of neutrality).
We need to think about the economic impact of Mashiach. There are probably millions of politicians, journalist, bloggers, and people who spend their life in chat rooms. What will they do? Massive dislocation?
There is probably something “else” going on, probably involving assets and/or children, and some complications since any contemporary “get” involves the interplay of multiple legal systems. I doubt we have the full story, and suspect the full story is not appropriate for publication.
Big deal, Xi and Putin manage to keep almost all opposition leaders in jail. It’s just American exceptionalism to think the US should be any different – and starting with Obama, the Democrats are clearly opposed to America being exceptional. Things like “Rule of Law” and “Dur Process” are as old fashioned as all the other archaic concepts in the Bill of Rights that the WOKE elites want cancelled.
1. Many Americans have trouble putting together a coherent sentence in English. What’ the hiddush?
2. Many Americans can’t do basic math without a calculator.
3. Many Americans are amazingly ignorant about science, social sciences and history.
4. Except for new immigrants and occasionally their children’s, Americans are infamously monolingual.
5. Almost all jobs for which a “fancy” secular education prepares you are closed to frum Yidden – even the modern Orthodox with their good secular educations are often forced to act secular to function in the workplace (consider people such as Jack Lew and Joe Lieberman who had to take off yarmulkes and adopt goyish names,among other things, in order to function – as Yaakov Lew or Yosef Lieberman, with beard and pe’os, we would never have heard of them).Could we make our schools more cost effective? Probably. Class size should be increased, students should attend local schools they can walk to, and we should make use of existing shuls and cut back on dedicated and costly buildings. We can probably make use of distance education technology, especially for secular subject, with supervision. Boarding schools should only be for students from remote regions to small to support their own schools.
But the bottom line is that we are doing better than many if not most public (non-charter) schools in producing graduates who can support themselves. If the bigots attacking our schools were to apply the same standards to the government’s schools, they would be forced to start closing them down (perhaps outsourcing to private or charter schools). And we know from experience that if you focus on secular studies, you will have an “OTD” rate in excess of 90% (and at this point, it appears that over 99% of those Jews (defined by halacha) who attend secular schools are not Shabbos-observant by any halachic standard).
I don’t think that under American law a father can order his daughter to divorce her husband. The Romans allowed that, but that aspect of law never survived the medieval period.
By definition, it was the משגיח’s fault. If the food was poorly coooked, you would blame the chef. If the restaurant was filthy, you would blame the manager in charge of keeping it clean. If the food is treff, you blame the משגיח.
It doesn’t help that a kosher restaurant hired non-frum people (secular Jews or goyim) as employees. And if any non-frum people had a ownership interest that is ever worse. But the bottom line is that the משגיח is responsible.
Assuming you are not a hermit living (and raising a family) in a remote area “off the grid”, you would teach them about the internet the same way you teach them about everything in the real world. Olam ha-zeh is the problem.
There is zero evidence of Trump being a plant. He is able to freely move from one place to another. He is absolutely NO way “green”. He inhales oxygen and emits carbon dioxide (probably another reason they want to cancel him). He is well known for the fur on top of his head, rather than having leaves.
There is also nothing in Hilary’s background to suggest gardening skills (though given their backgrounds, they probably did smoke weeds).A tablet can be used for reading ebooks. A smartphone is too small, and a laptop (or pc) is overkill for reading a text. Especially for non-commercial materials (including many sefarim), there is tremendous potential there since an ebook is much cheaper than a printed book. A large amount of book publishing is being done electronically, and a great many genre (e.g. reference books, technical manuals, newspapers) are clearly moving towards being entire electronic.
ymribiat: Assuming the person collecting roadkill or stray cats to feed the local vultures is a Yid , it would still be a shailoh whether one can attempt to sic the cops on them
We should be dan le kaf zechus, and assume that the person (the bird feeder) about whom the complaint pertain, was throwing out newly killed and/or partially buchered animals to feed the neighborhood vultures. In that case one would need ask Beis Din for permission to either sue or file a criminal or health law complaint.
what type of birds???
raptors? vultures? crows?
or song birds and hummingbirds?
Biden, like Trump, believes in appealing to his base. That is a risky proposition in any event, since rallying your supporters may backfire if at the same time you rally everyone else to vote against you. Consider Hillary Clinton who denounced the “deplorables” – it encouraged them to turn out and elect Trump.
Biden has multiple risks. Most serious, Trump might not run, or might run and not be nominated (the recent Democratic victories in House races suggest that a Trump endorsement, while helping in a primary, undermines a candidate in an election – if neither Trump nor the rest of the Republicans want to support a “loser”). Polling suggests that most Americans are moderates, or as some might say, either independents, DINOs or RINOs – so while being a fanatic helps in the primaries it won’t help in the election.
Mostly we are fighting “Le shem Shamayim”. Much better for people to feel passionately about public affairs and community welfare.
It’s the goyim who go crazy, e.g. fighting over pronouns and bathrooms, when they are preoccupied by sports or professional celebrities.
The case is being litigated.
One should consider whether any private university that received direct and indirect (e.g. student loans, tax exemptions, etc.) is allowed to ban an organization whose advocacy it disapproves of. Could YU ban a “friends of cheeseburgers” club? What about a “Hebrew Christians” club? What about banning a student “Friends of Neturei Karta” or a student group calling for “removal” of Palestinians from Eretz Yisrael.
Could private university ban a group advocating political incorrectness? Could a private, and WOKE, university ban “MAGA” club or a Chabad house? Could a private university ban a student organization that advocates genocide against Jews or the re-enslavement of African Americans? If a faith-sponsored university can ban students for religious reasons, do they risk losing their government funding? What if a university bans certain viewpoints that if done by a public university would raise 1st amendment issues (remember that the first amendment only applies to the government), should the university give up its students’ eligibility for subsidized student loans as well as its tax exemptions (not subject to real property tax, contributions are tax deductible from income tax, etc.).
The seems an extreme way to deal with students with un-woke behavior (use the wrong pronoun for a boy dressed as a girl, and you get beaten). This could catch on.
The Democrats have always been the party of patronage and handing out goodies to supporters. The Republicans (and the Whigs before) them have always been the party that preferred a government that respects merit more than identity and supports creating a pro-business climate. Both parties have a history of tolerating larceny. This all goes back at least to the period of John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson, and has been amazingly consistent (even while views on race or foreign affairs have shifted).
The idea behind a Jewish state was to get away from the control that Torah had over the Jewish community (as they sing: to be a free people, free from the yoke of Torah).
Most rabbanim at the time thought this was a bad idea. One underlying reason is the values necessary to maintain a state would inevitably clash with Torah values (e.g. learning how to fight wars instead of learning how to do mitsvos). Also it was obvious that the goyim would object and when goyim object to something they tend to express themselves violently).
When being politically incorrect is a crime, people like Trump will be cancelled, and either thrown in jail or “reeducated”. He has a legitimate dispute over ownership of personal papers, and instead of litigating it in the courts, the Democrats just sent in the FBI to seize the paper by making a false claim they were stolen government property (which needs to be determined in a civil proceeding).
The real crime is political incorrectness, and Trump is clearly guilty. In Britain they could pass a bill of attainder, but in America they need to fake criminal charges.Since most of us are also politically incorrect (be realistic, being frum is offensive to the WOKE, our necks are on the line as well), we should worry. The solution is to make sure the Democrats do not get solid control of the Congress, since a solidly blue Congress and a Democratic president means their WOKE base will define the agenda.
If Trump takes control of the Republican party (and it appears he has done so, and his endorsement tilts primaries), there is a serious threat of a massive blue wave in the 2022 and 2024 elections. Note how Trump made the Senate “blue” by turning two Republican seats in Georgia into Democratic seats – and it appears he is doing the same thing nationally.
1. If they are going to give place names in the Latin alphabet (the script of the Romans, the Crusaders, the Nazis, etc.), why not throw in the Arabic script (who until the mid-20th century were at most a nuisance).
2. Especially if you base your demographics on Eretz Yisrael rather than Medinat Yisrael, a large percentage of Israel’s population speaks Arabic as a first language. Except for rich “Anglo-Saxons” (more likely to be tourists than Israelis), very few Israeli speak English. Also note that a considerable percentage of those Arabic speakers hold Israeli citizenship, and have made clear they prefer to live in democratic (small “D”) and secular (relatively) state than be part of the rather fascistic fanatically Islam world.
3. Israel is in the Middle East (Ha-Shem’s choice, if a quiet uninhabited island was preferred Sefer Shemos would have include boat building instructions and a nautical map to either New Zealand or Madigascar) – and our neighbor’s speak Arabic. Note that both the Hareidim and the Zionists (except for a minority of “Religious zionists” desire peaceful relations with the Arabs.
To distinguish between dress up like you think people dressed up in the distant past (what the moderns say the hareidim to), or whether just is this fashion evolving in a natural way, albeit along different principals than affect the hiloni world (e.g who felt obliged to stop wearing hats since President Kennedy did, or to stop wearing kapotas since King George did) – consider radical change in hareidi fashion that have taken place over the last 120 years. If the changes didn’t result in outpourings of outrage, it supports my argument that this is just a matter of fashion evolving in a natural way. Consider: non-leather dress shoes (other than on Yom Kippur and Tisha B’Av); the use of fake light-weight fabrics especially in warm weather; the adoption of the bra; the discontinuance of fur hats on a daily basis (though some continue to wear them on Shabbos or if it is very cold); the adoption by men of long pants (200+ years ago men wore short pants with high socks, and 500 years ago men usually did not wear pants at all). Hareidim are not reinactors or affecting a perceived archaic style of dress; their fashions change like everyone else, but they have their own fashion sense so it sometimes evolves in different directions (unlike “moderns” who think it is cool to ape the goyim).
Gadolha-dorah: The matter of the extent the president has authority to declassify and transfer papers is the subject of civil litigation. Trump certainly believed, and has a respectable legal argument that he was within his rights, meaning the papers in question are his personal property, and not the governments. Trump was the first non-president with no background in government service, and it is to be expect that he did, and continues to bring, new perspectives and with them new legal issues that have never been litigated. Unless you consider Trump himself to be an alien power, there is no basis to threaten to bring charges for espionage. And under the 4th amendment, the government has no business using a criminal search warrant to seize property that whose status is being litigated. If the Supreme Court had already ruled against an ex-president in a similar situation, Trump would have no basis – but this is a new legal issue. If the American people in their infinite wisdom elect someone with no experience in government, politics or the military – they have expect such issues, since what is conventional wisdom among the political elites is neither reasonable to everyone else, nor necessarily even lawful.
Fashion change constantly. You can usually date photograph by looking at the clothing worn and how being groom themselves. Factors affecting Yidden include what the local goyim wear, what are rabbanim wear (the equivalent for for goyim are what their leading political figures and movie stars wear), and various halachic factors (modesty, looking better on Shabbos than the rest of the week). Fashions even among Yidden constantly change, and while it is interesting from a sociological perspective, from a halachic perspective “there is nothing to look at”).
Among fashion changes in the 20th century including the switch to manufactured fabrics (rather than linen, wool and cotton). Women switching to a “bra”. Most people giving up formal wearing of hats (a trend we ignored). Men switch to “short” dress coats (something rejected in part by many hareidim especially on Shabbos, the goyim switched when private cars became popular). Footwear has changed radically. People like President John Kennedy (who misplaced his top hat during his inauguration) and King/Emperor George V influence the world at large (when he stopped wearing a kapote as his standard normal daily work clothes), but Yidden not so much.