HaKatan

yankel berel:
That is inaccurate, of course. G-d, as per His Torah and as stated by the Torah sages then and afterwards (including but not at all limited to the Satmar Rav), is the One Who had a problem with the Zionist enterprise including, but certainly not limited to, the mass settling of the land against the will of the gentiles that the Zionists accomplished via war, all forbidden.

SQUARE_ROOT:
I assume you won’t bother responding and will just find some more hevel uReus ruach to copy/paste to a new thread and just ignore the Torah’s view against your idolatry. But, on the off-chance that you do read this…

Your latest response to me is full of nonsense, and my quote of the Torah’s view on this topic has never been refuted, to my humble knowledge.

“Religious Zionism” is idolatry as per Rav Elchonon, the Brisker Rav (who lived there, too), and all the rest. No, of course that has zero to do with the first Rashi in chumash, Avraham Avinu and all the mitzvos that are dependent on being in E”Y. Your giluy panim baTorah sheLo kaHalacha of the gemara regarding one who lives in chutz laAretz is also silly. The basic understanding of that gemara is that those who live in Hashem’s land, E”Y, are under the “direct oversight”, so to speak, of Hashem, as opposed to those who live outside E”Y who are *also* under the oversight of the “sar” of the nation in which they live. Of course, the “sar” of the Zionist paradise is the Satan, so that presumably puts those living there under the oversight of the satan, too.

Your academic question of why the oaths do not appear in the Rambam’s Yad and in the S”A has zero impact on the halachic relevance of the oaths, as brought down by numerous poskim throughout the ages.

Additionally, the nations of the world did not ever approve the creation of a Jewish State in 1920, as you falsely claimed. Balfour did signify British approval of a “national homeland” for the Jews, but not necessarily sovereignty, and that declaration was anyways rescinded by the subsequent White Papers and also clarified by the British that the Zionists “read much more” into Balfour than was written there.

Even if none of that were true, that doesn’t at all mean, as you again falsely claim and with zero basis for the same, that “therefore the oaths cannot apply in our time”. Of course they can and do apply, and the creation of the Zionist paradise has zero impact on that applicability because, in part, it is those very oaths that forbade the founding of that “State” (in addition to the numerous other halachic problems in founding that “State”). Again, all the prohibitions of the oaths, including Meridah baUmos, dechikas haKetz and aliyah baChoma, remain just as severely prohibited now as they were throughout the ages.

Yes, Rav Elchonon never saw the “State”. But he saw its ideological engine, Zionism, quite well. And the Brisker Rav, the Chazon Ish and many other gedolim certainly did see that “State” and even lived in it, and held the same as did Rav Elchonon that Zionism is heresy and idolatry.

The Zionist victory in 1967 was not miraculous; it was derech haTeva. There certainly was hashgacha from Hashem, just as there is anything that Jews do. But their victory was very much not miraculous.

That “baal teshuva” movement you mentioned was only needed because the Zionists shmaded almost all the Jews there to begin with! And that anyways doesn’t change the Torah CH”V.

The Satmar Rav expressed numerous severe problems with the Zionist “State”, but socialism was obviously not a very big concern of his.

Regarding your ramblings at the end of your post:
No, there is no valid logic to those who disagree with the Torah’s viewpoint of the idol and heresy of Zionism. No, asking the gentiles to “take over” would not in any way lead to a “civil war” and attacks on Jews and another Holocaust, CH”V. First of all, it is the Zionists who caused the Holocaust (primarily to achieve their “State” afterwards. So that concern wouldn’t apply here. Second, the Jews there would be much safer under a normal gentile government than under the Zionist idolaters and heretics under which they live now. That is true both materially and spiritually. Your accusations of me at the end of your post are totally baseless and beyond the pale – and you’re likely projecting given that you are the Zionist.

AAQ and Simcha613:
As Rabbi Jachter quoted from the Chofetz Chaim and Rav Moshe that it is forbidden to teach gemara to women and to normalize it for them, as the MO do. No sources permit that. If some women – with no schooling in gemara and with no encouragement to do so – choose on their own to learn gemara, that’s a different – and personal – matter. But, again, the Modern Orthodox attempt to stretch BY to learning gemara simply does not work and is wrong. Period.

yankel berel:
As mentioned on other threads, the fact that it’s not mentioned in various sefarim does not at all indicate that those sefarim dispute the halachic applicability of the oaths.

Go ahead and quote and cite the Avnei Nezer where/what he says that the oaths are not halachically applicable.

Meanwhile, there are numerous sources brought down by the Satmar Rav and others of poskim throughout the ages who invoke the oaths as being halachically applicable, with some bringing examples of the same, like Ben Koziva and the rivers of blood of millions (or more) of Jews there, et al.

ZSK:
I meant Iggeres Teiman; sorry about that. Regardless, the facts are, as mentioned above, that the oaths are brought down by poskim throughout the ages, and the Satmar Rav did not invent them and their applicability.

yankel berel:
You can laugh, but you can’t invent your own facts.
Avnei Neizer did not dispute the halachic applicability of the oaths. Go ahead and quote and cite what he said about that.
“Not mentioned” does not in any way mean dispute.
But, as mentioned, the Satmar Rav (Zionists brains automatically turn off) brings down many poskim who do bring – in their halacha sefarim – the halachic applicability of the oaths.
The oaths are undisputed halachically in force; go ahead and quote and cite a source that show one who does dispute it. But keep laughing.

AAQ:
You’re comparing Yiftach and Pinchas to the Chazon Ish and liHavdil elef alfai havdalos, the heretic David Green? Green went to him because he felt it would be politically beneficial to do so, of course, not because he was in the slightest interested in daas Torah.
Also, you’re stating that, by Yiftach, the only “daas Torah” was after the war, not on his appointment as leader and general before the war?

☕️coffee addict:
Good point. It’s all nonsense, of course.

Only brainwashed idolaters and the worst trolls refuse to see the truth that Zionism is idolatry and heresy and that it has caused cataclysmic damage to the Jewish people including destroying the Judaism of multiple generations of hundreds of thousands of Jews, if not more than that. And the oaths are undisputed halacha for many centuries, with actual examples brought down by Torah giants of what happened when the oaths were violated, including Ben Koziva and the Holocaust, both of which were the greatest causes of oceans of spilled Jewish blood, R”L L”A.

Eileh elohecha, Zionists.

yankel berel:
Nope. Nobody ever stated that “its preferable to rather let millions of innocent yehudim die , than be over on their corrupted version of non existent halachik shavu’ot.” That’s your invention. Of course, we all want all Jews to be well and good. But that doesn’t make it right to violate the oaths, of course.

AAQ:
“HaKatan, maybe I was not clear. This educated women need to have access to Judaism at comparable level they have to other areas of knowledge…”

You seem to be proposing that because women know secular subjects on advanced levels that, therefore, they must also learn gemara (on high levels, lectures, BM, et al.) I don’t see any logic connecting those two.

Judge Ruchie Freier, for example, is a chassidic woman. I very highly doubt that she has ever learned gemara in any formal setting, if at all. Yet, she is perfectly capable of being a judge of secular law.

Again, simply speaking, G-d does not permit women to learn gemara, unlike men, as the CC noted and as Rav Moshe Feinstein noted, both quoted in the article by LBC”L Rabbi Jachter. Yet you come up with a sevara of them needing to do so just because some have advanced knowledge in secular topics? One has nothing to do with the other, as mentioned.

DaMoshe:
Zionism is idolatry, as you have seen on these boards numerous times, and you could open a Kovetz Maamarim from Rav Elchonon and the other sefarim that discuss it and label it as exactly that. There is nothing “hateful” about that. You are both ignoring reality and accusing falsely because, presumably, you want to have your idol of Zionism as you were taught/shmaded, rather than reading Torah sources on the matter and taking that to your rabbis to at least try to get an opinion from them.

ZSK:
In Egypt, prior to Matan Torah, we certainly did have our own mode of dress, language and names, as we know. That was necessary at that time, since we hadn’t yet received the Torah.

“Am”, as it appears in the Torah, refers either to the Erev Rav, or to Klal Yisrael, the “People” who accepted the Torah, as in the “Am Hashem”. It has nothing to do with standard nationalist trappings. As Rav Saadiah Gaon wrote, our being one “People” is only through the Torah. Period. Nothing to do with “Nationalist” anything.

The Zionist usage of “Am Yisrael”, however, certainly is a misnomer because it refers to the citizens of the Zionist State.

anon1m0us:
No, that would be because the wicked Zionists lobbied governments against allowing Jews to escape to their countries and sabotaged other rescue efforts and on and on and on.

yankel berel:
You are conflating (as Zionists always do) two different matters.
Regarding the cataclysmic mess that the Zionists made in the holy land, and against the wishes of the Jews there, it is indeed only reasonable that the Zionists attempt to clean up their own mess and leave the Jews out of it. Of course, the wicked Zionists are attempting to shmad the Jews there, and at levels never seen before, and harass and impoverish the Jews there.

The other point is self-defense, to which all agree that one must defend one’s self, particularly if leaving the area of conflict is not possible. But the Zionist army is not relevant to that point, as the Zionist army is a shmad factory with all three of the gimmel chamuros, so that’s obviously a non-starter, regardless.

The nonsense about evacuating 8 million people is a straw man argument. As written above, if the Zionists wanted to end their forever wars – and the billions of dollars they needlessly waste each year on “defense” – they could go to the nations who would find a solution that would ensure the safety of the Jews (far better than the Zionists ever could) while ending Zionism and the mess the Zionists made, as the Satmar Rav wrote decades ago. But, of course, the Zionists would never do that, because, in their idolatrous anti-Jewish faith, Zionism is above all else including Jewish lives, as the Zionists demonstrated more than amply during (and before and after) the Holocaust.

DaMoshe:
Pathetic non-answer.

The idolaters have no answer because, as mentioned, since no group of Orthodox Jewish women from then until now ever felt the need to learn Talmud, that obviously means that the problem (of “needing” to do so) is MO, not Judaism, of course.

Return to full Torah allegiance rather than a maskilic dilution of the same.

But, since you mentioned hate, the only ones to whom that applies are:
“Halo misanecha Hashem esna…”
So, are you implying that you Zionist idolaters fall into that category? I would hope not.

I don’t understand why these Zionist idolaters continue to insist they are right and making silly claims like the Satmar Rav does not pasken for all of Jewry and the like.

This is all silly, and all you Zionist idolaters have gotten your answers to your non-questions many times already but you just keep repeating them and copy/pasting random things.

The S”A quote about fighting off enemies has zero to do with the shmad Zionist army. It is yehareig viAl yaavor to join that army. That army is a den of shmad and all three of the gimmel chamuros, as even the “Religious Zionist” boys are crying to their rabbis. Please stop with this nonsense.

The Satmar Rav was not the one who invented the oaths and their halachic applicability. But he does bring down numerous poskim through the ages, including BUT NOT LIMITED TO the Rambam, who invoked them as halachically binding. The midrash indicates that the oaths were the reason or the unimaginable ocean of Jewish blood spilled in response to Ben Koziva’s rebellion in Beisar. And on and on and on. Even the famous supposed quote from the Or Sameach that the Zionists love to distort (as mentioned above), clearly indicates that the oaths are halacha. Period. Please stop already with the nonsense that it is “non-halachic” just because it’s mentioned in an aggadita gemara.

Regarding the quote from Rav Yaakov, assuming it is accurate and in context, even if he did think so then, he certainly did not remain with that opinion. He wrote to the Satmar Rav that – as the latter had written that if even one Jew is convinced then all the effort he put into writing his sefarim – the Satmar Rav has succeeded in that he has convinced Rav Yaakov.

Regardless, the Zionists have shmaded generations of Jews, and are feverishly attempting to finally destroy the olam haTorah in E”Y.

Again, this is all silly. If your need to worship your Zionist idol keeps you coming back to post more nonsense, that doesn’t obligate anyone to respond.

DaMoshe:
His article is indeed well-written.
But, by “great”, you presumably mean for today’s maskilim who disregard mesorah in favor of anything from the talmud professor of YU (who also disregarded mesorah, especially his family’s mesorah by his adopting the idolatry and heresy of Zionism) that they call “the Rav”.

Rav Moshe Feinstein was the Posek HaDor.
As the article points out, he ruled that women may not study even mishnayos – never mind gemara – other than pirkei avos.

Rabbi Dr. Soloveichik was “responsible for all the tuma in America” according to Rav Aharon Kotler, and he also was the head of “Mizrachi”, meaning “Religious Zionist” idolatry and heresy, in America, so his opinion is anyways irrelevant to Orthodox Judaism. The talmud lecture he gave to the Stern College women was also obviously not permitted.

Rabbi Twersky’s attempt to justify his grandfather’s non-halachic pirtza mentioned above simply doesn’t work, and it is also absurd to compare that to the Chofetz Chaim’s heter of teaching chumash and mussar, as he did.

Rabbi Twersky writes, “If ever circumstances dictate that study of the Oral Law is necessary to provide a firm foundation for faith, such study becomes obligatory and obviously lies beyond the pale of any prohibition.” Even if that “heter” were theoretically true – still, none of the Orthodox (i.e., non-MO) schools ever dreamed that “circumstances dictate that study of the Oral Law is necessary to provide a firm foundation for faith”. So, no, of course his pirtza and disregarding of mesorah by permitting that which had always been forbidden were not needed and, yes, it obviously was “an instance of modernism”, and not “Torah intuition” unlike Rabbi Twersky’s attempt to claim otherwise.

As Rabbi Jachter quoted from the Satmar Rav, “the Chafetz Chaim limited his permission to the study of Tanach and Mussar.” As mentioned earlier in the article, the CC did so because the women otherwise would “deviate entirely from the way of Hashem and the Torah”. To extend that to, not only permitting but actively encouraging, talmud is simply absurd.

In fact, the MO’s claim to “need” this for their women – when no Orthodox women needed this, not then and not now – means that there is something very rotten with MO education and “culture” – and they should fix that (i.e., become Orthodox, of course) and then their imagined problem of this “need” of talmud for women would also be solved. Kind of interesting that none of them seem to notice that. But that’s anyways all nonsense; it’s not needed, and all the Orthodox women who don’t need it are the biggest proof that this imagined need of MO is nonsense.

Rabbi Aharon Soloveitchik was, like his father-in-law, a “Religious Zionist”, which means that his opinions are also irrelevant to Orthodox Judaism. Regardless, even if it were true, as he claims, that “Chazal only prohibited coercing women to study Torah. If, however, they choose to learn Torah, then they deserve full support of the community”, that would not at all justify setting up “Beit midrash programs”, or talmud lectures in Stern College, that encourage women to do so. This is both disingenuous and silly.

As Rav Aharon Kotler wrote, Rabbi Dr. Soloveichik was responsible for all the tuma in America. Just become Orthodox already and drop the idol and all the silliness.

SQUARE_ROOT:
They weren’t responding to Zionist idolaters and heretics who endlessly spout nonsense Zionist propaganda idolatry and heresy.

Regardless, there are many times in which the gemara begins telling a story with “haHu min…”, or “There was a heretic…”. Note that the gemara does not say that we *think* he’s a heretic but we allow for his delusion to claim otherwise. No. It stated simply and clearly that he was a heretic.

anIsraeliZionist:
You misread that. He didn’t write that the Zionist victory against Iran was “revelation of G-d”.
He wrote that (in general) that we are seeing the “revelation of G-d” now, whatever exactly that is supposed to mean.

For example, if Ukraine’s Iron Dome is not succeeding nearly as well as is Israel’s then obviously that is Hashem’s hashgacha in protecting His holy people.

More importantly, though, the Zionists are, as the Satmar Rav noted, like the arsonist who comes with a fire hose to put out the fire of a home that he himself set. Would you say that an arsonist must be zakai if he was able to put out some of the fire that destroyed that home? No, of course not, as he should never have set that fire in the first place, and the little firefighting only slightly lessened the tremendous bad that he did, not that it was in itself good.

Same with the Zionists. They have lit the region on fire and made problems for, and rebelled against the nations, all around the world. Whatever little Hashem allows them to do to slightly lower their damage from a level 10 to a level 9.5, obviously does not make them “zakai”.

yankel berel:
Neither, as it happens; it is you who is “badly mistaken”.
Rabbi Akiva thought that Ben Koziva was the Mashiach, not that he needed to do any actions to cause Mashiach to come. That’s irrelevant to this.

And it is not I who would have you believe that Hashem alone will bring the gedulah rather than any human being causing it (other than via Torah and mitzvos, etc.); the Satmar Rav brings down that and much more in his sefarim. He writes extensively about this topic in both his chiddushim al haTorah as well as the other well-known sefarim that he wrote. The midrashim are there for you to read for yourself. It’s not some invention with which you could argue.

From AI (I didn’t check the references, but I know they’re there from the Satmar Rav’s quotes of them – please feel free to learn it on your own and see that):

One key source is Deuteronomy 30:2–10, which describes how the people will return to G-d, and then He will gather them from exile, circumcise their hearts, and bring them back to the Land. The emphasis is on spiritual return rather than physical or political action:
“And you shall return to the Lord your G-d… and the Lord your G-d shall return with your returnees… and He will gather you…”

This suggests that man’s role is teshuvah (repentance) and devotion, while G-d performs the actual redemption.
Midrashically, this is reinforced in Pesikta Rabbati 36, and in Shemot Rabbah 15:2:
גאולה ראשונה על ידי משה ואהרן, גאולה אחרונה אני עתיד לגאול אותם בעצמי
“The first redemption was through Moses and Aaron; the final redemption I will redeem them Myself.”

The implication is that human leadership and effort were central in the Exodus, but in the future, G-d alone will act, and man’s role will be primarily spiritual—serving Him with sincerity and faith.

This reflects a broader theme in rabbinic literature: that the ultimate geulah (redemption) will be more direct, more miraculous, and more intimate between G-d and the people of Israel.”

BB:
Going back to your earlier post:
Imagine that someone is very strict about his mitzvah observance and learns and davens all day but he happens to also be a member of Jews for J and believes that their savior is his savior, too, R”L.

Would you similarly ask why that guy is to be shunned, given all the good that he does? After all, who cares if he worships idols if he does so much good, according to what you seem to be implying

So, please explain:
Given that Rav Elchonon Wasserman, the Brisker Rav (who lived there) and all the rest wrote explicitly that any flavor of Zionism, including “Religious Zionism”, is idolatry, and obviously in the halachic sense of the word, on what halachic basis did you decide that this idolatry (Zionism) is less severe and halachically different than that idolatry?

Going back ever further, there is the well-known story of the Malach (the rabbi, not an “angel”) whose son was fooled into donating a small coin to some Zionist and in return received a Zionist JNF pin, which he wore on his garment. When the Malach saw this, he tried convincing him to remove it, but he did not want to listen. As they were walking, they “happened” upon Rav Chaim Brisker, and stopped to ask him his Daas Torah. Rav Chaim pointed to a church across the street and stated that if the boy wanted to give money to idolatry, it would be better to give it to this idol (the church) rather than to that idol (the Zionists).

BB:
You are making a lot of assumptions and building castles in the sky out of those assumptions. Esav just fought Yishmael, for Esav’s interests/political reasons. You have no proof that it actually brought any salvation for any Jews, even if the indications are that it benefited the Jews in the Zionist paradise. In fact, it could be the opposite, that the Zionists might have done better if not for him. We don’t know, both what could have been and what actually will happen as a result of what did happen. But that’s anyways irrelevant.

Hashem stated that His Torah will never change. Migalgilin zechus al yedai zakai and other chazals very clearly denote that it is impossible for the Zionists to bring good for the Jews, and certainly not to bring the actual geulah. The Brisker Rav stated as much when he was already living there under the Zionists. Rav Elchonon Wasserman noted the same, but also pointed out that, ironically, the only way the Zionists could bring the geulah is if they cause so many problems for the Jews that Hashem then brings the geulah out of mercy to His children.

So, no, G-d already stated that the Torah will not change, and that is what the Torah says.

Bottom line is that the geulah could of course come today or tomorrow or anytime after, but that will be despite, not because of, the Zionists, as per the Torah.

GadolHadofi:
No. First of all, it is not a half-century “gap”. Zionism began a half-century before and increased its activities from then on. So, of course, there is no “gap”. You should have known and acknowledged that, rather than implicitly mocking.

Regarding the Zionists both causing and then contributing to the Holocaust, including announcing a boycott *in the name of world Jewry* (and the Zionists didn’t yet even have their pseudo-State) of Germany, which enraged Hitler YM”Sh to the point where he stated then “Now I will finish them”, and the wicked Zionists both actively and passively sabotaging rescue efforts of Jews including lobbying governments against allowing Jews into their countries, not to mention Kastner (mis)leading a million Jews of Hungary to their murderous deaths in the Nazi gas chambers, that is all historical record and fact, also mentioned by various gedolim.

There is also the spiritual/religious aspect of it in that Zionism is a mass assimilation/shmad movement, which is inherently a cause of antisemitism. And Zionism flagrantly violates the oaths, which is a cause of “ani mattir es bisarchem…”, which is essentially what happened during the Holocaust – on a horrific and never-before seen scale.

Feel free to look all this up for yourself. It’s not a secret, except in the Zionist paradise where the Zionists lie and propagandize about it to their citizens there.

The odious canard that you repeated against the gedolim is the propagandist Zionist response to the above facts. Also, Hitler YM”Sh was poised to invade Palestine, and the danger there was very real. So, even from a purely secular perspective, it would have made no sense to go to Palestine from Europe then. The Brisker Rav left Europe for Palestine specifically because of spiritual safety concerns in Europe despite the greater physical safety concerns in Palestine.

Your mockery, especially when you are both wrong and repeating Zionist propaganda against our Torah sages, is appalling.

@Bayit Beitar:
No, unfortunately, we cannot “forget about Zionism” Of course, Zionism is not, as you claim, “a political movement that is irrelevant nowadays” but rather an idolatry and heresy that is by very far the greatest rebellion against G-d on the planet, which has shmaded and continues to shmad R”L generations of Jews, especially those inside its putative “State”. Zionism is nothing less than a (very anti-Torah) complete redefinition of Judaism and Jew, with lots of money (from its “State” and elsewhere) to propagandize the same to hapless Jews.

@ZSK:
So, in addition to having no answer, you also added the heresy of “mai ahanu lei rabbanan”? And it’s not only “Rabbanim who died nearly 100 years ago”; it’s Rav Shach and others who lived much more recently, as well as LBC”L those alive today like Rav Moshe Sternbuch and others. Your labeling of me as a “sonei Yisrael” is, of course, false; true to Zionist form, it is the wicked Zionists and their supporters who would fit that rubric as they try to shut down our yeshivos and shuls in the Zionist paradise to force the Jews there to be shmaded in the Zionist army and impoverish our brethren there and forbid them from working for years as long as they refuse to be shmaded in the Zionist army. That’s true Sinas Yisrael, though a “Religious Zionist” might not recognize the Torah’s definition of sinas Yisrael due to their idol of Zionism and instead, like you, apply that to those who wish good upon Jews instead of to the wicked Zionists who are the greatest sonei Yisrael by far.

@AAQ:
The “gedolim” at the time were essentially Moshe Rabbeinu and Aharon haKohen, though his instructions were straight from Hashem rather than derived from Torah knowledge. Moshe Rabbeinu gave the meraglim specific instructions, which most of them did not follow. If memory serves, the Zera Shimshon points out the halacha that if 2 people mutually agree on criteria for an item then those criteria become binding. Moshe Rabbeinu agreed with them on specific conditions about the land because he knew that the land would pass those conditions with flying colors. But the meraglim complained about other things on which they had not agreed, which went against their agreement. So, yes, while chareidim try to listen to gedolei Yisrael, the meraglim did indeed do the opposite.

@anonymous Jew
The enormous propaganda of Zionism, especially post-War, unfortunately fooled many. That is totally irrelevant to the undisputed truth of Rav Wasserman’s writings. Regarding Torah study protecting and comparing that to tragedies that happened in our history, you can ask your LOR for more on that. One general answer is that Torah study indeed protects, but a time of din (strict judgement) has a very different calculus than in normal times. During that type of period, it takes very special merits to be saved. (Regarding the Holocaust specifically, the answer also includes the evils of the Zionists. The wicked Zionists interfered with Hashem’s plan to save Jews by, for example, lobbying governments against allowing in Jews to their countries, which closed off escape routes that Hashem had setup to be open for Jews.)

anIsraeliZionist:
It is, of course, the Zionist idolaters who twist themselves into pretzels to distort and remove from the Torah in favor of their Zionist idol.

none2.0:
I thought my phrasing made sense and also don’t understand your rephrasing.
The Torah says Lo sa’amod…, that you’re forbidden from standing by idly as your “friend”‘s blood is being spilled. Like that hypothetical drowning example.
Lifnei Iver is an additional concern.

Not sure what “morals” has to do with this. There is Torah, which is absolute truth, and everything else, which is not. Morals are irrelevant unless they are firmly based on the Torah.

emesdik613:
Great posts. Yasher koach.