Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
>>>Dear Smerel, etc
How many times do I have to repeat that I am NOT a Trump supporter?
My opposition to Trump however does not make me blind to the repeated wrongdoings and dishonesty of the other side. And right now they are the ones sounding off , not Trump.
>>>Smerel: you acknowledge Trump probably did lots of treif things. Yet you skewer and discredit all investigations as corrupt and political. They are working with a handicap because Trump and many of his top supporters have not cooperated.
Only an idiot would cooperate with a investigation when he knows that those who are making it aren’t out for truth but are out to get him. There are plenty of things they could and would have done to work around such distrust if they were looking to do an honest investigation like (1)stress that we don’t know the outcome (2)appoint DEMOCRATS who weren’t long term passionate Trump enemies (3)have oversight and transparency which conducting the investigation (4) have this as an actual hearing with the Trump side being given the ability to be present and question the what is being presented etc.etc.etc.
The way things really were done I don’t think they were even TRYING to make a fair investigation, give accurate information or determine the causes of January in an effort to prevent them from happening again.
I’m being very charitable to both sides by saying Trump seems to have deluded himself into thinking that he really won the election and still thinks that way now. The January 6 committee seems to have deluded themselves into thinking they are impartial investigators honestly presenting an impeccable case against Trump for altruistic motives.
For the good of America’s future as a democracy cooler and more honest heads need to prevail.
>>>4) The 174 traitors in the republican party that voted on January 6th (after the riots) to overturn the election results.
As if two of the most vocal members of the January 6th commission (Jamie Raskin & Bennie Thomspn ) didn’t try to do the exact same thing in 2016 not to certify Trump.
As is another member of the commission Adam Schff didn’t spend years trying to get rid of Trump by telling us baseless false claims that he had proof of Russian collusion and election fraud resulting in Trump getting elected. And Trump probably really deluded himself into thinking he won the election. Adam Schiff for all his self righteousness probably realized that he was lying when he claimed to have evidence of Russian interference in the 2016 elections
Even if I were capable of believing everything the January 6 commission is saying is true it wouldn’t change the fact that the Democrats spent years engaging in very similar behavior to get rid of Trump. It is only being viewed as a threat to democracy now becuae the other side allegedly did it.
>>>And so, some on this blog would have us believe that the Jan 6 insurrection was merely a walk in the park, verily a picnic with just a few rowdy boys.
No one said that
>>>Obviously they didn’t watch t.v. that day in which our wonderful democracy almost was lost.
Sure. American democracy was almost lost by thigs breaking into the capital. There was a real chance that they were going to install a new government. I’m so glad it didn’t happen and so terrified it will happen again.
>>>smerel, I’m voting Democratic since my main issue right now is preservation of Democracy.
If you truly believe that you need to vote Democratic to preserve it is time for you to drinking the kool-aid.
One of my many issues with the Democratic party is that they are trying to hard to “other” Republicans that they are risking major danger
. When Biden and co say stupid proactive things like “MAGA is the ‘most extreme political organization’ in recent U.S. history” it is far more likely to marginalize and raise extremism among that group than moderate it or cause it to disappear. For a few votes from people who think like you he is willing to risk
(1)creating a self fulfilling prophecy
(2)creating very fertile grounds for dangerous demagogues on either side to step in and cause havoc.
This is aside for the general issues like the Democratic party used to be the party of tolerance and acceptance. Now it is the party of hate
>>>Smerel, so you’re fixed in your views: if they were all democrats, it must be a witch hunt. If there are any republicans then they must be sell-outs
Totally not the case. Had Pelosi also picked Republicans who hadn’t very strongly expressed their opinion that Trump is guilty and whatever else the Democrats party line is before they were chosen then I would give the commission the benefit of the doubt. It’s current makeup is about as objective as a KKK lynch mob running after a black man accused of raping a white women. The black man may be guilty but they are still a lynch mob.
>>>At least there are 2 republicans participating who have every political incentive NOT to participate
They were only selected to be on the commission they had both very clearly and strongly expressed their view that Trump is guilty.
Liz Cheney is making MILLIONS of millions dollars from liberal donors for being on the committee. Adam Kinzinger (who the Democrats gerrymandered out of future office) is a guy who no one ever would have heard of had he not joined the committee but now (along with Cheney) is getting an enormous amount of attention and kovod from the media.
They both have very bright future careers on MSNBC and other such sites bad mouthing the Republicans. Ever since they joined the committee they have both picked so many fights with other Republicans (about unrelated issues) that they are both clearly angling for those positions.
They are NOT people of principle (It’s possible they once were but once you join such corrupt commissions all principles and morals are out the window)
>>>Also, why would they gather so much evidence and hear over a thousand testimonials, to just go with such a basic premise?
Because they are Looking for more excuses to harass and more information to incriminate their political opponents and sifting through it to make sure to AVOID presenting any other evidence. The January 6th committee is already guilty of presenting altered documents to the public. Does anyone think they would hesitate to do so again?
Does anyone think that if the Republicans made a similar investigation into the Democrats who supported The Steele Dossier or other completely baseless and outright fabricated attempts to remove the legally elected president of the US (Trump) it would look so different from what the January 6 commission will tell us?
I don’t watch the Republican or Democratic national conventions because I’m not interested in party line propaganda meant to whip the party faithful into a frenzy. Any important new proposals being made I’ll hear about the next day. What makes this any different?
Let me tell you in advance what they will tell us “Trump conspired to overthrows Democracy … he and other Republicans… this is a danger to American democracy… we need to….”
They been telling us that for over a year and a half already. Even before the committee started the committee members told us that. So if I left anything out let me know tomorrow …
Does anyone believe that if they came across counterevidence to the narrative in the first paragraph above or even non counterevidence but something that takes the blame off Trump and Republicans exclusively and puts some on their friends instead they will share that with us?
>>>The reason why all America tuned in on May 17th 1973 to the Watergate Hearings is because there was no Fox news.
Um.. no…
The Watergate committee was careful to include Nixon supporters and to avoid including any passionate Nixon enemies to ensure that they would conduct a fair and unbiased investigation. The January 6th committee did the exact opposite. The ONLY included passionate Trump enemies to ensure that it would NOT be a fair and unbiased investigation.
Therefore people trusted and cared about what the Watergate commission said. As opposed to the January 6th commission which is just political theater and people using their government platform to repeat to us what they already told us ad nauseum before the investigation even started
The January 6th commission has no purpose or focus other than creating more divisiveness, more distrust of the “others” in America, more of a precedent of the party in the majority using their power to as a political tool to conduct compelled interrogations of those who are in the minority etc.
That is terrible for the US and it’s future democracy as a whole.
Note I personally am a Trump opponent so don’t start lecturing me about how terrible Trump and Republicans are or assume I get my views from Fox News and Sean Hannity. Even so I still the January 6th commission as a danger to America.
>>>I have a half sister who I didnt know existed and was only seen once , and that was nearly 60 years ago. Why would I sit shiva
In such a case I wouldn’t be menachem avel if there was a major inconvenience to me. My SIL had such a sister. I’m not sure if she knew of her sisters existence or not but I certainly didn’t. No mention of her having a sister was made when she married into the family or any time later.
When that sister died I was not menachem avel. It would have been a whole day shlep and I felt that if her family never acknowledged her existence during her lifetime I don’t have to do so after her death.
>>>You need to wait for the avol to start the conversation. You should not.
Aside for that he murmured words of acknowledgment I was told by Rav Moshe Heineman that if an avel leaves the door and allows people into the house and is sitting in a manner of being prepared for conversation you don’t need to wait for him to initiate conversation. Ask your LOR but when an avel is looking at you waiting and expecting you to say something I don’t think it is correct to remain silent because he is
I had a situation a few months ago where a neighbors 10 year old daughter was killed in a car crash. Even worse his wife was the one driving. She lost control of the car and flew into a highway guard rail I barely know him and certainly didn’t know his daughter but of course went to be menachem avel.
Given the tragic circumstances I expected to find a big crowd on the Sunday morning when I showed but it was almost empty so I had to sit down directly across from. Being that at the time I had never sat Shiva myself I was at a lost for words when he looked at me expectantly. What was I supposed to say?
Now that I sat Shiva myself I’m more familiar with what to do. I would started off with “I’m so sorry that this is the circumstances that I’m here for…” and gauged his response and cues for what to say further. If I sensed he was no longer interested in me “I would have said “let me go take some mishnoyis…Hamokom Yinachem Eschem…” and made a slow exit
I recently sat Shiva. Not sure why anyone who knew neither the nifteras not the avelim would have come to be menchem avel (don’t remember any such people) but anyone and everyone who came was and is appreciated.
What is and was awkward was people who I knew vaguely coming and just sitting and sitting there after the conversation ran dry (usually because they were waiting for someone)
IMHO if you go to be Menachem avel with your wife, make up with her to wait for her on the porch/front of the house if you finish first. And if you primarily know one of the aveilim but due to the seating situation end up near one of the avelim you only know vaguely and the conversation has run dry, just get up and say “let me see if can go over to…”
>>>No need to change the second amendment. Just follow it. Either interpret it the way it was interpreted for centuries as applying to a “milita” and not individual.
That wasn’t the understanding for centuries. It was one supreme court ruling in 1939 that took that position. All the other many supreme court cases on this issue came to the oppisite conclusion The US never faced a legal effort to implement total gun control and a simple reading of
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”
pretty clearly give individuals the right own guns as opposed to referring exclusively to a militia. Otherwise it would say “the right of the militia member to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” It is these type of interpretations that I’m concerned about. Once things are stretched beyond their simple meaning you can discard the constitution
Until relatively recently I was very pro gun control. My only issue was that changing the second amendment is a very dangerous precedent. Obama’s sneering comment about “those who cling to guns and religion” should tell you where the next step after overthrowing the second amendment would be
I changed my mind to oppose strict gun control after the George Floyd riots. Those riots caused me to realize that the line of “one day a gun may be your only protection so don’t let them take it away ” is true.
The over twenty people murdered in those riots were not killed with legal guns. The footage and pictures of a riots where entire business districts were destroyed except for the one store where the owner had a gun and stood on the roof of his store brandishing it also made me rethink my opposition to gun ownership.
People say they “only the US has mass shootings” Aside for that not being true it ignores that the US is also from the few countries that tolerates riots like the George Floyd riots so it’s citizens have more reason to be armed than the the citizens of other countries.
And while the media of course only tells you about mass shootings that (preferably) took place with legal guns and cover up the skyrocketing shootings and murders in the aftermath of the anti-police laws passed after the George Floyd protests, in places that all have VERY strict gun laws, those murders made me question how effective gun control really is.
I still support gun control laws that exclusively focus on weeding out people who present a clear and present danger if they owned a gun (as opposed to most gun control laws –at least in NYS that make so many technical difficulties in owning a legal gun there is no point in trying) I support the following gun control laws (1)national registry for buying a gun that does not allow felons to own a gun and requires felons who own them to hand them back. (2)a two week wait between the purchase and acquisition of a gun (3) only licensed gun dealers may sell guns and much stricter penalties and enforcement for non licensed sales or possession (4)raise the legal possession of gun ownership to 20 UNLESS the person owning the gun is in the army or police training
I’m no fan party of either party. I usually (not always) vote Republican as the lesser of the two evils.
If the Republican win the midterm election they will slow the American decline. With all their faults the Republicans won’t be pushing for policies that are anti-religion, pro crime, anti work etc.
In the end the US is going to fall apart anyway . The Democrats will accelerate the process. The Republicans not as much.
>>>However, I’ve heard that in IRL the Jew was in fact the hero of the story, and Shakespeare made him into the villain only because he knew that in those anti Semitic times no one would show to a play in which the Jew was the good guy, and that he was not in fact an anti Semite
I’ve seen the claim that the Jew was the hero of the story and Shakespeare changed the roles is a Marcus Lehman. I question if the story ever happened to begin with that anyone had any role in it.
As far as Shakespeare himself is concerned the excuse sounds like all the Germans who said after the war “we only members of the Nazi party for business purposes” And in the case of the Germans some of them really didn’t actively do anything other than belong to the Nazi party whereas Shakespeare personally wrote anti-Semitic works
>>>After an enjoyable two hour shmooze on the topic, not one chabadsker will say anything like the Rebbe has replaced God.
Catholics don’t say that Yoske replaced God either. They give him a quasi status similar to that which some in Chabad seem to give their leader.
And of course no Chabadsker is going to admit to an outsider like me having such views. I personally was in attendance at fabrengans in 770 where the crowd was warned not to share some of their views with non Chabadskers because it stops the spreading of Lubavitch
>>>If you think you understand the chassidishe velt because you learned a little chassidishe seforim and went to Torah Vodaas then that might be the reason you think Chabad is not rooted in precedent from Chassidishe thought.
Don’t give me this “you don’t understand” apologetics. The leader of the Chabad movement himself when he introduced the “atzmius” concept explicitly said that it isn’t something he saw in any Chassidishe Seforim.
And say you are right that I don’t understand it. Do you think I’m the only one who doesn’t? Do you think no one in Chabad takes it even more literally than I do? I’ve heard plenty of chabad educators give speeches about how we need to take the “rebbe” for what he says. I’ve never seen any chabad educator speaking to a Chabad crowd emphasize that עצמות ומהות מלובש בגוף is not to be understood the way it sounds and that it would be a terrible aveira to do so.
>>>Please name one chabad rabbi (who does not belong in a mental rehab) who chas vshalom says that the Rebbe is Hashem.
They don’t say that the Rebbe is Hashem but they talk about him as if he were.
And yes some of them refer to him as עצמות ומהות מלובש בגוף R’L Something the rebbe himself made up. Some say that they don’t mean it literally . Others not so much.
There are very few issues that I want to be proven wrong and made a fool out of myself for saying like this one
It is true that in Chabad they have lifted their leader almost to the point of deification R’L but they aren’t going to listen to any outside group who attempts to set them straight . There are few groups in the frum world who are as willing to ignore the vehement opposition of other groups as Chabad. BUT their result should be a lesson to all of us that you should not just ignore vehement opposition from Talmedey Chachomim from other groups
Democrats are addicted to Trump. Or more accurately they are addicted to HATING Trump.
If they ignored him he would go away. He has no power to do anything affecting anyone’s life anymore. He was thrown off Twitter and social media. etc.
But the Democrats remain obscessed with him. When I go on Internet explorer for news there are more stories about Trump than about Biden. All of those stories are written by people who clearly hate Trump.
It’s clear that the Democrats need him for two reason (1) a major part of their identity revolves around hating Trump (2)they want him as the bogeyman so the party faithful continue to vote for them.
Note: I can’t stand Trump either but I think if he would be ignored he would no longer be anymore relevant than say Bill Clinton
>>>If not for covid Trump would have won
That is true but his behavior after the election doomed his chances in 2024.
Had he acted like Stacy Abrams and said “I don’t accept that I lost the election but realize that I won’t be the next governor of Georgia” and moved on he would have had a good chance in 2024.
But two years of talking about a stolen election don’t endear you to anyone. Is 2024 about what the voters want or a referendum on whether 2020 was stolen or not?
I don’t think Trump will run again . The winds are blowing against him even in the Republican party. The crowds who are coming to his rallies are getting smaller. His ego will not be able to take another loss.
>>>Haaretz is the Zionist version of Der Sturmer.
You would be hard pressed to find a more ANTI Zionst publication than Haaretz
>>>Rav Avrohom Pam ZTVK”L signed a letter supporting R. Helbrans, etc.
Without context this is motzey shem ra.
At the the time Helbrans had a Yeshiva in Boro Park that was relatively mainstream . He was facing accusations of kidnapping someone who lived in his house. Helbrans claimed he was hosting a troubled youth who was running away from a dysfunctional family . The teenager involved (then an adult) who was not a follower of Helbrans and not living with him anymore consistently backed up Helbrans side of of the story. As far as I know he still does. The letter of support was limited to that court case. Not any type of controversy that Lev Tohor was involved (at that point in time they weren’t involved in any)
Without context this is motzey shem ra.
The question sure seems like a troll question but I’ll answer it anyway.
These days the term cult (which the question makes no effort to define) is used so broadly that it frequently really boils to “members of a group with strong opinions or a lifestyle you dislike”
As such pretty much any group can be accused of being a cult. Or one could can question if joining a cult is really such a bad idea. If you can enhance your life by joining a group that others consider to be a cult I would say go right ahead (assuming the only real issue with the group is that others accuse it’s members of being cultists)
A cult is only bad and a cult when there is a charismatic leader knowingly misusing the trust of his followers for his own benefit. An example of such a guy is Reverends Moon . A guy who misleads his followers to terrible results because he believes what he is saying is not a cult leader. An example of such a guy is an atheistic scientist.
>>>I’ve often heard that farmers hate DST since the extra hour of sunlight is harmful to the crops.
Obviously you never heard that because DST doesn’t add sunlight but what is true is that some farmers don’t like DST because it means the dew defrosts an hour later in the work day causing problems for their work day schedules.
I’m not expecting any sympathy for the frum world who doesn’t like year round DST because of Netz but how can anyone ignore the plight of the Muslims who will need to fast a extra hour every day for a month when Ramadam falls out in the winter?
>>>I am talking about a whole universe of science as presented by hundreds of papers written by probably thousands of people. You seem to dismiss them all
I don’t dismiss them all but I also don’t think that a scientific peer reviewed paper about something that can’t be proven true with a clear cause and effect, where there are many unknown factors and only certain types of evidence are admissible in reaching that conclusion represents truth.
>>>You seem to dismiss them all, without presenting a specific argument.
Scientists frequently do that about things like (but not limited to) overwhelming anecdotal evidence against them.
>>>I can only think that this is based on internal feeling that we, Yidden, know and understand something important that others don’t.
I work in a non-Jewish professional office and interact with non-Jews most of the day . I’ve never met a non-Jew who had the incredible degree of Emunas Chachim in scientists and Emunah Pesutah
in various scientific claims like I see on the ostensibly frum science oriented blogs and forums>>>smerel, I would like to understand the source of your looking down at all the official information.
>>> just because you got yeshiva education and know how to browse internet does not necessarily mean that you understand facts better.
I certainly don’t think I know more or better than a guy like Fauci does. However unlike two years ago I no longer put lying and misleading the public past him (he admit lying and misleading the public for “the greater good” at least twice during Corona)
And Fauci for all his faults is from the good guys compared to some of the more power hungry hypocritical politicians who claimed to speak in the name of science and for health
Therefore if they suggest something that does not seem cost effective to me I see no reason to listen to them.
>>>u have a pblm with science. all it is , is give you FACTS.
don’t like facts? r u an ostrich?
they don’t like the truth and facts, so they hide their face in dirt.
be my guestWhoa! Defensive much here even though no one attacked you.
I won’t change your mind but (1)science does not give facts. They give their interpretation of phenomena and sometimes claim they are facts. Sometimes they are sometime they aren’t (2)Someone so scientifically educated should know that ostriches don’t hide their face in dirt. It’s an ancient scientific belief that we have far advanced from. They use their beaks to check on their eggs buried in the ground and in times of danger lower their heads partially in the ground to protect it.
But whatever…
>>>such scepticism predates Covid.
Before Covid I was skeptical of government and “science” but felt that due to the lack of alternative and better information source you may as well go along with most of what they say
Today what they say means as much to me as a advertisement saying “Drink Pepsi”
>>>After taking over crimea, donbas and invading Ukraine , they have ZERO LEGITIMACY.
Do you know the Russian talking point justification for doing so? Like always and like ALL countries who make military invasions they claimed it was a defense maneuver .
In this particular case when you have a hostile military alliance (NATO) coming closer and closer to Russian borders they are lot more justified in claiming defense purposes than in many other military conflicts where the western views supports the invaders and claims of defense .
I stopped accepting the Western view about every conflict over thirty years ago because of this very conflict. Back then there was a question of Russia keeping Ukraine by force. The US of course was screaming against it. Gorbachev responded “The United States did the same thing and a lot, lot worse during the Civil War” The more research I did into the Civil War the more I came to realize that with all the American excuse (like Fort Sumter) Gorbachev was making an accurate analogy.
Getting back to this conflict going on now. When you have a military alliance (NATO) constantly moving closer to a country they are hostile to (Russia) with no other ostensible conflict at hand the hostile military alliance (NATO) has plenty of fault when a larger conflict erupts over it.
This is my last post on this thread.
>>>Nations are literally standing in line to get into Nato, while nobody stands in line to partner with Russia
From the Russian point of view it is for a simple reason. They no longer have a militaristic alliance like NATO moving from country to country. When Putin and the Russians say “we disbanded the Warsaw Pact why does the West continue the militaristic buildup of NATO?” there is legitimacy behind what they are saying.
>>>If I was a Russian I would be asking myself the following.
No you wouldn’t. If you be Russian you would probably agree with the over seventy percent of Russians who see the enlargement of NATO as a threat to them and like most Russian be happy you have a leader like Putin who is willing to do something about it.
Russians like citizens of the US and ALL countries only support their country going to war when they believe they are facing some threat otherwise. Putin doesn’t have seventy percent support for the invasion because people are dying to dominate Ukraine .
The reason this invasion did not happen when Trump was president was because for all his faults Trump understood Putin’s point of view and was careful not to provoke him.
You can scream about Trump being too friendly and soft with Putin but the end of the day Putin invaded Crimea under Obama and Ukraine under Biden. Nowhere under Trump. So apparently Trump’s friendly way of dealing with Putin really was better
>>>Now Biden has practically done nothing and he is being called a coward. Isn’t this what the conservatives wanted?
I STILL don’t think Biden should do anything but once he got involved beforehand and spent weeks goading Putin to invade by telling us that Putin is about to do so and worse after sending US troops to bolster NATO in early February which caused an escalation of the crises his current lack of involvement is deserving of criticism.
>>>Paul Gosar and MTG spoke at a pro Russia white nationalist event led by well known anti semite Nick Fuentes.
The event they attended wasn’t inherently anti-Semitic and neither of them said anything remotely anti-Semitic at the event. I have no idea what MTG and PG privately think but one thing is certain: The Jewish community making a major about an event they attended and calling them anti-Semites is guaranteed to send them in that direction.
>>>One can only imagine the large OUTRAGE headline if it was AOC or Ilhan Omar.
I don’t remember any large OUTRAGE headline over AOC or Ilhan Omar attending events organized by anti-Semites. And they do so all the time!
>>>Is antisemitism merely a tool to use against political enemies?
Quite ironic that you would ask that question because that is exactly what you are doing with this post
>>>Smerel: Why blame NATO? Part of the purpose of NATO is to deter aggressors from invading sovereign countries
Not really. Officially the UN peacekeepers do that and even they don’t really do so.
NATO was formed to protect anti Russian countries. From the Russian perspective when they are moving their troop closer and closer to the Russian they are the aggressors. There was no conflict that precipitated those moves. Putin is correct to see it as a move against him and to respond.
As above how would the US react to military “peacekeepers” from hostile counties being moved closer and closer to the US border?
I don’t feel bad for Putin but I do agree with him that the US and other Western groups have plenty of blame for the current conflict. Putin didn’t just wake up one fine day and start moving troops towards the Ukrainian border. It was a response to NATO troops moving closer to his borders and talk of Ukraine joining NATO etc.
He is 100% correct for saying that if Warsaw Pact was still around and there was talk of Mexico joining the Warsaw Pact along with Warsaw Pact troops moving into Mexico the US would not just ignore it. (Nor should they)
>>>So, no, the Zionist “ideal”, and practice of the same (meaning shmad) is, unfortunately, very, very much alive, and is, by far, the greatest source of shmad worldwide, far, far greater than the dying “Reform” and whatever damage “Footsteps” has done.
This comment epitomizes why I look at the more anti Zionist crowd as being badly brainwashed and purely political as opposed to having actually caring about shmad. You can’t reason with such people
Reform, a movement that openly fights against Torah and even has some “rabbis” who openly preach not believing in God? Nu, nu not so bad. Footsteps who I personally who they led off the Derech? Also Nu, nu not so bad.
The main thing is not to be a “Zionist” Whatever “Zionists” are.
I leave you with one thought. There are plenty of Satmar alumni hanging out in Footsteps fighting Torah with them. How many are being led astray by the “Zionists”?
>>>In fact, the opposite has occurred. Moreover, there are numerous kiruv and other places throughout the USA, including on colleges, and in communities
I’m curious do you any involvement with Kiruv? Do you know that even American Kiruv organizations focus on Israeli Yordim because the typical American college student has so little Jewish identity that s/he wouldn’t go anywhere near a Kiruv center?
I’m no Zionist but I see more and more the truth of what Rav Yaakov Kemintsky said that Hashem wanted the state of Israel because otherwise most of the Jews living there would be assimilated.
Do you know that most of the anti religious activity in Israel today is done through the pressure and funding of secular American Jews not native Israelis
If you want to be such a kanoi go fight with Footsteps and the Reform movement. Not people and ideals who are long dead. As an aside it amazes me how all the big anti-Zionist kanoim in the US would never dream of fighting with the Reform movement or ANY other anti-Torah movement as long as it’s members aren’t Zionists
I’m an independent voter who usually votes Republican as the lesser of the two evils and I’ll say enough of the Kool Aid. If you believe the Republican party should be renamed the Trump party then you must also believe that the Democratic should be renamed the BLM rioter party.
There are a lot more Republicans who are willing to stand up and criticize Trump than there are Democrats who are willing to criticize BLM rioters
The “in Germany they also thought it can’t happen here” are making a false analogy. There is a big difference between a situation where a party like the Nazis is ALREADY in power and a situation where they aren’t. A guy living in Germany in the 1920s indeed had no reason to flee and was a lot safer than Jews in most of the rest of the world were at the time. Someone saying we have to leave Germany in the 1920s was making a foolish comment unless he was a novi. While it is possible that the situation in the US could rapidly change just like it did in Germany that possibility exists in other countries as well so there is no reason to go running to them.
Another factor to consider is that the US has far more things decided on a local level than most other countries. It is possible that some of the more liberal states will become unlivable for Orthodox Jews but not the US a whole
>>>With all the rising anti Jewish attacks in so many states and big cities, is this the wake up call to think about packing our bags?
If you wouldn’t follow social media and have been around in the seventies you would realize that there is no major increase in these type of attacks.
To quote Rav Avigdor Miller on peace of mind “Don’t read the newspapers! They are going to tell you that hooligans are running around in Boro Park beating up innocent people. They are going to fill your minds with all sorts of problems with all sorts of problems you an do nothin but otherwise never would have heard of” This was fifty years ago. Today substitute social media for newspapers
>>>When the police do nothing to stop the rioters and arrests and prosecutes Jews who try to defend themselves against the rioters that is a government sponsored pogrom.
The first half is exactly happened thirty years ago during the Crown Heights pogrom. The police did not arrest Jews who tried to defend themselves because few tried but the liberal media made it sound as if the Jews were the aggressors or at least equally at fault .
What is a problem is that the increasing hostility to religion in general among the more liberal circles. e.g. Forty years ago The New York Times and those type of publications were anti-Semitic but they did not mock frum people per se. I do think that things will get worse in a general sense in America but not to the degree of needing to run away
>>>Bashing a capital policeman with a fire extinguisher followed by a shpritz of bear spray is an explicitly recognized form of political discourse
Are you trying to remind us about how the Democrats and media lied to us for WEEKS claiming capital policeman Brian Sicknick was killed by being beaten with fire extinguishers and when that was demonstrated to be a lie they went ahead and lied to us for another few WEEKS claiming he was killed by bear spray until the family and medical examiner report forced them to admit it was all made up?
But those are the truth seekers and truth purveyors who we are supposed to follow about everything else with regard to the capital riots .
>>>Smerel, one does not need articles or investigators to know what Trump is.
No idea what you are trying to say with this. As I said I’m no Trump supporter, but I also recognize that a lot of what his opponents say and do is very wrong as well. And as above if you have a specific question on what I said I will respond
>>>The Republicans should be working on fence building and reconciliation, rather than passing a resolution designed to encourage people who would otherwise vote Republican
There is no way you can reach out to someone who isn’t interested in reaching out to you and the only thing she says to or about you is “I hate you” like Liz Cheney. If she had the exact same viewpoints but also used her media limelight to advance ideas that Republicans care about and speak against Democrats ideas that they oppose she would be in a very different situation.
Unlike the censure of Sinema or the fact that Manchin now needs private security wherever he goes
Cheney wasn’t censured for her political views. She was censured because there is a limit to how much of a fight you can pick with people and expect them to continue to consider you you as one of their own .>>>What else do you call someone who lost and after unsuccessfully trying to prove that he won, continues to claim that he won the election and it was stolen from him ?
The great hero of the Democrats in Georgia , Stacy Adams did the same things and continues to make the same claims. Unlike Trump she has the brains to realize not to endlessly fight a battle she won’t win. But she has acted exactly like him when she still thought it would benefit her
>>>Here is a list of the people subpoenaed. Cross off the one who was not involved in Jan 6th.
None of those people were personally involved in the Capital riots, the ostensible excuse for the January 6th. If you are going to prosecute people for peddling false information and try to get rid of a legally elected president through peddling lies then you can investigate almost Democratic member of congress. They all tried to get rid of Trump through an impeachment trial based on baseless accusation and then tried to do so peddling the Steele Dossier , now universally acknowledged to be a pack of lies. And that was just the start of the Democrats trying to get rid of Trump through false accusation and lies
When the Democrats will investigate how there was an impeachment trial based on so little evidence and start worrying about the precedent of trying to get rid of political opponents through false trials and false accusations then I’ll believe the January 6th commission is even remotely about truth, democracy and integrity in government .
As above let me stress and stress again. I am NOT a Trump supporter. But other than having better temperaments I just don’t see his opponents as being morally better than him or being the good guys and doing the right thing in all the conflicts they have with him
>>>Smerel, why in the world would Cheney suddenly embrace the Left-Liberal agenda?!? Are you for real? Stop spewing the lunatic Trump propaganda which can not withstand the smallest scrutiny.
You are screaming so loud I can’t hear what you are saying. If you have a specific question or scrutiny on what I said let me know and I’ll respond.
On a personal note as my comment indicted I am anti Trump. However I also realize that his career opponents are frequently lying and frequently doing the wrong thing as well. It is rare to read an article about Trump that is pure honest and straight reporting . And many (most?)of the people who are investigating him are Rodfim. Your emotional response to my comment complete with the standard insults Trump’s opponents tell their followers to believe about anyone who doesn’t blindly and slavishly parrot their party line indicates that you have fallen into their web. The only difference between your comment and the type of comment you would expect from a Trump devotee who believes whatever Trumps says is which side you happen to be on