ujm

Likud MK: “Arrests Of Bnei Torah Is Illegal; It Feels Like An Era Of Gezeiros Shmad”

Yankel: The agreement was a political agreement reached in June 1947, which allowed Agudas Yisrael to join the provisional government institutions in the first place.  The Status Quo Letter is dated June 19, 1947.  The United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) was coming to the region to decide if a Jewish state should exist. Ben-Gurion knew that if Agudas Yisrael (representing Orthodox Jewry) testified against the state, it would destroy the Zionist case for a “united Jewish people.” Agudas Yisrael threatened to oppose the state unless religious guarantees were made. In response, Ben-Gurion (along with Rabbi Yehuda Leib Maimon and Yitzhak Gruenbaum) signed the letter promising autonomy in education, Kashrus, Shabbos, and family law. Because of this letter, Agudas Yisrael agreed to join the “Moetzet HaAm” (The People’s Council), the provisional body that would become the temporary government.  As a member of Moetzet HaAm—a position he held only because of the Status Quo agreement—Rabbi Levin was automatically one of the agreed designated signatories of the Declaration.

Rabbi Levin did not believe in the ideological content of the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration is a secular Zionist document based on “natural rights” and historical nationalism. Rabbi Levin believed the Jewish claim to the land was solely religious/Divine. The final text of the Declaration famously refers to “The Rock of Israel” (Tzur Yisrael) rather than “Hashem.” Rabbi Levin fought to include Hashem. The secular socialists (Mapam) refused. Levin signed a document that omitted Hashem, something he would never do for an ideological statement. He did it purely for political pragmatism. 

Rabbi Levin wasn’t even there when it was signed; he signed later when he returned to Eretz Yisroel, as per his earlier agreement in exchange for the Status Quo Letter. While Ben-Gurion was declaring the state in Tel Aviv, Rabbi Levin was in a hotel in New York fundraising. If he viewed this as an important event (like Religious Zionists did), he would have made every effort to be present. His absence underscores that for him, this was a bureaucratic necessity, nothing more. Even after 1948, in the Knesset, Rabbi Levin repeatedly spoke about the spiritual hollowness of the state, calling for a return to Torah rather than nationalism.

Yankel: That was a strategic move on his part to get concessions from the rasha Ben-Gurion. And he received concessions, most notably the “Status Quo Letter” signed by Ben-Gurion. Why do you assume the Agudah Rabbonim opposed this tactic?

Therefore, your comparison is off-base.

The New York Times and the Washington Post and and Bellingcat, all left-wing outlets, agree in their analysis and conclude that physical contact occurred between the woman’s SUV and the ICE agent. (Those outlets try to poo-poo it by dismissing it as “only” being the SUV clipped or brushed his leg.)

The woman’s presence at the scene was intention to be there to oppose ICE. It was not as originally claimed that she was merely passing by coincidentally.

Her vehicle stopped diagonally, blocking the lane to stop ICE: Obstruction of Governmental Administration (OGA) or “Interfering with a Federal Officer” (18 U.S.C. § 111)

A “prima facie” case exists against her of Fleeing a Peace Officer (MN Stat § 609.487) and Resisting Arrest when an officer with “apparent authority” ordered her out of a car and she instead put the car in reverse to drive away.

An agent was still physically touching the door handle when she shifted into reverse. Under 18 U.S.C. § 111, “forcible interference” does not require a strike. If her movement caused the agent to stumble or jerked his arm, it can be charged as Assault on a Federal Officer.

By accelerating forward while an agent was at the front corner of the car, who her SUV hit (which wasn’t even necessary for this crime but strengthens the case against her) she weaponized the vehicle. This is Domestic Terrorism/Attempted Murder.

Since the ICE police officer believed the SUV was veering into him (and it in fact did hit him, which isn’t even necessary for his belief), his “reasonable belief” of a threat justifies his discharging his weapon against her under federal law. So the first shot is definitely self-defense. As far as the second and third shots, once a “threat” is perceived (the car accelerating), the officer makes the decision to fire a “volley” of shots; even if the car passes him and the threat is gone by the second or third shot, the human brain takes roughly 1.5 seconds to process that the danger has ended and to signal the finger to stop pulling the trigger.

Warning To IDF: Immediately Halt Drafting Ill Charedim Or Face Legal Action

Timeline of events:

1. A 37 year old female rioter with a history of impeding law enforcement activity of ICE intentionally blocks the road with her vehicle to prevent law enforcemnent from passing the road.
Crime: Obstruction of Governmental Administration (OGA) / Obstructing a Peace Officer

2. ICE police officer lawfully orders the female driver to move her vehicle out of the way so that law enforcement can move down the road.

3. The driver refuses the order.
Crime: Failure to Obey a Lawful Order / Disobeying a Lawful Order

4. ICE police officer lawfully orders the driver to get out of the vehicle so he can place her under arrest for above crimes she committed.

5. The driver refuses.
Crime: Resisting Arrest

6. The police officer attempt to open the driver’s door to take custody of her.

7. The driver suddenly reverses her vehicle, while the police officer is holding the door, in an attempt to escape police custody.
Crime: Assault on a Police Officer / Battery on a Peace Officer

8. Another ICE police officer moves in front of her vehicle to block her.

9. The driver switches from reverse to forward and accelerates towards the second police officer.
Crime: Assault with a Deadly Weapon on a Peace Officer / Aggravated Assault on a Police Officer / Attempted Murder of a Law Enforcement Officer

10 . The police officer, who the car was moving towards (and may have been physically hit), in a self-defense split-second life or death decision to protect his life and others (who the moving vehicle may additionally hit) fires upon the rioter.

akuperma: Factually wrong.

The law enforcement officer ordered her out of the car. To be arrested. She resisted arrest. And attempted to flee and become a fugitive. Law enforcement lawfully, and as trained, attempted to stop her escape from justice.

She then used her vehicle as a deadly weapon moving in the direction of the law enforcement officer. He then used his best split second judgement that she may run him over. While the videos are unclear whether or not she did or did not actually end up hitting him before he stopped her, as well as being unclear whether she was moving directly into him or moving slightly to his left, he was left with a life or death judgement whether she was attacking him with a moving automobile. The law protects the law enforcement officer in such circumstances.

She created the deadly circumstances by refusing a lawful order to stop and get out of her vehicle. After refusing that lawful order and resisting arrest, she illegally switched her vehicle from reverse into forward, where the officer was standing.

The earlier attempt lawfully ordering her to drive her SUV out of the way and stop impending the carrying out of law enforcement activities, she had refused to comply with. She missed that opportunity by refusing the lawful order to get out of the way. At that point she was being placed under arrest and legally could no longer move away.

Your idea that he should have called the local police is foolhardy. Should the ICE police officer have called 911 after she ran over him with her SUV?

Rare Incident: Ponevezh Bochur Detained & Transferred To Military Police

Disgrace At Military Prison: Bochurim Weren’t Provided Mehadrin Food For 3 Days

“Lomdei Torah Are Not Just Sharing The Burden; They’re Carrying The Entire Burden”

HaRav Landau Warns AG, Supreme Court: “You’re Fighting The Torah & The One Who Gave It”

“At A Dead End:” Legal Adviser Demands Harsher Sanctions On Bnei Torah

Fellow Supreme Court Judge Slams Amit: “He’s No More Than A Politician In A Robe”

Furor Over Supreme Court Conference Featuring Radical Left & Anti-Chareidi Speakers

“Supreme Court Is Like A Child Throwing A Tantrum; Yitzchak Amit Has No Boundaries”

Leading Rabbanim And Admorim Convene Emergency Asifah in Yerushalayim Against Draft Law; Call for Mass Atzeres

Simcha: Who are you kidding? This isn’t new stuff that started happening in the last two years. Jackbooted Zionist Gestapo thugs in uniform and on horseback and with batons have been violently beating Bnei Torah in Eretz Yisroel over and over again since 1948.