Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
If you can daven and managed to get a Jewish education through elementary school (meaning Humash and some Mishna, siddur and some halacha), you can communicate in Heberw if you really try. Remember that most immigrants to Eretz Yisrael had only their “cheder” Lashon Kodesh to communicate in. Sefarim such as Kitzur and Ben Ish Hai were very popular, and not as translation, meaning the average reader could read them. The same goes for Pirkei Avos and Humash.
rightwriter
actually, the goyim never saw us as wimps
they attack us to prove they can their avodah zarah’s enemies
if you look hard enough you could find some kashruth agency that would give a hecksher to a casino or a brothel (businesses prohibited by halacha), but I certainly wouldn’t eat there
Do you some basis, other than zionist and Nazi propaganda, to believe that Jews are wimps?
What is true is that our survival and welfare are a function intellect and ruchniyos.
if Ha-Shem did not want us to survive, we wouldn’t
Define “right” and “left” (and remember, those terms derive from the seating in the French legislature during their revolution, which was before any Jews were allowed to vote or hold office).
If by “right” you are referring to the groups such as the self-proclaimed Nazis, the Ku Klux Klan, Q-ANON, their rhetoric is threatening but they are regarded as nutcases by American Conservatives, and lack any potential to be more than a nuisance.
If by “right”, following groups such as the Democrats or the secular left-wing media, you are referring to those who favor capitalism, fiscal responsibility, personal autonomy, religion, policy that regards hetereosexual reproduction as normal, etc., we have no reason to fear them, and in the eyes of the American left, we are clearly part of them. Even if a frum Jews wishes to be a “Liberal”, we can’t since we are by definition religious, pro-children, and believe that an persons have free will and are responsible for their actions.
The American “left” is probably a bigger threat. It is dominated by secular Jews, are see most of what we believe, including the existence of a creator, to be incorrect ideas that require the coercive power of the state to “correct”. Unlike American conservatives with a long tradition of opposing religious discrimination, going back to the late 18th century when America became “exceptional”, the “left” sees “Freedom from religion” as a policy goal, and since we are obviously religiously oriented, they perceive a need to “cancel” us (thus we see the Democrats in New York trying to close down yeshivos and ban Bris Milah – suggesting that frum Jews should really consider moving to a more conservative, and therefore tolerant, state).
The “Black Hebrews” are very similar to many other African American religions that were created out of odds and ends picked up by people who were not only enslaved, but done so in a manner that prevented transmission of their own culture (e.g. newly enslaved persons were rarely living together with slaves who shared their own language and culture). They ended up “inventing” their own culture, which is why many African American religious groups seem a bit outlandish. The “Black Hebrews” are clearly goyim, and like many American goyim, choose aspects of Biblical (as they define it) history to “appropriate”.
As the split in the Jewish community becomes more obvious, frum Jews are decreasingly likely to be blamed for the actions of a secular cousins (whether or not they are Jews according to halacha). On the bad side, it appears that most anti-Semitism is increasingly from secular persons with Jewish ancestry. Groups like the “Nazis” are universally regarded as a bad joke (and note that contemporary “right wing” parties everywhere tend to make a point of repudiating anti-Semitism), where the “politically correct” left is a real threat to us (note who wants to close the yeshivas and prohibit Bris Milah).
So if one side decides that putting you in a concentration camp is a good idea, they should get the chance every other year????
If you don’t like democracy, try moving to a country without free elections, preferably one with a dictator who doesn’t like you. While some democracies make serious mistakes (e.g Japan’s democratically elected government was very dumb to enter World War II, the local governments in many American cities were dumb to give a “green light” to criminals, the Confederacy’s decision to go to war to protect slavery though in all fairness had they had free elections that wouldn’t have happened, etc.), there is really no alternative unless HaShem decides to take direct control of the political system by smiting idiotic politicians.
Trump has made a point of alienating huge groups of Republicans, including those favoring a strong national defense and a foreign policy of America being “first” in defending freedom, of welcoming immigrants, of fiscal sanity and monetary responsibility,etc. The Republicans who liked Ronald Reagan and Dwight Eisenhower are the ones alienated by Trump (though much of his policy appeals to those who liked Robert Taft and Herbert Hoover). With the necons, and the Tea Party, and the “Chamber of Commerce Republicans”, no Republican has a chance. Trump has burned his bridges and unless he wants to be remember as one of the most humiliating failures in American history, he needs to back down and focus on helping the Republicans win in 2024. That means not taking sides in the primaries, focusing on issues, and working to get his base to support the ticket.
…beat Michelle Obama
Attacking an old lady (and former First Lady) would definitely get you thrown in jail, “elder bashing” is consider outrageous, and unlike the House Speaker’s husband, she is protected by the Secret Service
P.S. and in any event, the Democratic Party has a secret weapon which is used very effectively in the 2022 election – they run against Donald Trump; they managed to convince most voters to overlook Joe Biden’s flaws, which was a major accomplishment
Blame the Democrats since they are the party that prefer global cooling.
So what, most of the 1% class support the Democrats. You have to go back a generation to find a period where the wealthy tended to vote Republican. The Republicans tend to be the party of the working class (a.k.a. the “deplorables” as the Democrats call them). Are you coming out in favor of a change in the law to ban rich people from donating to political parties, and to replace it with the government funding all campaigns, limited of course to those with socially acceptable views (a change the WOKE Democrats favor).
The closest thing to “rigging” was that in the Republican primaries, the Democrats funded candidates supported by Donald Trump, knowing that those candidates were likely to lose in the general election.
A lot of the reasons the major countries became less barbaric, starting in the 19th and especially the 20th century had to do with Jewish influences (sometimes directly, or by way of goyim “appropriating” ideas from us), as well as the growth of mass media putting a spotlight on barbarity and making the barbarians look bad. There were always people who though that genocide was morally wrong and should be banned, or that drawing and quartering was savage – but it is only recently that these views can to predominate.
To Yabia Omer: You need to consider what was done to criminals until the invention of modern prisons in the early 19th century. If you think killing a bunch of children is barbaric, what do you think of American and British “ethnic cleansing” in the 17th to 19th century, where the murderers were hailed as national heroes. Baruch ha-Shem we live in a world in which criminals no longer plea bargain for a merciful death, and that genocide and torture result in one being labelled “Hostis humani generis” (“enemy of all mankind” – a legal term the until recently was only applied to some pirates and that only some of the time).
It is very inappropriate to make fun of people who are foaming at the mouth.
And it is inappropriate to make fun of Biden and Trump since at their age, they can’t help themselves.
Blame the fools who vote candidates who well past recommended retirement dates.
A test of election fraud is whether the results are consistent with what someone stuffing the ballot box would do. For example, how is it that Government Kemp in Georgia won a significant victory over a well funded and well know opponent, while Herschel Walker managed to come in second place. If the far left is stuffing ballot boxes, why did conservatives do well in New York. I have check Russian history, and except for the very last election held under Communists, the Communists typically got close to 100% of the votes.
Ballot stuffers don’t split their tickets. You never encountered some of the famous Democrat election cheats in the past (e.g.Tammany Hall in Manhattan), letting some Republicans win just for show.
While 2020 had a lot of believable anarchy since absentee ballot use was encouraged due to paranoia about Covid, especially among “blue” voters (since being paranoid about Covid generally correlates with “blueness” which is why absentee votes were more likely to be Democratic than those cast in person), the 2022 election was conducted with record breaking scrutiny.
The problem with the Trump fan club is there inability to understand that most Americans expect their leaders to act mentch-like, and someone who makes rude jokes and makes fun of people is not acting like a mentsch – which is why Trump’s support (and supporting Trump) was detrimental to Republican candidates.
One should also note that Stacey Adams who had really great career prospects as a moderate Democratic politician, wrecked them by insisting that the 2018 election she lost had been stolen, and being a sore loser. In a democracy, if you make a claim that an election was stolen, you need to back it up or face political disgrace.
Exit polls were always unreliable, and even more so now. One should not take the “instant” reports based on exit polls as being proof of anything.
Most pre-election polling suggests a Republican win, and usually the polls “lean” Democratic. However the Republicans seemed to be “surging” at the end, meaning that the mail-in and early voting might have missed the surge.
The lawsuits should largely vanish in non-close elections.
Undated but verified envelopes (meaning the voters name is on the outside can be checked) are unlikely to be forged, especially if they have a postmark. One has to ask as to why one assumes that Democrats are more likely than Republicans to improperly fill out the absentee ballot forms (being a Democrat probably indicates poor economic and political judgement, but doesn’t indicate inability to fill out a form).
for Yidden in particular, the election has no good reason to get excited. Some of Biden’s supporters are anti-Jewish, as are some of Trump’s. Biden’s ambiguous foreign policy (back stabbing allies in Afghanistan which encourage the Russians to attack Ukraine, and giving Ukraine enough aid to survive but not win) does endanger Israel, as does Trump’s “America First” foreign policy (since that attitude changes Israel from an endangered ally to a foreign entanglement).
Economically, the Democrats “big spending” policies are highly inflationary, but many Yidden derive benefit from them. While the war in Ukraine (caused by Biden’s incompetence, coming after Trump’s neo-isolationism) is causing serious inflationary disruption in grain and energy markets, the Democrats “green” agenda is also a major source of disruption and price increases in the food and energy markets. Plus, the underlying cause of inflation is a falling labor supply, caused by a falling birthrate and lower immigration, none of which are really “Jewish issues”.
If you look at American history, the country is doing well from most perspectives. The poor have never been better off, minorities (even frum Jews) have more opportunities than ever. Most of the concern that the country is falling apart can be attributed to sensationalist media and the fools who believe them.
Depending on what state they are in, they should have already voted. No reason to be bitul Torah when there are plenty of options for mail-in or early voting.
1. Like most Chareidim, historically, Shas was pro-peace. The reason Chareidim tend to be pro-peace is that the continued existence of a constant state of war tends to undermine Torah life whether by glorifying soldiers (rather than the traditional Jewish glorifying of Torah scholars), conscription of young adults, and severe economic discrimination against those who haven’t served in the army.
2. Also note that the left wing parties and Chareidim usually agreed on social programs that benefit the poor, whereas the more nationalist parties tend to be less than thrilled about creating and expanding entitlements.
3. If the left wing parties were no so committed to the anti-religious commandments of their Marxist pseudo-religion, the Chareidim would probably be considered inherently left wing , however the Israeli left regardless of what it feels about issues such as national security and economics, sees its highest priority as being to opposed Torah and the Chareidim (to make Israel into an “Am Hofshi” – free from Torah).
Hard to say. If someone is meikel about needing to support one’s family without relying on charity or handouts from the goyim, so they have more time to learn, is that good or bad?
ujm and Philosopher: But anyone frum who learns Humash without Rashi is likely to actually be learning Humash according to Rashi, since that is how Jews understand Humash.
By way of contrast, goyim and frei Jews learn “Bible” based on the text without reference to the oral tradition which is why they end up with rather queer (meaning weird and deviant with no special reference to the 21st century meaning of the word which we don’t discuss) ideas about Tanach. Indeed, the basic tenet of the “fundamentalists” is that “Bible”, meaning King James’s adaptation, must be understood solely by looking at the text without reference to external sources; no frum Yid would ever be a “fundamentalist”.
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).