Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
ubiquitinParticipant
Joseph
Good question
1) I dont know you have to ask them
2) I never said it isnt dangerous for ISrael, in the course of theis discussion I think that point is forgotten. ALL I am saying is that I have not heard a viable alternative (neither here nor from any of the people you mentioned). I dont think the plan is a good plan and I dont think it will work. I am failry certain (As I have been since Saddam was taken out of the picture over ten years ago) that Iran will get the bomb and we will all learn to live with it.
– Sanctions havent worked (and according to some have helped stir anti-US hatred
– Military attack isnt politcally viable (or even expected to eb effective according to some mossad reports)
– That leaves kicking the can down the road, and hoping that maybe just maybe either the IRanians will keep their end. and again if they dont, then we are back where we were July 14.
ubiquitinParticipantTirtza
I didnt mean to insult. (I’m not even sure which line you mean “no-brainer”? I just meant it was obvious.
“No, I think that Iran’s nuclear facilities should be sabotaged if they are not being used to provide electricity or medical products, apparently I’m in good company seeing that the senior Israeli diplomat. also concurred.”
that makes three of us!
“Oh, how much do they have to violate to void because if they violate a little and the sanctions “snap back”(are presented to the UN for discussion, we know how the UN works), then Iran has it in the agreement they can void the deal.(really effective!)”
What? did you just say that if IRan violates the deal then they can void it?
If they violate it (even “a little”) the sactions immediatly snap back, no UN needed.
(“,”If you like your health plan you can keep it?””
You can! but that is a dfifferent topic)
“No agreement would have been better”
How?
ubiquitinParticipantcrazybrit
You are making a few mistakes
There is no problem to get fleishigs during the nine days. AS Dy mentioned earlier. The only thing you cant do is eat fleishigs.
You say regarding your grill that pareve cooked on it is “fleishig gomur lkol hadaos” This is certainly not true. If the grill has no meat on it even without kashering it, pareve cooked on it remains pareve (but cant be eaten WITH milk). If the grill hasnt beesn used in 24 hours not only do you not need to wait after eating your pareve sausage prior to eating cheese,but you can even put cheese on the sausage bedieved. According to most though you cant lechatchila cook the sausages on the grill planning to place cheese (though according to the biur hgra you cna even do that!).
As popa pointed out even if the grill was dirty it wouldnt make you fleishig (though this couldnt be eaten with cheese)
ubiquitinParticipantredleg there is a differnce between opposing and sactions. threatening sactions if an “ally” doesnt do waht you want is the exact deffinition of abandonment.
You may have a different definition that isnt grounded in realirty, but that would make conversation difficult
“Does that also constitute abandonment? “
If shooting down aircraft isnt abandonment I think you need a new dictionary! (though IVe never seen any reliable sources for that story so Ive left it off since it is a better example of abandonment than 56)
“In many respects the modern State of Israel a child of the U.S. Tough love is still love. “
This is nonsense! ISrael is an ally not a child. If your friend thretens to take stuff away from you or punch you if tyou dont do what he wants, I have news for you he is abandoning you.
The notion thta Israel need the US’spermission to do what is in its own best interest is offensive. (Collin Powell snapped at a reporter in 2001 for suggesting what you are, Ill dig up source later)
ubiquitinParticipantSushi there is no better alternative (at least none that Ive heard yet)
Tirtza says “See my comments there”
However while she does raise some valid concerns regarding the plan. she does not offer any viable alternatives, which is what sushi asked for.
akuperma
“By agreeing that Iran will get nuclear weapons in the foreseeable future,”
The agreement does the exact opposite
Barry
“Keep tightening the screws with sanctions and any other means available. “
Been there, done that. IT hasnt worked
and besides
“Do not fear my children, do not fear. All that I have done I did only for you. Why are you afraid? The time for your Redemption has come! “
I dont get it, so you are concerned that IRan will keep their end of the deal and not get weapons thus not fullfiling the yalkut?
Sushi
“This new deal gives them an opportunity to give in with their pride intact, it’s let’s the feel like winners but but still forces them to change. “
Exactly! and if they dont keeop their end, the sanctions return! and we are still free to try any other plan that hasnt been suggested yet.
July 20, 2015 11:31 am at 11:31 am in reply to: Is Trump all he's trumped himself up to be? #1093210ubiquitinParticipantubiquitinParticipantTirtza
“Where can I see the whole document?”
Google is your friend. Washington post has it, among others
“Did you read the section at the end, “Nuclear Safety, Safeguards and Security?””
Yes
“Check it out again”
I did
Arutz Sheva implies it is directed against Israel.
bottom line is If Iran keeps their end of the deal (and again I doubt they will) they cant get a bomb, and there is no need to sabotage their facilities. IF they dont keep their end, the deal is void.
Dont you think it is important to protect nuclear facilities from sabotage? This one is a no-brainer
ubiquitinParticipantredleg
“seemingly”
You have got to be kidding, you can argue that it was int he US’s best interests to back Nasser (of course history proved that wrong) but you can targue that he only “seemingly” took the arab side.
“was specifically to show them that they needn’t rely on the Russkis”
Yes and it didnt work. Did it?
“Just because the U.S. disagrees with an Israeli position or considers an Israeli action inimical to the U.S. interest that doesn’t constitute abandonment. “
Agreed (as in the Iran peace deal). However threatending sanctions certainly constituent abandonment
“Any President who put the interests of a foreign country or entity before the interests of the U.S. would justly be called a traitor.”
so you can argue that he was right to abandon Israel as you beielve it was in the US’s best interests but you cnat argue that it wasnt abandonment
ubiquitinParticipantDY
It seems mistaver to me, but I do not have a source
sushi
“How can you justify having a new like ubiquitin isn’t that kefira?”
What?
July 19, 2015 10:40 am at 10:40 am in reply to: Is Trump all he's trumped himself up to be? #1093198ubiquitinParticipant“he cant “take it like a man”?!”
No he is a egotistical child.
Egotistical children dont make good presidents
ubiquitinParticipantDY
I didnt make that assumption, PBA did. (I owuld think that if anything waiting would be stricter than nine days since the geder for waiting is moshech taam (see igros moshe i forget the teshuva exact mareh makom, but can find it tommrow on the rema/shach cited by PBA, wheras nine-days is simcha, but I do not have a mekor that say explictly compares the two.)
I assumed the opposite, that cooked in a dirty grill it shouldnt be eaten in the nine days, which is the way i remebered the halacha in OC.
ubiquitinParticipantTrump’s latest gem
(regarding John Mcain)
Man I love this guy!
ubiquitinParticipantDY
Thats what I was basing on.
Though PBA raises a good point
sushi.
“Can you really not see the difference?”
Im not sure what you are saying. If you are on a high darga that you dont want to “miss eating meat” or try “somehting new every day” Mazel tov! I am so proud.
It is a strech to call that “benefiting” they do the best they can and making parnasa during the nine days isnt assur.
ubiquitinParticipantTirtza
“First of all, I could care less at this point what any president did or would have done, we are talking about today.”
Complelty agree
“I think that the way you take each point that I bring up and appear to answer it is quite clever”
Thank you
” but you are not answering the points at all, you are just latching on to something that you can argue about,like the “suffering” bit, you know that was not the point.”
I address almost every point.
The bottom line is, no viable alternative is beiong offered to the agreement
” The “allies” was a reference to Israel and Saudi Arabia, which is in quotation marks because they are not being treated as allies.”
The US has other allies, whiule I wish they put ISrael first, ISrael if far from the biggest/most important ally .
” I haven’t read the agreement but this is not speculation, they referred to a certain section.”
I have, it is speculation
” I was not making a personal attack against you, but trying to stimulate your heart, an emotional appeal, but I guess that only works with people who are not already convinced that they know the right answer.”
I dont knoiw thta that is a bad thing per se. Emotions are certianly important but logic is more important
Of course, I think H’ is the Director of all things but we are expected to play our role.”
Agred, though in your previous post you accidently put those roles backwards
“I’m very glad that I have returned to Israel because, being a person that experiences guilt easily, I would have hated to be stuck in America with Obama or his successor and something bad to happen to Israel, either by a nuclear attack or serious attacks thru Iran’s proxies.”
I shudder at the thought. Chas veshalom
“Here I’m with my people and I’ll suffer their fate without regret, you in the US will just have to suffer guilt if something happens and you did not try, even, to prevent it.”
I dod what I can. The agrement might prevent it. If IRna keeps their word then they wont have a bomb. If they dont keep their word the agreement is null.
” I’m not trying to make you feel guilt, it’s just my reaction and may be yours as well, if, G-d forbid, something happens.”
I would feel terrible, not guilty at all. Except in the communal aveira sense.
“One thing you can do, which I’m sure you will do, is pray intensely for the safety of Israel and the destruction of our enemies.”
3 times daily! (sometimes extra here and there)
“It is the Nine Days and we should not be arguing among ourselves but concentrating on getting all of Am Yisrael to unite and beseech H’, there are so many crises that need His intervention.”
Amen
“A Gutten Vok, Shavua Tov “
You too
ubiquitinParticipantCA
Not quite What I meant was this discussion is regarding the plan TODAY on July 17 2015 (ok few days ago when signed)
The gist of my argument is what alternative is there?
Arguing that years ago Obama could have supported the revolution isnt an alternative to the current agrement.
Sorry if I wasnt clear.
That said regarding Romney you are sort of right Since obviously I can be hundred percent sure. But I am certain he wouldnt attack Iran.
(for argument’s sake are you Will Trump deport all illegal imigrants? Would Anybody drop a nucleur weapon on IRan? I think we can be certain that neither will happen. I am equally certain that Romney wouldnt have attacked IRan)
Ben
“As for all Mideast countries supporting it.
They all did not just Saudi Arabia or are you completely unaware of Mideast politics?”
I am very well versed in mideast politics, Though Iam not sure what you mean.
ubiquitinParticipantJospeh
I agree it doesnt imply, it is expressly stating. He said and I quote “…some I assume are good people” this means most are not.
you can quible that this isnt expressly stated but is merely implying that most are not. Fine I can accept that.
You cannot claim that “…some I assume are good people” does not mean that most are not, but rather are the things he had just said.
ubiquitinParticipantsushi
I dont know what he meant. I know what he said.
He has since had repeated oppurtunities to clarify what he said. He has yet to dod so, and repeatedly said he stands by what he said.
He didnt imply he outright said that most were “”They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.”
This isnt an implication.
by concluding ” And some, I assume, are good people!” He implied that this is his assumption and it is possible that in fact all are bringing drugs. . bringing crime. … rapists.” but this is just an implication.
ubiquitinParticipantSushi
It isnt a benefit, are you saying all fleishig restaraunts should close? Instead of taking advantage of a pareve menu?
I’m not sure I understand you, what is being advertised?
If the stores advertised “Come celebrate the churban by enjoying cheese blintzes ” R’L I would agree. But simply adveretising that they are open and have menus available is certianly within theri right.
How have values been compromised?
And I’m not sure how not eating meat is being “turned into a benefit” I for one am miserable already (which is the idea, as to why im miserable, its becasue where I work they have prepackeged lunches turkey sandwhiches, grilled chicken egg salad etc, the pareve ones are terrible, so I’m hungry today)
“Not respecting the consumers values can actually harm brand image” If that were the case they wouldnt do it every year
ubiquitinParticipantBen
“Actually I for one think that Romney would have attacked Iran.
In fact I think that the circumstances in the Mideast would have been completely different Republicans won.”
Doubtful, though theres no way to know either way
“Whether you agree with them or not Republicans generally hold the military in higher esteem then the Democrats and tend to listen better.”
Depends what you mean by higher esteem. If you mean prevent their access to care and sending them into harms way under faulty pretenses I agree, but that is a funny defnition of “higher esteem”
“I fully believe that the would have been a Status of Forces agreement in place had a Republican been President ( the general consensus is that Obama blew it because of a general lack of interest) as such there would have been a larger US presence in Iraq as there should have been.
Couple that with the fact that there would have been a more robust deployment of troops in line with he general’s requests.
There would never have been a timeline given for the US withdrawal.”
The timeline was Bush’s
“The above facts on the ground would not have allowed the rise of ISIS to begin.”
Probably correct, but it was Bush’s timline
Also keep in mind Leaving Saddam wouldve prevented both ISIS and Iran devolping nucleur weapons (Cheney actually said this in the early 90’s)
“In addition during the “green revolution” American support for the opposition would have been clearer and possibly include covert arms from the nearby forces which possibly would have brought down the Iranian government as it brought down others.
A lot of “possbilys” and Arming IRan is probably illegal
” I think there is a strong room to believe Romney would have bombed Iran”
There is no room to believe that.
” or at worst supported an Israeli attempt.”
Bush had the oppurtunity to do that. Why wouldRomney have been different. And why does ISrael need the US’s permission? They are big boys if it is so critical for their survival,why dont they just do it?
” The reason is simple
All of the Mideast countries would have supported it (unlike the embassy move) and any one with a half a brain understands what is already being said.”
Not all, Saudi arabia MIGHT but never openly.
“This agreement sets off an arms race in region already teeming with millions of armed individuals calling for the destruction of the US led by a country that Obama’s admits remains committed to the same goal.”
The agreement prevents IRan pursiuing weapons! Now my concern is that Iran wont keep their end, but built into it is going back to sanctions.
“Even without Israelis interest’s it is an epically bad decision to basically allow you enemy to become you equal.”
Do you mean that? You beleive the agreement allows IRan to be the US’s equal?
ubiquitinParticipantJospeh that is off topic and debatable.
Certainly those displaced from Gush KAtif would disagree.
I remeber his critiscm after Jenin, I was protesting his push to divide Yerushalyim at Annapolis. (why doesnt any body else remebr that, google it it wasnt that long ago)
Oh and remeber when he alloweed Israel to us US held airspace to attack IRan?
Me neither!
If by “best” you mean that he wasnt Obama you are right. If you are using any fact based measurment it is very hard to make that case
ubiquitinParticipantUm no sushi
he said most, here is the quote verbatim
“They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people!”
Ie “some” are good people most are not.(he assumes,he isnt sure in other words it is possible that not even “some” are good people)
He then stood by these words
ubiquitinParticipantcrazybrit
If it there is bein Ie residue on bbq then Shouldnt eat during 9 days. IF the bbq is clean then the sausages can be eaten and dont make you fleishigs (though they cant be eaten w/ milk (unless bbq hasnt been used for meat in 24 hours in which case if cooked already (i.e. bidieved) can be eaten with milchigs, though according to most cant cook on bbq lechatchila planning to eat with milchigs)
sushibagel
“Doesn’t that defeat the purpose?”
Depends what you mean by “purpose” The purpose of the stores/restaraunts is to make money in which case advertising does the exact opposite of defeating the purpose! As for the consumer’s purpose once following his/her halacha/minhag and avoiding meat during the prescribed time. Any other purpose is between him and his rabbinical advisor
ubiquitinParticipantCA
I’m sorry I dont follow
Charlie
“Ronald Reagan is the President to gave armaments to Iran.”
True and lets not forget the F15’s and Awocs to Saudis.
And remember how he supported Israel’s attack on Osirak. Oh wait…
ubiquitinParticipantMirzee
Those are VERY isolated cases.
Please note you (and poster and joseph) have STILL not aswered, do you believe most illegal imigrants are rapists?
ubiquitinParticipantBen Levi
“He made it clear, over and over and over again that if Iran refused to get rid of their Nuclear Program he would take it out militarily.”
He was lying. politicians do it all the time.
Those following politics know it is a lie as it is said. For example, ANYBODY who says they plan on moving the embassy to Yerushalyim. (Like George W Bush promised in the past and Jeb Bush did recently) is lying, As he said the words most know it is an empty campaign promise. Ditto for attacking Iran.
(The only thing I wonder is how much of a lie it is when people know it is an empty promise, and how many people have to know. For example Mcain promised to move the embassy to Jerusalem, Obama never did. A friend of mine criticized Obama for not making the same promise though he admited it would be an empty promise, he felt that Obama not making the empty promise was a red flag. I was happy that for once a politican wasnt pandering what was obvious nonsense)
Hope that clears it up. Obama, like all politicians is a liar.
Though this aprt was true ” Romney Obama claimed there was no difference between the two in regard to Iran.” Romney wouldnt attack Iran either.
ubiquitinParticipantJoseph
Not sure if that was directed to me, but that isnt what trump said and it wasnt my question.
Here it is again:
Trump said that most Illegal immigrants are briniging drugs and are rapists.
Do you beleive that is true
ubiquitinParticipantTirtza
you have it backwards “well I guess then, if this “fever” has infected even the likes of these, then there really is no hope in man and only H’ can solely save us.”
That is first of all. That isnt the “well I guess then…”
There is no hope in man period. Only Hashem can solely save us period.
Now on to practical Hishtadlus
“Like “forget” to pay the debt.”
“Stir up Eastern Europe against Russia”
Russia is the strongest power in Eastern Europe
Nobody is paying any debt.
“Besides , there is plenty of evidence that Iran, even with China, and to a lesser extent Russia, violating the sanctions, was suffering,”
The object wasnt to get them to suffer, it was to prevent them pursuing a nuclear weapon.
” “allies”back and start negotiations, aimed at legalizing the Iranian path to the bomb”
america biggest allies were involved in the negotiations. The plan as it stands PREVENTS IRan from getting a bomb. Now you can argue that it wont actually due that. But claiming it is “AIMED at legalizing the IRanian path to the bomb” is simply misrepresenting the facts.
“You make no mention of the most secret Installations or intercontinental ballistic missile systems.”
Because they are secret
“You make agreements to help them protect against any sabotage of their work and research, thereby thwarting a reasonable method Israel has to slow down or thwart their path.”
that is Arutz sheva fear mongering
” Perhaps when you think in personal terms, it will move you.”
I take extreme offence at that! I too have family in Israel and your children are my family too, may Hashem protect them.
Shame on you for resorting to misplaced ad hominem attacks.
A Gut shabbos to you as well
July 17, 2015 11:48 am at 11:48 am in reply to: Is Trump all he's trumped himself up to be? #1093174ubiquitinParticipantRedleg
America did abandon Israel in 56′ The fact that it was during the Cold War makes it worse not better, they took the side of their rivals The USSR against allies Britain and France in opposing Israel. You can say it was good foreign policy (It wasnt as it increased the Soviets presence in the mid east by getting Nasser to take the USSR side and support and he let the Soviets move in to Hungary at the same time, but that is way off topic) but it wasnt “never abandon[ing] Israel”
Mimzee
“unless you think his tough persona is an act & he’s really a wimp”
He is a nothing. He is a publicity hound who loves having his name in the limelight. He says what he must know is stupid but says it in a bullyish tough guy manner. Someone who says his big secret plan to defeat Isis is to “bomb them and take their oil” isnt a might sound tough but most of the populace recognizes that as just that: sounding tough, thats all it is a tough guy act.
Though you havent answered my question earlier you said he “speaks the truth” He said regardign illegal immigrants they ” have lots of problems and they’re bringing those problems. They’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime…”
Note not some. Most
Do you believe that is true?
ubiquitinParticipantLol Joseph
And your version of “advanced English” includes Bush Obama and Clinton too? what about the other 40 presidents are there names alos descriptors?
And why havent these descriptors been included in “advanced English” dictionaries?
ps dont worry I knew what you meant. And explained why attacking Iran is not a politcally viable option regardless of who (or what caliber person) is in the whitehouse.
ubiquitinParticipantCA
Are you serious? Of course I googled!
did you
” we must also bear witness to the courage and the dignity of the Iranian people, and to a remarkable opening within Iranian society. And we deplore the violence against innocent civilians anywhere that it takes place.”
June 23 2009
At any rate for arguments sake say he shouldev been more supportive. Fine
It is now 2015. Six years later what is done done. Are you saying A better plan than the current one is to keep all of Irans enrichment programs running and wait for the people to rebel?
ubiquitinParticipantMimzee and Poster
Both of you claim everything Trump says is truth. his immigration comments were earlier mentioned so you mutve heard them
He said that most illegal immigrants ” have lots of problems and they’re bringing those problems. They’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime. They’re r…ists”
Note not some. Most
Do either of you believe thats true?
Furthermore Listen to him in action. Truth or not he is mentally unstable, most people can see through his “truth”
That said I am so excited for the debtates! Its going to be hilarious!
(anybody else suspicious thta Trump is a secret Democrat trying to destroy the GOP?)
ubiquitinParticipantJoseph?
Bush? You are dreaming he tricked us into a war which got us in this mess in the firstplace. America is sick of war. There is less of a chance of attacking Iran with Bush (any Bush) than anybody else.
Reagen is dead sadly. I’m so sorry to have to tell you. (Unless you meant Ron Reagen? but he is a big liberal so he wont be attacking anyone anytime soon. Michael Reagen prob would attack but he isn’t running).
bottom line is it isnt politcally viable with anyone. Unless Iran attacks first (which is doubtful) the US isnt going to be starting a third war in under 15 years. Especialy when the very reason to go for war was already falsy used. (I know you probably think it wasnt falsely used, but most Americans do so even if you personally would support a third war, there is no question the vast majority of the US would not)
The US knows this Israel knows this and IRan knows this. I dont claim to have any chidushim.
CA
“and it couldve happened during the arab spring but Obama didn’t back them”
He did. Unless you mean militarily? and at any rate. It couldve but didnt so here we are today
ubiquitinParticipantJoseph
It probably is militarily viable, but it is not politically viable. (Regardless of who is in the white house)
ubiquitinParticipantmimzee
Trump has equal chance at being president as you do.
It is unlikely that he will even be the republican nominee, though he has a slight chance at that.
“who does the world think is better? clinton?!!!”
Without question
ubiquitinParticipanttirtza
“Actually the sanctions are what brought Iran to the bargaining table.”
OK so they are at the bargaining table. Now what a plan was formulated (I think a good one – if the Iranians keep their word which I doubt they will). The question is what is the alternative?
“More sanctions can make the Iranian economy even more insecure”
Doubtful, especially if Russia and China dont go along.
“and stimulate people to rebel against their tyrannical leadership.”
That argument has been floated for over 20 years now? When is thi rebellion going to take place? Their was more hope after the “arab spring” It has been 5 years now
Actually, Daniel Pipes was addressing options (they were for Israel but could apply to international efforts, as well) and his second option was for sabotage against the program, both viruses like Stuxnet and other physical acts of sabotage.
– also been tried and havent worked significantly.
“If they wanted to thwart the bomb, they could, unfortunately their greed for trade with iran blinds them, and well Obama, what his plan?”
The plan is readily available online. ID be happy to copy and paste if you cant find it.
“It’s good to have the threat of military attack on the table but to keep them guessing.”
Nobody is guessing All parties know it is a bluff
ubiquitinParticipantCA
“why do you (in plural) say the alternative is attacking iran?”
I dont! I said attacking is not an alternative. Most of the people I talk to think it is.
As for your options 1&3 are the same. It has been tried as hasnt worked.
#2 is more of the same, there is little reason to think it might be different.
ubiquitinParticipantCA
It depends what the alternative is. Attacking IRan isnt a real option, it is a charade. Obama knows it Netanyahu knows it and Rouhani knows it. Allthe talk from all parties regarding “redlines” “all options are on the table” is all a charade that all parties knows is one.
So given that attacking Iran isnt an option.
What alternative plan is there? A plan can only be judged when weighed against alternatives.
ubiquitinParticipantOOmis
1) The gemara says we are not experts on the exact letters in the Torah (nothing that affects meaning, just “chaseiros veyeseiros” )
2) To that end, the Gemara in several places makes derashas based on “extra” or “missing” vavs that we dont have
3) There are several differences between our sifrei Torah and Yemenite. most famously whether “dakah” has a heh or aleph
4) Dont let it shake your belief none of this has significant effect on any of the Torahs’ meaning so shouldnt affect your day to day living
ubiquitinParticipantCA
I’ll bite, defend what exactly?
ubiquitinParticipantDY
I dont think Ive created any straw men, and i never twisted your words or position
you did not answer this
“So again to be clear: If I stick in vavs all over the place, If I understand you correctly you believe we will still find codes since that was caused by hashgacha, even if I do it to corrupt the text?
and you dont think this undermines the whole notion of the codes?”
I’ll show you were you were dishonest
DY Q : “”If the codes which Rips and the other people used are mathematically impossible, you’re going to say that’s meaningless? “”
Ubiq A: “It is not impossible. It is a certainty….”
DY “… I don’t have an opinion on the actual math.”
THis seems dishonest. I get that you claim not to have an opinion on the math, but I replied to a direct question that YOU asked based on the assumption that the math was right. Well as I pointed out it isint, so I’m not sure how you expect me to respond I’m sorry if I misunderstood but that seems pretty dishonest to me.
Bye
ubiquitinParticipantJospeh
by not answering questions?
If you say so
Plus the point that DY hasnt satisfactorily addressed is that when dealing with skipping letters there is no “The Torah” since there are variations, even one letter could throw off the whole ELS therby negating the entire code. So which Torah “knew minute details of world history, to our very age” Ours? the yemenite? chazals? He is left with two posibilites either all of them, and is forced to say that Hashem guided all these mistakes to still contain codes (and any upcoming mistakes will contain codes as well) OR only our torah contains codes but not the original Torah given at Sinai.
When you say he preveailed, which of these positions do you accept?
Rebyidd
Not sure what you mean by “real” The codes are there. The question is do they have signficance.
On the Asih website they describe the significance as “But what they do tell us is that the author of the Torah knew minute details of world history, to our very age.”
Which would mean that Tolstoy and Mellvile also “knew minute details of world history, to our very age”
ubiquitinParticipantDY
That is a lot of conjecture
As Sam once said torah code believers arent interested in truth. At least you can admit that in order to answer my “major question” you have to rely on conjecture on top of conjecture kudos to you. Maybe Hashem did orchestrate it that way, or maybe lehavdil elef alfei havdalos space aliens did After all any conjecture is reasonable do defend codes.
So again to be clear: If I stick in vavs all over the place, If I understand you correctly you believe we will still find codes since that was caused by hashgacha, even if I do it to corrupt the text?
and you dont think this undermines the whole notion of the codes?
As for your last point
You arent being honest you asked a question “”If the codes which Rips and the other people used are mathematically impossible, you’re going to say that’s meaningless? “”
I replied that it is not mathematically impossible
You then said you “dont have an opinion”
so you are asking questions based on something you have no opinion and when I address your direct question you ask why am I adressing that point since you dont have an opinion?
ubiquitinParticipant“True, but we are not given many variations, just the one we have. So your point is wrong.”
No there are many variations (as outlined before) plus the potential for more if more chaseiros/yeseiros are introduced. Either they all have codes (which would lessen the uniqueness of the codes) Or only ours, in which case why are we the lucky ones. Mah nafshach the premise is flawed!
Simple question: Say I stick in Some vavs here and there r”l would the new product contain codes? Keep in mind this is no longer min hashamayim this is me making trouble.
Now what if those same vavs were introduced by accident (as has happned) would THIS contain codes?
“If you find that strange (I don’t have an opinion) so posit that it’s there as well. Mah nafshach.”
I find it very hard to believe that you dont have an opinion, you have an opinion are virtually everything. Even if you dont, formulate one. As mentioned previously you have the mah nafshach backwards. Wether all versions of the Torah have codes or only one. The premise falls apart.
(What would carry weight, is if the exact version handed down at Sinai contains these codes. THAT would be interesting, but sadly lkula alma we do not have the exact version from Sinai)
“Whose codes, whose methodology, which proponents? I’m maskim that Drosnin is a quack.”
I’ll bet the Christian coders are quacks too. Only codes that relate to yahadus are from non-quacks.
“For the third (fourth? fifth?) time, I don’t have an opinion on the actual math. There are apparently experts on either side. “
Not quite, in your last post you said the codes were “mathematicaly impossible” see here: “If the codes which Rips and the other people used are mathematically impossible,” I was respnding to this point.
ubiquitinParticipantDy
I knew you were missing something, here it is:
“If you think (for who knows what reason) that codes appearing in all variations of chaseros and yeseiros in a way which is a mathematical impossibility”
This is wrong. Given enough variations of chaseiros and yeseiros, that “codes” will be found in some of them is a mathematical certainty. Certainly not a “impossibility”.
“you can still posit that it’s only in this one, which is the one Hashem knew would be here in the computer age.”
You really dont find that strange at all? That chazal’s Torah didnt have codes but only ours does?
“And again, the proponents I’m referring to deny that the codes work elsewhere”
I am looking at codes in moby dick as we speak. That the proponets deny what I see with my eyes right now, says a lot about this quackery
“If the codes which Rips and the other people used are mathematically impossible, you’re going to say that’s meaningless? “
It is not impossible. It is a certainty. It is one thing if we decide beforehand what we are looking for say “Barack Obama” but to go on a fishing hunt through 304,805 letters in the Torah after weve decided what we are looking for. B Obama, Barack Obama, B H Obama, Barack hussein Obama, President Obama, President B obama, (dont forget we dont need vowels in hebrew). The probablity of finding something that we can attach meaning to aproaches 1! a certainty!
(Note: this is a second problem with the codes, not related to the “major problem” identified earlier)
ubiquitinParticipantDY
Regardless of which came first the bottom line is the same “codes” found in the Torah by Droznin or anybody else are also found in those works lehavdil.
The codes are readily avilable online. “contesting” them doesnt make them go away.
” either ours is “correct””
So you are willing to posit that our Sefer Torah is more similar to the version handed down at Har Sinai than that of Chazal?
I suppose you can say that (It makes me very uncomfortable). But certainly you can agree this is a “major question” or at the very least a “problem”
“Whether He put it into any others is immaterial.”
Hardly! that undermines the very nature of the codes. If they exist in all variations of the Torah that ever existed and that might oneday exist, then what makes them special.
If chas veshalom I write a sefer torah missing a few vavs here and there and add a few others, and in generations it somehow becomes the most prevelant one (granted very unlikely, but whose to predict how the galus will play out (aside from the codes of course :-)) would it contain codes?
If yes: Then the codes are meaningless if any text similar to the Torah contains them!
If no: What is so special about the version we have that only it contains codes?
ubiquitinParticipantubiquitinParticipantDY
The math works in moby Dick, the “new testament” war and peace and Drozin’s own book.
So let me see if I understand you correctly. The text of our Torah is slightly different than Chazal’s. Did their Torah contain codes or only ours? If both what about Rashis? what about the Leningrad codex?
Assuming all contain codes at The ribono shel olam planted codes in all variants of text over our galus. This is certainly possible but it certainly undermines the excitment of the codes when every version contains them. Dont you agree?
And if only our version contains them, does that mean we have a more authoritative version than chazal?
ubiquitinParticipant“If you believe the Torah is from Hashem, then the whole issue is very plausible. We learn that everything is contained in the Torah, this is just one of the methods of deciphering it. “
Granted, except for a major problem: As the Gemara says We arent bekium in chaserus veyeseiros. In other words the exact number of letters in the Torah recieved at Sinai is unknown. This doesnt make much practical difference to our day to day lives. But the premise of the Torah codes invloves exact knowledge of letters and equal spaces between them. What Torah do you use? Ashkenazi? Yemenite? The Gemara’s which has some maleh casers we dont? Rashi’s “Ves kol ahser etzavicha”?
ubiquitinParticipantBary
I read everything I can find on the subject.
I have two questions:
You said earlier that the fellow predicted “he [Obama] will be so bad for us, that it will lead to Moshiach.”
did it say how long after?
Also can you please rellay a message to this fellow
Could you please ask him to predict who will win the next US election. It can be narrowed down to say 20 names or so, Should take a matter of minutes to run. And if my understanding of the idea behjind the Torah Codes is correct. One and only one name should pop up? Sowho is it gonna be?
Thank you
ubiquitinParticipantBary
I have spent time looking over the literature on “torah codes” and it is utter hogwash
“torah codes” have been found in moby dick and war and peace. My favorite is “codes” that have been found in Drosnin’s book identifying him has the real unabomber. “codes” have been found in the Christian bible as well and some of the “codes” found in the Torah attest to the divinity of osa haish r”l.
Keep in mind the odds of finding an allusion to an event after it occurs is 100%. And the predictions they have made beforehand dont come true. (See examples cited above)
They have been refuted by many mathemetcians
-
AuthorPosts