Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@simcha
Your approach is dangerous.
You advocate for pure , temimi and young yeshiva boys to be taken out of tevat noach in to the waters of the raging mabul.
I do not know your credentials. But I am guessing you are not an exceptional talmid haham. Nor an exceptional yarei shamayim. Nor an exceptional pikeach. [not that sure about this last one]
All three of which are needed to navigate and decide this complex question.
So – my humble suggestion is to let the people who do possess the above 3 qualities in abundance , to decide.Re ‘sharing the burden’ , please refer to Sh’A YD hilhot ta’t where they exempt talmidei hahamim from contributing funds to the defense of the city they inhabit .
Based on a gemara in Bava Batra. And without any holek.
.@avirah
Not the gerrer rebbe allowed . The Moetset allowed it.
Without any extenuating circumstances.
No one made a fuss at the time about government participation. Besides those who were against behiroth, they made a fuss about the behiroth.
When giyus banot came up , aguda resigned from the gov in protest.By the way, Rav Shach claims that when he spent a lot of time with the Brisker Rav during his final illness , the Rav agreed to his approach of being mishtatef in the governing of the medina.
So much for the protests from the brisk side.
.If they are only ‘praying’
How does Sen Shumer know about satmar shita ???Why is Sen Shumer quoting Satmar when he tries to explain away his negative stance re the medina [and memeila its citizens ???]
.@sechel
is that the only line of tnaya you know? see gemarah and rambam what is a min and an apikores. not keeping tznius dosent make someone an apikores, nor does saying the rebbe is moshiach, making fun of a talmid chachum makes someone an apikores.
and the rambam clearly says that people who were raised a certain way these halachos dont apply too, and the chofetz chaim also speaks about this that because of this these halachos dont apply
simply the tanya is coming to explain dovid hamelech, not tell you how to act today, (thats why its in brackets) vda”l
—-
Appreciate your typical habad answer.
They all seem follow the same script.Attack the questioner. [ is that the only line of tnaya you know?]
Change the subject. [see gemarah and rambam what is a min and an apikores. not keeping tznius dosent make someone an apikores, nor does saying the rebbe is moshiach, making fun of a talmid chachum makes someone an apikores.
and the rambam clearly says that people who were raised a certain way these halachos dont apply too, and the chofetz chaim also speaks about this that because of this these halachos dont apply]Give a non answer. [simply the tanya is coming to explain dovid hamelech, not tell you how to act today, (thats why its in brackets]
———————-Lets ignore the first two points and concentrate on the [non]answer.
Tanya asks on his previous principle where he states a Jew [i.e. US] is meant to have also love and also hate towards a sinner. How does that fit with the pasuk of tahlit sin’a , where David hamelech is SHOWING US that the proper approach is hate only , without love.
To summarize , we have conflicting directives for US , is it love plus hate, or is it hate only ?
Answer of the Tanya is that it depends which type of sinner is it , the apikores type of sinner or the ma’amin type of sinner.
The apikores type the ‘only hate’ approach applies FOR US.
The ma’amin type of sinner ‘the ‘love-hate’ type approach applies FOR US.That is the pshat for any unbiased learner of Tanya . This is plain obvious.
If pshat would be like sechel and all other habad apologists who are biased against the pashute pshat, why doesn’t tanya answer the question by saying the pasuk is talking about david hamelech and not for us ??
Al korchach that both his previous principle AND this pasuk are meant to be taken as directives FOR US.
.@avirah
Sorry , but you are factually wrong. r YM Levin was a full Minister in the First Government of Israel.
@hakatan
Regarding the Chareidim in the Zionist parliament, that is halachically almost-impossible (read Rav Reuven Grozovsky’s biayos haZman). And according to the Satmar Rav and others, it’s severely prohibited.
====It is more than ‘possible’…..
Haredim in Israeli Parliament is not only possible , but accepted halachic practice dating back to the very first Parliament in 1949.
This is supported by the overwhelming majority of Poskim ,Rabanim and Rashei Yeshivot in EY and in in Huts La’arets, not only as ‘permitted’, but as a Chov Gamur and as a Mitsva.Some Kana’im do not participate , but this has no bearing on accepted halachic practice , as mentioned.
@aaq
I can’t see any inference from said Rambam to the question of joining the army . He is simply talking about a totally different scenario.@avirah
That’s not only satmar. The rabbonim who backed away from the major israel rally a few months ago also said that demanding things from America is not the way we behave in galus.
[avirah]
——————-
Reminder- Discussion here was ,whether satmar shitah is being used for withholding arms , or not .
Whether satmar could ‘ve publicly rejected usage of their shita for blocking arms shipments.
And whether withholding arms is an issue of pikuach nefesh.
Resulting in satmar carrying responsibility for p/n.That was the discussion.
There was no discussion about joining demo’s , nor about ‘demanding’ anything.
Now to your new point. Which rabbanim said exactly what, please ?
.@avirah
while they don’t agree with nadler and his people, they also don’t think it’s pikuach nefesh for the US to send arms to Israel. You decided that.
[avirah]
======Its not p/n for the US to send arms. According to avirah, at least.
Question for Avirah [and all other satmar apologists] al pi derech hateva :
Will the same number of yehudim in EY chvsh die, irrespective of weapons shipments ?
Or will more yehudim chvsh die in EY if shipments are stopped or delayed ?What are the objective facts ?
.@avirah
Agudah doesn’t speak out when it’s cast wrongfully in the media either, and neither does mizrachi or zionist organizations. Your request of them is petty.
[avirah]
===this was not ‘the media’.
This was the SENATE MAJORITY LEADER.
.
You can rest assured that any of the mentioned organizations would speak up if they were misrepresented by one of the foremost officials in the country . bifrat if it would be nogea to p/n.Your defense of them is laughable.
@avirah
Satmar isn’t responsible for every idiot who quotes them wrongfully
===
Come on . A Senate Majority Leader should not mistaken for “every idiot”.
This is one of the most senior posts in the country.It seems that he did NOT quote them wrongfully.
He is not an ‘idiot’ .
He is an intelligent and a responsible [to his own worldview] person. Otherwise he would not get where he got.Biggest proof that he quoted them properly , is the fact that Satmar keeps quiet and does not correct the record.
.@hakatan
Non frum zionists could turn their state and its army into an idol. But frum Jews who serve in the Army can do so without turning the State nor the Army into an idol.It is true that with young and impressionable recruits it is easier to shove it down their throats .
But this is not universal. Not at all.
There are plenty of haredim who went thru the Army and emerged with their emuna intact.
.@avirah
So satmar has to come out against Shumer and correct him .
As long as that does not happen , we [and the whole world – most importantly including the decision makers about arms exports] will apply the klal of shtika ke’hoda’a .
Shma mina de niha lehu.Are they guilty of lo ta’amod al dam rei’acha ?
If people die as a result of non deliverance , or slow deliverance of certain weapons ?
A she’ala of dinei nefashot ?
.@AAQ
Not sure how contemporary science figures in this discussion.
.@AAQ
“Yeshiva as a Maimonidean desert” that Chazon Ish created is not a correct analogy. Living in a desert presumes you take care of yourself, not erquesting others to send an army to protect your oasis.
====
Incorrect. Or better said – correct.
Correct – when talking about the analogy.Satmar Rave asked Chazon Ish how come you do not run away to the caves, as mandated by Rambam , when surrounded by resha’im. Whereas Ch’I answered that Yeshivot are the caves of the Rambam . End of quote.
Said discussion Was not pertaining to IDF service at all.
IDF service – for haredim and for yeshiva boys are 2 totally different complex issues to be analyzed separately.
.@avirah
Yankel, the “who started it” is just as childish as when kids get into a fight. Both sides can point to an earlier point where there were attacks or aggression; it’s not clear at all who started it,
[avirah]
==============
This is not a playground squabble. This was a discussion about contravening 3 Shevuot , al hatsad that they apply lema’ase.You stated that 300 villages in the hands of the Israelis contravenes the Shevuot. Whereas the fact that they are in Israeli hands is a direct outcome of real Arab attacks and threats to repeat the Mongol Massacres chvsh.
The Israeli’s proclaimed their medina when the Mandate expired. If the Arabs would have kept within their allotment under the UN Partition Plan of 1947 , the Israeli’s would too.Remember , the Israeli’s accepted Partition. The Arabs did not, they aimed to drive the Jews into the sea.
Pikuach nefesh is docheh the shevuot. That was the point.
re tanya 32 where he clearly [in the brackets] qualifies the hiyuv of ahavat yisrael for resha’im to non apikorsim . For apikorsim he says – tahlit sin’a sene’tim. Sin’ah without qualification.
How that fits with contemporary habad theology and habad practise is a mystery.
.Fact is that satmar preaching for dismantlement of Medina has been used by Senate Majority Leader as rationale [or excuse] for withholding arms in certain circumstances.
Withholding arms from israel is pikuach nefesh.
Pikuach nefesh on Satmars account.
.Zionists: Give it up. Give up this idea that the Jews are there to serve the State. Then it will become an idol.
But – Zionists :DO NOT GIVE IT UP .
Do not give up on the idea that the State is there to serve the Jews. Then it will not be an idol , rather be a kli for a mitsva.
Do not give up defending the State .
Do not give up defending innocent Jewish blood.
Do not give up defending Jewish property.You will get olam haba for defending the innocent and defenseless Jews. [this last line is from HRav HGoan R Chaim Shmulevits z’l – in his sihot in wartime]
@katan
…. the Zionists started the war against the Arabs (and British) long before 1947. The “Partition Plan” came much later after the Zionists invaded against the wishes of the Jews and also lihavdil the British and Arabs ….
[katan]
====
You seem to forget that one cannot misrepresent facts [it is a three letter word in English starting with an L] even letsoreh kana’ut .‘The zionists’ encompass many groups . Some fought the British, some did not.
The hagana , the labor zionists , between 1917 and 1948 [the years of British rule] ,did not, except for a short period between October 1945 and August 1946.
The etsel and the lehi , the revisionists did.
So much for the facts.
.
The zionists did not ‘invade’. They did not conquer EY.
They came to live and work there.
Some came legally, with British permission, some came illegally, without British permission [like Rav Wosner z’l].
So much for the facts.
.
They did not come against the wishes of the Jews.
The overwhelming majority of the Jews wanted and explicitly petitioned the British for unfettered Jewish immigration to EY.
So much for the facts.
.
All those facts are easily verifiable , as verifiable as a simple letter in karyane de’igreta …..
.@haleivi
preaching towards that goal is equal to dismantling ‘by hand’ .
And if this will be marbeh shfihut damim then it will be on their head.@avira
They also took over 300 arab villages. Some by force, like deir yassin (whether or not this was a military campaign or an intentional slaughter is anyone’s guess at this point) and others were because the Arabs fled the armies.
[avira]
—
1] That was after the arabs started a war against the yidden.
Had the arabs accepted the 47 partition plan like the yidden did , then they would have still been there.2] Don’t forget the yiddens villages in gushe etsyon , the old city in j-m , in hevron, etc taken by the arabs ?
3] What with all the yidden in arab lands, their houses and their property , forcibly confiscated by arabs ?
Could that be considered ‘payment’ for lost property in ey ?
.@sechel
All those marei mekomot which sechel is bringing us are TOTALLY IRRELEVANT here.Should we not investigate the merits and faults of zionism for example because of the hiyuv of ahavat yisrael ?
Or of conservative judaism ?
Or of any new movement which claims subservience to its new ideals ?
Are we meant to be transformed into happy go lucky simpletons who accept everything and anything with a joke and a glass of mashke ?This is a common mistake of habad apologists. They [intentionally?] confuse the erech of ahavat yisrael with discussion of habad ideologies’ merits and faults.
One can be anti habad ideology and love the individuals who happen to be its adherents., and conversely support habad ideology and hate individual habad people.
No one is ‘judging’ the ultimate worth in shamayim of the adherents of habad.
What we are attempting to establish , is the veracity of various habad claims . That is a TOTALLY SEPARATE MATTER.
So – again – a critic of habad – is not a “hater”.
.@avirah
chairs and mehitsah were not allowed at the kosel.There is a printed answer of R A Miller saying NOT to return any territories conquered in 1967, because of hashash pikuach nefesh.
So – being anti zioni does not necessarily translate in to the dangerous dismantling of the medina.An internal meeting of dati leumi educators has determined that around 30 % of their youth go OTD because of IDF enlistment , and they resolved that price is a worthwhile one , since it is being paid for the defense of the State.
It is clear that service of yeshiva boys in the IDF has a dramatic effect on their yiddishkeit. To argue otherwise is simply unrealistic.
There are many elements within the government and the IDF who would love to ‘reform’ and ‘reeducate’ the haredim.
Forced Service for haredi youth in the IDF is an ideal tool for them.This might be a case of metu echav machmat milah where one is exempt from a mitsvah because of tragic precedents.
This is not a blanket exemption, however.
There are cases where this heter would not apply .How to manage such a delicate situation while we are in galut between our misguided and sometimes hatefilled brothers , is a an unenviable task better left to ziknei gdolei torah veyirah.
.@sechel
There was no mesorah to keep yidden away from haskala – before haskala appeared .
Simply because it did not exist.
Same with any other new non torah approach / movement.@ujm
You conveniently forget the stated aim of the Arabs in 67 ‘to drive all the Jews into the sea’.’
Or the promise of the Secretary of the Arab League that the “Mongol Massacres will pale in comparison” to what will happen chvsh after the Arab victory.
The 67 War was an existential one .
The conquest of the Shtahim are also existential.
So is the retreat from those Shtahim an existential question.
Where considerations of pikuach nefesh are paramount.
Before any question of [possibly binding] considerations of 3 shevuot.@hakatan
The Zionists chose to invade the area a century ago – against the wishes of the Jews there – and the Zionists proceeded to light the area (and world) on fire; it’s not anyone else’s responsibility to put out the Zionist fire.
[katan]
—–
Irresponsible. Totally Irresponsible.
Terrible and krum.
Since when does the Torah exempt from the hiyuv of saving a yid from a fire just because a tsiyoni started it ???
Let the yid burn because a tsiyoni started it ?
Does hatsole anywhere, operate on the basis of such principles ?
Shomu Shamayim …..@ujm [and all other satmar apologists out there].
Lema’aseh satmar makes believe that the shevuot are binding on everyone.Avne nezer clearly disagrees and thus explains their hashmata from yad and mehaber.
I have not heard anyone from satmar address this avne nezer and how klal yisrael could be blamed for following one of its most respected poskim ?What is impossible to understand about the satmar Shitta is the following –
Any open eyed facts based assessment of the situation in EY will arrive at the same conclusion.
1] The yehudim in EY are surrounded by bloodthirsty savages who would commit the worst atrocities if not stopped by force.
2] The only practical and effective force available is the IDF.
3] The only way of enabling the existence of the IDF , is the existence of the Medina.
Doesn’t it follow then , that the existence of the medina is the only barrier in front of a millions times of pikuach nefesh ?
Why should I care [in the context of p/n] who, or in what way established the medina , or who governs the medina or how the medina is being governed ?
Pikuach nefesh is Pikuach nefesh. Full Stop.Let’s say it was the tsionims fault. Let’s say. Therefore, are we not obligated to act in the face of mass p/n ?
Does Hatole anywhere in the world , not do anything possible to save any yid ?
EVEN IF IT MIGHT BE THE CHOLE’S OWN FAULT ?
If hatsole is obligated to act in the defense against P/N , without inquiring whether it is the victims own fault , why would any yid not be obligated in the same ?
So why is the existence of the medina [in our constellation] not absolutely MANDATED by the torah ?
The only possible idea would be the mahaal who is reputed to have written that the 3 shavuot are meant to be kept EVEN AT THE RISK OF OUR OWN LIFE.
Since when do we pakan like a maharal as a daat yahid , NOT MENTIONED IN ANY OF THE noe”sei keilim in sh’a who deal halacha lema’ase ?
If anyone has the Mareh hamakom for this maharal?
ThanksWhen the Messiah of all mankind died, some 60k people attended the funeral.
When R moshe Feinstein died [some important snag rabbi] died some 300k people attended.
When R shlomo z Auerbach died [another snag rabbi] some 600k people attended
When R ovadia died some 900k – 1 million attended.Lesson to be taken.
Mainsteam yhudim may attend habad services once in a while , but still know clearly who they rever as a gadol be yisraeledited
Seems like satmar rav when speaking against zionists used language which even according his own shitah are not clear cut halaha.
Its mutar for a rebbi who wants distance his pupils from dei’oth kozvot to exaggerate the danger of the ideology he is cautioning about.It is plausible the Satmar rav used this heter in his fights against zionism.
satmar are mamash yehidim in the way they portray the 3 oaths as one of the 13 ikarei emuna.
All the other groups and ways of thinking in klal yisrael , even if they are scathing against the medina , do not give such prominence to the 3 oaths .
The problem is that satmar propagates the 3 oaths lehalacha peshuta umuskemet, as if there is no controversy in the kadmonim about the legitimacy of the 3 oaths lehalaha.They claim that participation in israeli elections is yehareig ve’al yavor [chvsh].
Tantamount to taking part in Merida against Shamayim.Nevertheless when looking fo shiduhim for their own kids , they themselves made shiduchim with those rebbeish families who go and advise others to go the behiroth.
Seems like satmar kana’ut is not a clear and dry halaha issue.
Otherwise how do they make those shiduhim
Never@cofferoom guy
you hit the nail on its head.
As long as habad will not come to its senses on this fundamental issue, they will be regarded by mainstream old fashioned orthodox Judaism as some sort of offshoot of Judaism, not representing Judaism proper.Their apologists are going to bring multiple so called ‘proofs’ that their deification of their leader is/was practiced in other ages and / or communities.
Upon closer examination they will turn out nothing more than bogus proofs , unable to stand up to any serious scrutiny.
This is a totally new phenomenon unequalled in Jewish History.Alternatively they might call you a ‘hater’.
This is a fundamental issue with habad which is their responsibility to fix.
.@avirah
I meant sabotaging trains to Auschwitz as in Jewish partizans doing the job themselves – not through a government.
—
And – you omitted any reaction to my question :
Attacking SS ‘soldiers’ in order to save Jews ,even without hitlers permission , is that against gezeirat galut ?@avirah
Yankel, that action was not a violation of gezeras hagalus – if Hitler had given us permission to attack the SS soldiers who were trying to kill us, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
—
Attacking the SS ‘soldiers’ in order to save Jews ,even without hitlers permission , is that against gezeirat galut ?Haba lehargeha – hashkem lehargo.
—
Sabotaging trains destined for Aushwitz is against gezeirat hagalut ?@sechel
Thanks for an honest and positive answer.Mashiach promotion Is totally new and not part of any habad mesorah.
Good to know for when CS will claim that this is old stuff , done everywhere and in all types of generations and communities.
Good to know for ourselves when we remember the decades of repeated official habad denials that they are harboring any type of mashiach aspirations for their own movement and their own leader.
@avira
On Purim, we were threatened with annihilation. Did we make a SJDF(Shushan Jewish Defense Force)?No. We davened, and did teshuva, and the gezerah was batul. That’s the lesson of Purim, to recognize the source of our tzaros.
[avira]
—–
You are only half right.After the gezerah was botul there WAS a SJDF in shushan – and in the other cities.
Who fought the amalekim ? For one day / for two days ?On what day was the Yomtov of Purim proclaimed ? On the day the King changed his decree ,or
on the day the SJDF finished its work ?The miracle was only complete after the SJDF acted.
For the record.
The ponevezher rav flew the flag because of shlomo shel malhut.
much like he would fly the union jack in britain and the stars and stripes in the usa.There is no record at least as far as I know about not saying tahanun on Yom Haatsmaut.
In his yeshiva they do say tahanun on Yom haatsmaut. They said when the rav was alive and afterwards when his son R avraham was the nasi of the yeshiva, and they still do now.
In both ‘branches’.
In r tzv markovits’ yeshiva and in r eliezer kahanemans yeshiva.@CS
So for example, when someone asked Rav Lau why he associates with crazy lubavitch, he asked the fellow what he would do if his Rosh Yeshiva asked him to go to a forsaken place to spread Yiddishkeit. The fellow said he would ask about chinuch? Mikvah? Local kosher stores? Etc. Rav Lau responded none and again asked what he would say. The fellow answered he would tell his Rosh Yeshiva to go himself!
[CS]
—
Typical misrepresentation.
This is total science fiction .This could never happen.
Good sign of how non grounded in reality CS really is.@CS
It’s only getting worse as the decades pass so until the Rabbinic leadership puts a full halt to it, all the justifications and arguments in the world won’t make it any more palatable.”I’m sorry this bothers you, but meshichism can never be shut down, as what the Rabbonim think hashkafically cannot override the clear printed sichos of the Rebbe,
—
The only way forward , if so , is for the habad rabbinic leadership to open up a no holds barred discussion of their leaders personality.
How , even a great person , who had a lot to offer [in his hasidim’s eyes], is not infallible .Not infallible , meaning that not everything emanating from him, is Gods Word mamash.
I know many people who we can learn from , but not every word of theirs is Gods Word.This is not phitat kavod for their leader. He was human. And prone to mistakes. Does that mean that his followers cant learn from him ? Absolutely not.
Educating the next generation of habad children and newly minted BT’s is this vein , would a TREMENDOUS boon for klal yisrael, besides being much closer to accuracy and fact.
what I’m saying is, if I proclaim I have Nevuah, and say it was true, you wouldn’t be chayav misa for doubting me- it would need some sort of Rabbinic seal of approval.
—-
Wrong.
If you bring proof thats enough .
Source ? rambam hil yesodei hatora [sefer hamada]
no mention of any rabbinical approval.—
btw. habad rabanim claimed that their leader has nevua .
this was publicised by habad rabanim.
Includes automatic hiyuv mitah for klal yisrael for not listening.
And automatic hiyuv mitah bebeit din for claiming it besheker.Hi did you get my posts ?
We get your posts, we also read them and approve them. Sometimes it takes more than the 20 minutes you wait before you ask. Sometimes it’s even hours. But yes, we get your posts.@reb eliezer
Rav Kreisworth is reputed to have asked -about satmar rav s shitah that nissim could come from stra achra- how can the gemara state that one who passes a place where a neis was done [for his forefathers or klal yisrael] baruch ata shem elokenu she’asa li neis bamakom hazeh ?
Maybe it came from the s’a ?
How can you know ?3 Shevuot lehalacha is not “invented”.
Nor is it “accepted by as clear halacha by all of klal yisrael” .This is not the first unresolved halachik issue , nor is it the last.
It is childish for either side to insist that there is no other side.@arso
If you proclaim Nevuah you have to prove it by predicting exact occurrences (unless, as far as I remember, another known Navi declares you a Navi). If someone can’t, he is, I believe, chayav misa bidei Shamayim. If someone can, then someone who doesn’t listen to him is chayav. I don’t think there’s any halfway.
—
the navi sheker gets Mitah be beit din .
not listening to navi emet is bidei shamayim.According to [warped] neohabad theology , their own rebbi should [chvsh] be hayav mitah bebeit din.
Their rabanim claimed [not the so called ‘hateful’ critics of habad] in the journal kfar H, that the proof of their rebbi’s nevuah is the fact that he predicted no one will be hurt in Israel during the Gulf War in 1991.
Rambam writes clearly that even if one of the details does not come true , it is clear that he is navi sheker. And hayav mitah bebet din.
There is no half way. At least in Rambam.They [or their leader] tried to elevate their leader to the navi status of the Rambams level.
Anyone honest enough will agree.
CS is attempting to keep the cake and eat it.Hi did you receive my posts ?
I will repeat here the language of the Mandate , under which the British themselves stated, they were governing.
Article 2 of the Mandate made the mandatory power [Britain] responsible for placing the country under such “political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish National Home…and the development of self-governing institutions.”
Establishment of the Jewish NATIONAL HOME and SELF GOVERNING INSTITUTIONS .
Thats the language used by them.
—–
Some Zionists fought the British .
Not all of them.
Most did not.
.
Please – lets stick to the facts.Another example of your obvious misrepresentation [sourced in kana’ut]
Hashmatat haMehaber.
Hashmatat Yad Hachazaka .
Rambam wrote clearly – learn this sefer and you will know in short ,all you need to know – without learning any other sefer.
Hashmata of any halacha from Yad is MAJOR.Which is the question posed by one of klal yisraels greatest ge’onim [as great as Satmar Rav ,if not greater]
The Avne Nezer, the rebbe of Sochatshov.
Wherefrom he decides that according Mehaber and Rambam , the 3 shevu’ot are NOT BINDING lehalacha.
Look it up in the end of Tshuvot YD.
—-
How can hakatan so brazenly state that the Shevu’ot are binding according to everyone ?[the oaths are settled halacha, as per all the poskim through the ages that brought them down and applied them, including the Rambam, and nobody can possibly claim otherwise – hakatan]
Again, kana’ut seems to be doche everything …
Even clearly established and easily verifiable facts ….