Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hey Joseph, is they one of those soul warming tochacha posts that brings people running to Torah life?
I think the term is “clean” 🙂 Isn’t it the coffee that *makes* us sober?
Have no fear, CA, being an addict is a status whether you are indulging or not
🙂
Charlie, murder or not you need to judge this soldier l’kaf z’chus. The court may decide what to call his behavior but only a Rav can tell you how to treat him.
Would I defend Bugsy Seigel? Here’s my answer:
“I don’t make comments on things like that when I don’t know the facts.”
And I don’t consider reading up on it the same as knowing.
Who cares?
Please stop starting threads asking people to chose between different Jewish owned businesses , products and establishments.
And in answer to the question, “Should we be defending this soldier?”, try reading the posts from the KJ residents when there was a raid. Is he a Jew? Then you defend him.
If you are on the fence about following protocol with terrorists, there is an article circulating about a soldier with no legs who was told not to pull the trigger on an arab while he took off his shirt at a checkpoint to be searched. Apperently the arab activated the vest before the soldier could verify it existed. He lost his legs, and his commander.
Just a heads up that if I have to start worrying about what will be posted here I will close the thread. There is a yid being investigated in this case, it is not some hypothetical news story. Please keep that in mind.
Good point. I guess I thought the post was so obviously ridiculous that it didn’t mean anything but I can change it.
Working on it. Have no fear 🙂
What?! No Way!!!!
You don’t have to leave us, who says your voice is not needed here? You can post sporadically, or occasionally, or on-and-off. No need to cut off ties. Aw, c’mon Goq!
I think you just got uninvited.
And I am eternally grateful.
Here’s the real question – Gamanit, how did you find a 7 year old thread with only one post?
I assumed they are all coordinated in some way.
nostalgic bump
ROFL
What? You aren’t talking to me anymore?
6. Jerks who think a tiny OU in two of three nutrition panels is the same thing as an OU “on the package”
7. Jerks who have no clue what the packaging looks like but comment anyway.
Mention of the illegibility was an unnecessary put down. And I’m a bit confused about what point you’re making.
Yes, but then the one before that will show up and may not be readily noticed, causing people to start reading backwards up the thread to make sure they didn’t miss anything.
DISCLAIMER: In honor of adar I will be approving posts in random or reverse order without respecting how it affects the conversation.
What I was saying was this –
If the usernames you linked had changed their names, their history would still be showing on that page despite the change. Since they are not showing a history we would have to assume that our Phil and M are the ones with the second (changed) names, and that their original names/profile pages are unknown.
And additionally each bag is a duplicate of the large sized bag in regard to labeling. When there is an open mixture, as with chex mix or trail mix which contain kosher candies and pretzles mixed with unsupervised baking/cooking, there is no hechsher on the package.
Likewise, there are lunch packages of tuna that contain kosher tuna (still in a single serving can), a packet of kosher mayo, a packet of kosher relish and unidentified wrapped and sealed crackers. These packages also do not bare a hechsher.
Many granola bar type foods or oatmeals come in multipacks that contain the nutrition panel of each of the types included in the box. Even if the OU is listed on that type of bar, the box will not contain an OU on the front. But the difference is that these brands REGULARLY POST THE OU ON THE FRONT!!! Hershey’s hides their OU in the ingredient paragraph so if someone copies the nutrition panel and pastes it onto the packaging, it will contain the full copy of what is listed there.
Maybe a more appropriate conversation would be why Hershey’s, who used to put their OU on the front but stopped when Arab countries refused to buy their products with an OU, is hiding their kashrus.
Yes, of course, if one notices that the hashgacha is part of the ingredient panel and that there are multiple ingredient panels, they would look at the others.
which is exactly what I said in the first place, thank you.
sorry
Pictures are linked in the article. It shows the front, the back with the ingredient panels including the tiny OU’s on two of the three panels, and the message.
No, actually I wasn’t. But feel free if that’s what works for you.
Aw, well I hope you’ll be okay with that.
In general best practice is to have a clue before weighing in.
No, I don’t read the ingredients on any labels but, and I assume this confirms that you were speaking without having looked at the package, hershey’s puts their OU in the ingredients paragraph. If you want to see an OU, you need to find the ingredients and check the last or last two tiny characters in the tiny paragraph. If you don’t know to look there, you wont know there is any hechsher at all (which would happen to anyone not familiar with their procedure)
So that’s my angle.
Except if you see what you are commenting on, you may realize it is not quite what you read.
And I think there is a picture in the news article on the front page.
Queen, you should really side with Joseph then, not popa. Popa was just being argumentative, Joseph really thought out his side on the issue.
To be truthful, I do see it this way but don’t really care if someone agrees or not as it is beyond irrelevent in the big scheme of things. Just another case of societies cognitive decline.
Just from your and popa’s comments, though, I would guess (with room to be wrong) that you didn’t see the package but are going on what you are reading.
That’s exactly my point pops. You DON’T analyze, you just read. But when you look for the ingredients on the panel, you can’t not notice that there are three to choose from. Do you sometimes see the word SOUP and think that’s an OU too because you just picked it up and ran?
(remind me not to eat in your house)
Agree on what? You agree that it isn’t confusing but some people can’t seem to navigate so now there’s a whole big deal being made and the OU has to step in and ask for kindergarten accommodations for our consumer market? Great!
Queen, if you see that there is NO OU on the package, but on the back there are three seperate ingredient panels and you have to actively chose one to read (knowing there are two others there) and you keep reading until you find the OU on that panel, I would put money on it that you would not think it was implying the contents of the bag is kosher. When they use the term “outside packaging” it gives the impression there is an OU on the front.
If I put out a pan of brownies and write DAIRY – CONTAINS MILK in big letters in front of it and three people come up to me to say they ate them without realizing they were milchik, I, as the provider, would be obligated to make changes. Not because there was a problem with the warning, but because there are consumers who need more help.
That’s right! He did not say it IS confusing, he said that it can be confusing – to people who aren’t intelligent or responsible enough to know what they are looking at/for.
Yes true. Many products have the kosher symbol on the back at the end of the list of ingredients. And if you are looking at THREE panels and you choose to only scan one of them, then you are either irresponsible or ignorant and possibly shouldn’t be shopping on your own.
You have no idea if Rabbi Genack agrees with me or not. Maybe he also knows that some people are idiots and his job is to make sure they are supported. Parents do it all the time. The fact that he is making things easier for them based on the fact that they err, does not mean he isn’t laughing in his sleeve.
No, it doesn’t. It shows three ingredient panels, very seperate and distinct. And two of them have OU’s. And one doesn’t. Stating that there was an OU on the “outside packaging” implies on the front, declaring the whole bag kosher.
But the outside packaging does not have and OU. The ingredient panel for two out of three has OU and it is not possible to read that panel without noticing that there are two more ext to it. You would really have to be an idiot to think that this “package” bears an OU.
And yes, that is my professional opinion.
I second Utah’s news!
Even if you disagree with him and his unknown rav 100%, you still cannot call what you are doing “talking about a mishna” in the sense that the rabbeim meant it.
Even if NO rav said not to bring it up, your own rabbeim wouldn’t give consent for you to be here at all let alone here discussing these mishnayos in this venue.
If you insist that “talk about a mishna” is somehow the equivalent of “post threads in anonymous forums about topics in mishna” than reasoning isnt much of an option.
Well that’s kind of creepy.
Yea, that’s the only reason I don’t have cable.
Wouldn’t that mean that the present posters have the changed name, and not the owners of the profiles you linked?
Well, I stated the Halacha in the pre-edited OP
That was one of many times you have posted this topic, which makes me question your motive/intent. And sometimes intent trumps content.
Dislike? never said a thing about that. Just that we have had conversations about deletions in the past so I thought you would assume it was me.
My only comment on the subject is that you probably assume it was me who deleted it but it wasn’t.
Well, no offense of course but that tree thing was your doing.
He objected to my deletion of his post.