Expert: Charedi IDF Service Now an Unstoppable Force

Despite continuing protests by groups of Charedi community members against IDF service, more members of the community are joining the army than ever before, Yonatan Bransky said. 

Branksy is the Chairman of the Netzah Yehuda organization, 

which consists of veterans of the IDF and rabbis in the Charedi community.

The protests, which have been going on for months, are the work of just a small, but loud, minority in the community, said Bransky. “I think most of the community just ignores them,” he said. “Everyone understands the importance of working together.”

Among other things, Netzach Yehuda arranges ceremonies for Charedi soldiers, such as their graduation from basic training to regular service units. The latest ceremony was held Thursday, and Bransky said that it went very well.

“Our soldiers bring a great deal of pride to the community and to their families. Our job is to enable these soldiers to serve without compromising their religious lifestyle, and we are able to work with the army on this fully.”

As head of an organization that advocates IDF service, Bransky said that the issue for Charedi Jews was not being “for” or “against” IDF service.

“No one will teach us lessons about the importance of full-time Torah studies, and we fully support those who choose to do this. No one is going to pull them out of their chairs in the House of Study. But there are thousands of 'students' who are not learning anything. These are the people we are seeking, and many of them do want serve in the IDF. 

We help them.”

The system works, he said. “Many of the soldiers we have worked with are now working and supporting families. They are our best ambassadors. We are here and ready to help any Charedi soldier who joins the army to learn Torah, to provide spiritual support, and to find the appropriate service framework,” he said.

Rabbi Moshe Meir Weiss bashes Ami Magazine that gave "irresponsible exposure" to those Meshigina Parents that refuse to vaccinate their children

I cannot believe that we are still discussing this issue... those crazy creeps that refuse to vaccinate their children should be thrown out of shul and their children barred from attending Yeshivah!

There, I said it.....

By Rabbi Moshe Meir Weiss

Last week, I had a verbal ‘tantrum’ about one of the major Torah publications giving irresponsible exposure to an uneducated opinion that can have grave consequences to its thousands of readers.   This week, I would like to study the flip side, the applause that these publishers have coming to them when they print important opinions of well-educated Roshei Yeshiva, rabboinim or lay-leaders.  The example I have chosen amongst the many that there are is a letter written by Dr. Indich, a well-known pediatrician in Lakewood for over three decades.  The letter was prompted by the measles outbreak in California.  Dr. Indich wrote to decry the parents who choose not to vaccinate their children because of the fear of a discredited linkage to autism.  Dr. Indich gives testimony in his passionate letter that during the thirty years of his practice with thousands of children and thousands of vaccinations, he has never seen any such linkage.

Now, this is journalism at its best.  A young mother, perhaps seeing an autistic child, and fearing for the safety of her children, might be swayed by the hysteria.  So, the magazine reaches out to the masses and teaches them with one who has impeccable credentials to do so - that they should not be concerned.

As a Rav, this issue has crossed my desk more than once and I know one great Rosh Yeshiva who told one of his talmidim who was dating a girl from a family that did not vaccinate their children that the chosson should stipulate before getting married that they will vaccinate their children because in medical Halacha we go after the rov, the majority, and the overwhelming majority of medical opinion and the overwhelming majority of vaccinations save lives and do no harm.

I have strong personal feelings about this issue since I personally contracted the measles and the mumps having had the mumps three times; once on one side, once on the other side, and once on both sides.  I still remember, more than half a century later, the delirium I suffered from the measles.  To think that a parent would voluntarily risk her child getting this dreaded disease by opting not to vaccinate because of ignorance is frightening.  (When I was a young boy, they didn’t have these vaccinations.)  Even worse, I have people in my community who have had polio and have the telltale marks which remain with them throughout their lives.  How scary that a mother would opt not to safeguard her child from such a horrid disease.

But, before writing this, we are taught to consult with two mumchim, two experts.  So, to get another opinion, I called my dear talmid and friend Dr. Robert Adler, who has one of the largest pediatric practices in Boro Park, seeing tens of thousands of children and has also been practicing for over thirty years.  I asked him whether he thinks there is any linkage between vaccinations and autism and whether there is any validity to the concern about not vaccinating one’s child.  He vehemently informed me that there is no truth to those concerns and the ’studies’ that supported this theory have been completely disproven and discredited.  He even educated me that some parents with autistic children are distressed that so much funding has been wasted on the “Scandinavian”, and other studies in this area when the money could have been used for much better purposes.  He did tell me that in the area of autism, there are credible studies that exposure to certain pollutants have been linked to a heightened risk of autism.

Being also a Talmud chochom, he concluded that vaccination is one of the examples of how Hashem created the refuah before themakeh, the cure before the disease - and that everyone should make sure to avail themselves of these gifts from Hashem.

As a postscript to this essay, let me share with you the following.  I mentioned this view about vaccinations at my flagship lecture at Rabbi Landau’s (Tuesday night at 9:50 PM on Avenue l and East 9^th). After the lecture someone accosted me saying that there are two sides to this story about vaccinations. This prompted me to make yet another call to yet another expert. I called my ydid nefesh-very close friend, Rabbi Dr. Yitzchok Kurtzer who is a noted Internist for three decades and runs three busy offices in Scranton. I asked him for his opinion about vaccinations. He told me emphatically that it is criminal not to vaccinate our children. He went on to inform me that Scranton had a Mumps outbreak, and the probable cause was traced to a Mother who was afraid to give her child the Mumps vaccination!

This is but one example of journalism at its best.  And there are many examples:  Magazines and articles that educate people on how to safeguard their elderly parents’ homes, giving people resources to deal with severe allergies, educating people on mental health issues and the list goes on.

I’ll close with a final word of caution to all readers of print material:  just like the Gemora cautions us to choose our rabbi carefully, “Im yihyeh Rabbo domeh l’malach Elokim, yevakshu Torah mi’pihu - If your Rabbi has angelic qualities, then learn from him wisdom.”  So too, check the credentials of the writer whose piece you are reading before you rely upon it as if it is gospel.  May it be the will of Hashem that we always safeguard our children and in that merit may we be blessed with long life, good health andYiddishe nachas.

Sheldon Zeitlin takes dictation of, and edits, Rabbi Weiss’ articles.

Rabbi Weiss is currently stepping up his speaking engagements to have him in your community call now 718.916.3100 or emailRMMWSI@aol.com.

To receive a weekly cassette tape or CD directly from Rabbi Weiss, please send a check to Rabbi Moshe Meir Weiss, P.O. Box 140726, Staten Island, NY 10314 or contact him at RMMWSI@aol.com.

Now back in print is a large size paperback edition of Power Bentching, also available a brand new Cd Album on Purim containing 6 Cd’s from Rav Weiss’s great speeches on Purim. To order call him at 718-916-3100 or email at above.

Attend Rabbi Weiss’s weekly shiur at the Landau Shul, Avenue L and East 9^th in Flatbush, Tuesday nights at 9:30 p.m.

Rabbi Weiss’s Daf Yomi and Mishnah Yomis shiurim can be heard LIVE on Kol Haloshon at (718) 906-6400.  Write toKolHaloshon@gmail.com for details. They can now also be seen on TorahAnyTime.com.

Netanyahu really running against Obama

by Caroline Glick

Officially, the election on March 17 is among Israelis. Depending on how we vote, either Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will remain in office and form the next government led by his Likud party, or Isaac Herzog and Tzipi Livni will form a government.
But unofficially, a far greater electoral drama is unfolding. The choice is not between Netanyahu and Herzog/Livni. It is between Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama.

As the White House sees it, if Herzog/Livni form the next government, then Jerusalem will dance to Obama’s tune. If Netanyahu is reelected, then the entire edifice of Obama’s Middle East policy may topple and fall.

Secretary of State John Kerry made clear the administration’s desire to topple Netanyahu last spring during his remarks before the Trilateral Commission. It was during that memorable speech that Kerry libeled Israel, claiming that we would automatically and naturally become an apartheid state if we didn’t give Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria to the PLO, Jew free, as quickly as possible.

Despite Israel’s venality, Kerry held out hope. In his words, “if there is a change of government [in Israel], or a change of heart, something will happen.”

Shortly after Kerry gave his Israel apartheid speech, his Middle East mediator Martin Indyk attacked Israel and the character of the Israeli people in an astounding interview to Yediot Aharonot.

Among other things, Indyk hinted that to force Israel to make concessions demanded by the PLO, the Palestinians may need to launch another terror war.

Indyk also threatened that the Palestinians will get their state whether Israel agrees to their terms of not. In his words, “They will get their state in the end – whether through violence or by turning to international organizations.”

Indyk made his statements as an unnamed US official. When his identity was exposed, he was forced to resign his position.
Following his departure from government service he returned to his previous position as vice president of the Brookings Institution and the director of its foreign policy program. Last September, The New York Times reported that the Brookings Institute received a $14.8 million, four-year donation from Qatar, the chief financier of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.

This week, Indyk was back in Israel to speak at the annual conference of the Institute for National Security Studies. There he provided us with a picture of what we can expect from the Obama administration in its remaining two years in office if Netanyahu forms the next government.

On the Palestinian front, Indyk warned that Israel shouldn’t be worried about the Palestinians getting an anti-Israel resolution passed in the UN Security Council. Rather, it can expect that the US will join with the other permanent members of the UN Security Council to pass a resolution “against Israel’s will” that will “lay out the principle of a two-state solution.”

As Indyk intimated, Israel can avoid this fate if it elects a Herzog/Livni government. Such a government, he indicated, will preemptively give in to all of the Palestinians demands and so avoid a confrontation with the US and its colleagues at the Security Council.

Indyk explained, “If there is a government in Israel after these elections that decides to pursue a two-state solution, then there is a way forward. It begins with coordinating an initiative with the United States. And then, together with the US, looking to Egypt and Jordan and the resurrection of the Arab Peace Initiative.”

As for Iran, Indyk shrugged at Israel’s concerns over the agreement that Obama is now seeking to conclude with the Iranian regime regarding its nuclear weapons program. That agreement will leave Iran as a threshold nuclear state. Indyk suggested that the US could assuage Israel’s concerns by signing a bilateral treaty with Israel that would commit the US to do something if Iran passes some nuclear threshold.

There are only three problems with such a deal.

First, as former ambassador to the US Itamar Rabinovich noted, such a treaty would likely render Israel unable to take independent action against Iranian nuclear sites.

Second, the US has a perfect track record of missing every major nuclear advance by every country. US intelligence agencies were taken by surprise when India, Pakistan and North Korea joined the nuclear club. They have always underestimated Iranian nuclear activities and were taken by surprise, repeatedly, by Syria’s nuclear proliferation activities. In other words, it would be insane for Israel to trust that the US would act in a timely manner to prevent Iran from crossing the nuclear threshold.

Third of course is the demonstrated lack of US will – particularly under the Obama administration – to take any action that could prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. So Israel has no reason whatsoever to believe that the US would honor its commitment.

But then, since the Obama administration believes that Herzog and Livni will be compliant with its policies, the White House may expect the two will agree to forgo Israel’s right to self-defense and place Israel’s national security in relation to Iran in Obama’s hands.

And this brings us to the real contest unfolding in the lead-up to March 17.

When Speaker of the House of Representatives John Boehner announced last month that he had invited Netanyahu to address the joint houses of Congress on the threat emanating from Iran’s nuclear program and from radical Islam, he unintentionally transformed the Israeli elections from a local affair to a contest between Obama and Netanyahu.

Obama’s response to Netanyahu’s speech has been astounding. His ad hominem attacks against Netanyahu, his open moves to coerce Democratic lawmakers to boycott Netanyahu’s speech, and the administration’s aggressive attempts to damage Israel’s reputation in the US have been without precedent. More than anything, they expose a deep-seated fear that Netanyahu will be successful in exposing the grave danger that Obama’s policies toward Iran and toward the Islamic world in general pose to the global security.

Those fears are reasonable for two reasons.

First due to a significant degree to the administration’s unhinged response to the news of Netanyahu’s speech, Boehner’s invitation to Netanyahu sparked a long-belated public debate in the US regarding Obama’s strategy of appeasing the Iranian regime. Generally consistent Obama supporters like The Washington Post editorial board have published stinging indictments of this policy in recent weeks.

These analyses have noted for the first time that in pursuing Iran, Obama is alienating and weakening America’s allies, enabling Iran to expand its nuclear program, and empowering Iran regionally as the US does nothing to prevent Iran’s takeover of Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.

Second, it is possible that in his remarks about Iran and radical Islam, Netanyahu will manage to discredit Obama’s approach to both issues. This is possible because Obama’s approach is difficult to understand.

Last week, following the decapitation of 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians by Islamic State, the Obama administration stood alone in its refusal to note that the victims were murdered because they were Christians. When Egypt retaliated for the massacre with air strikes against Islamic State training camps and other facilities in Libya, the Obama administration refused to support it ally. Instead it criticized Egypt for acting on its own and called for a political solution in Libya, which is now governed by two rival governments and has become a breeding ground for Islamic State terrorists who transit Libya to Sinai.

Following Islamic State’s massacre of the Christians, the group’s leaders threatened to invade neighboring Italy. Italy’s Prime Minister Matteo Renzi promised a strong response, and then called on the UN Security Council to do something. The Obama administration responded with coolness to a similar Egyptian call last week.

Hamas (which is supposedly much more moderate than Islamic State despite its intense cooperation with Libya-trained Islamic State forces in Sinai) warned Italy not to attack Islamic State in Libya, lest it be viewed in the words of Salah Bardawil as beginning “a new crusade against Arab and Muslim countries.”

While all of this has been going on, Obama presided over his much-touted international conference on Confronting Violent Extremism. Reportedly attended by representatives from 60 countries, and featuring many leaders of Muslim Brotherhood- linked groups like the Council on American- Islamic Relations, Obama’s conference’s apparent goal was to deemphasize and deny the link between terrorism and radical Islam.

In his remarks on Wednesday, Obama gave a lengthy defense of his refusal to acknowledge the link between Islam and Islamic State, al-Qaida and other Islamic terrorist groups. He insisted that these groups “have perverted Islam.”

Obama indirectly argued that the West is to blame for their behavior because of its supposed historical mistreatment of Muslims. In his words, the “reality... is that there’s a strain of thought that doesn’t embrace ISIL’s tactics, doesn’t embrace violence, but does buy into the notion that the Muslim world has suffered historic grievances, sometimes that’s accurate.”

Obama’s insistence that Islamic State and its ilk attack because of perceived Western misbehavior is completely at odds with observed reality. As The Atlantic’s Graeme Wood demonstrated this week in his in-depth report on Islamic State’s ideology and goals, Islam is central to the group. Islamic State is an apocalyptic movement rooted entirely in Islam.

Most of the coverage of Netanyahu’s scheduled speech before Congress has centered on his opposition to the deal Obama seeks to conclude with Iran. But it may be that the second half of his speech – which will be devoted to the threat posed by radical Islam – will be no less devastating to Obama. Obama’s stubborn refusal to acknowledge the fact that the greatest looming threats to global security today, including US national security, stem from radical Islam indicates that he is unable to contend with any evidence that jihadist Islam constitutes a unique threat unlike the threat posed by Western chauvinism and racism.

It is hard to understand either Israel’s election or Obama’s hysterical response to Netanyahu’s scheduled speech without recognizing that Obama clearly feels threatened by the message he will deliver. Surrounded by sycophantic aides and advisers, and until recently insulated from criticism by a supportive media, while free to ignore Congress due to his veto power, Obama has never had to seriously explain his policies regarding Iran and Islamic terrorists more generally. He has never endured a direct challenge to those policies.

Today Obama believes that he is in a to-the-death struggle with Netanyahu. If Netanyahu’s speech is a success, Obama’s foreign policy will be indefensible. If Obama is able to delegitimize Netanyahu ahead of his arrival, and bring about his electoral defeat, then with a compliant Israeli government, he will face no obstacles to his plan to appease Iran and blame Islamic terrorism on the West for the remainder of his tenure in office.

www.CarolineGlick.com

List of the Democrats who are Planning to Skip Netanyahu’s Speech Against Nuclear Iran

The following officials will not attend Netanyahu’s speech:

Rep. Earl Blumenauer (Ore.) — Wrote a Jan. 29 column in The Huffington Post explaining his decision, saying the Constitution “vests the responsibility for foreign affairs in the president.”

Rep. G.K. Butterfield (N.C.) — The head of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) focused on Boehner undermining Obama in a statement and emphasized he’s not urging a boycott.

Rep. Andre Carson (Ind.)

Rep. James Clyburn (S.C.) — Clyburn is the highest-ranking Democratic leader to say he’ll skip the speech.

Rep. Diana DeGette (Colo.)

Rep. Donna Edwards (Md.)

Rep. Keith Ellison (Minn.) — He is head of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC), a member of the CBC and the first Muslim in Congress.

Rep. Raúl Grijalva (Ariz.) — Grijalva is a co-chairman of the CPC.

Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (Ill.) — A spokesman told the Chicago Sun-Times that Gutierrez has a “strong” record on Israel but called the speech “a stunt.”

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.)

Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (Texas) — “The Congresswoman has no plans to attend the speech at this time,” a spokeswoman said.

Rep. Barbara Lee (Calif.) — A member of the CBC and former head of the CPC.

Rep. John Lewis (Ga.) — His office confirmed he’s not going but emphasized he’s not organizing a formal boycott

Rep. Betty McCollum (Minn.): “In my view Mr. Netanyahu’s speech before Congress is nothing more than a campaign event hosted by Speaker Boehner and paid for by the American people,” McCollum said in a statement.”

Rep. Jim McDermott (Wash.) — “I do not intend to attend the speech of Bibi,” he said in an email to a Seattle newspaper.

Rep. Gregory Meeks (N.Y.) — A CBC member.

Rep. Beto O’Rourke (Texas)

Rep. Chellie Pingree (Maine)

Rep. Charles Rangel (N.Y.) — “I’m offended as an American,” he said on MSNBC.

Rep. Cedric Richmond (La.)

Rep. Bennie Thompson (Miss.)

Rep. John Yarmuth (Ky.) — “We know what he is going to say,” the Jewish lawmaker said in a statement.

Senate (3)

Sen. Patrick Leahy (Vt.) — Leahy called it a “tawdry and high-handed stunt,” according to a  Vermont newspaper.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) — Sanders, who caucuses with Democrats, said it’s “wrong” that Obama wasn’t consulted about the speech.

Sen. Brian Schatz (Hawaii) — “The U.S.-Israel relationship is too important to be overshadowed by partisan politics,” said Schatz in a statement. “I am disappointed in the Republican leadership’s invitation of Prime Minister Netanyahu to address a joint session of Congress with the apparent purpose of undermining President Obama’s foreign policy prerogatives.”

Ami's Frankfurter interviews Moshe Arnes and asks him "silly questions"

Yitzchok Frankfurter, The Purim Clown

Yitzchok Frankfurter, the Purim Clown, publisher and editor of Ami Magazine,  interviewed the Former Foreign Minister of the State of Israel, Moshe Arens, and the interview is  featured in this week's edition of the Anti-Israel Ami Magazine.

Reading the questions, will make you want to puke, because of the clown's immature questions and blatant anti-Israel slant, .... so have a brown bag nearby!

I will start with one of the clown's last questions, just so you get the gist of his insane questions.

Notice Aren's great responses.

The Purim Clown Frank:
"You're practically one of the founding fathers of Israel. From a personal perspective, what is it like to watch your country still under the same threat today as when it was established?"

Moshe Arens:
" May I permit myself to say "our" country?"

DIN:
Do you believe the question?  "your" country?.....
This is the "country" that the RBSH"O gifted to the Jewish people forever and forever, as Rashi points out in the very first pasuk in Bereishes..... but according to the Purim Clown, Eretz Yisroel is not "his" but "yours" ... reminds me of the Rasha's question in the Pesach Haggadah!
Somebody should be "boidek" this guy,..... I'll bet he is not from "zera Yisroel"

I have the following question to The Frank:
"From a personal perspective, what is it like to watch the Jewish People being under the same threat today as when we had the first war with Amaleik?

The Purim Clown Frank:
Israel's problem today is more diplomatic than military. Would you agree with that?

DIN: 
What is wrong with this imbecile? 
Only a guy living in Boro Park in those fancy "match-boxes" would ask if "Israel's problem is more diplomatic than military" ..
Only a guy who didn't experience grabbing his toddlers and running to the nearest shelter as Hamas rains down thousands of missiles, would ask such a stupid idiotic question!
He must be hanging out too much in the mikvah! 

See how Arens  responds!

Moshe Arens:
NO! The primary problem for Israel is military in nature. First and foremost, a nuclear weapon in the hands of the Iranians, who make no bones about their intention to wipe Israel off the map. 
Nothing will take a backseat to that.

The Purim Clown Frank:
Do you think there's anything to the accusation that it's inappropriate to address Congress two weeks before the Israelis go to the polls? Some people are up in arms about that?

DIN:
The only people that feel that it's "inappropriate" and are "up in arms" against Netanyahu  addressing Congress "two weeks before the Israelis go the the polls" ..... are Satmar, Leftist self-hating Jews, Anti-Semites, Tzippy Livni, Herzog and the  Iranians...

Moshe Arens:
What would you say if Netanyahu, knowing that an agreement was taking shape that posed a great danger to Israel, was given an opportunity to address Congress on this important subject and told the Speaker of the House, "I'm sorry, I'm busy with elections now. This is more important than the danger of a nuclear Iran." What would you say to that? What would Herzog and Livni say about it?

DIN:
Since the Clown is an anti-Israel Satmarer he is against Netanyahu addressing Congress because this will antagonize Hussein Obama, who together with Satmar hate Netanyahu, so like all the rest of the  anti-Semites, he keeps badgering Arens on this topic.................

The Purim Clown Frank:
Would you care to comment on the way the invitation was handled?
Do you think it was dealt with properly from a diplomatic perspective?

Moshe Arens:
As far as I know it would be almost disrespectful to the Speaker of the House, the number three person in the American political hierarchy, to refuse to accept his invitation or to start to interrogate him as to whether it was coordinated with everybody. An invitation was issued to the prime minister, and I think it would have been wrong on his part to refuse it. It would have also been wrong if instead of answering yes, he said he'd like to know a little more about it.

DIN: 
Gut Ge'zugt..... but the clown doesn't give up and keeps pestering him like an annoying  mosquito.

The Purim Clown Frank:
People know exactly where Netanyahu stands on this issue. He's even made his opinion known in the UN. What will he accomplish by restating it?

DIN:
And why does Satmar keep "restating" their anti-Jewish stance every single week in Der Yid, Dee Zeitung, and Der Blatt and in AMI?
How about the two Satmar rabbi gangsters, don't they bash Israel every single Shabbos in the Shaolosh Seudois "Toirelech?"

 "People" actually don't know "exactly where Netanyahu stands on the issue" but they'll know now, when the entire world will hear his message to Congress!

By the way, is the Clown referring to the same UN that the Late Mayor of New York Ed Koch said, should be converted into a parking lot?
 Is that the UN .... that R' Shlomo Halberstam z"l the Bobover Rebbe, said looks like a Matzivah, because the truth is buried there?

Moshe Arens:
Things are not clear-cut at all. You might remember the sanctions that were imposed on Iran by the UN Security Council, which were then followed by the US Congress. I don't think I'm overstating it, but that was a direct result of Netanyahu's efforts to call world attention to the danger of a nuclear Iran. So he definitely has achievements to his credit. I'm sure you're also aware that there are differences of opinion on this agreement within the US. A very formidable group is coming forth and saying that is not a good agreement for America. [Public opinion] is now in the stages of being crystallized. Just imagine if Netanyahu had replied to the invitation by saying, "Everybody already knows my opinion. There's no point in my coming." I think that would be silly.

DIN: "Silly" and Stupid!

Maran HaRav Shteinman: iPhone Users are Pasul L’Eidus

This month, 26% of my audience used the i phone to access my site.....
That's quite a % of my audience......21% used the Android....

 My question is.... how many are now going to run to buy an Android?
 Maybe, Rav Shteinman didn't mean "davkeh" an i phone, maybe he meant any Smartphone!
But if he meant any smartphone, why did he "davkeh" say "i phone?" 

My second question is:
How about a guy who abused and molested countless girls in a well known Seminary in Yerushalayim, but doesn't have an i phone, is he "Pasul L'Eidus?"

How about a guy, who beats up a Frum IDF soldier in Uniform, a block away from Rav Shteinman's residence, but doesn't have an iphone, is he "Pasul L'Eidus?"

How about the guy in Ponovitz that threw a Shtender on the Rosh Yeshivah and drew blood, but doesn't have an i phone, is he "Pasul L'Eidus?"

Or does Rav Shteinman's psak only concern the guy who possesses an i phone? 
And the abuser, the bully,etc.. are all, according to Rav Shteinman, full fledged Kosher Eidim?

Maran HaGaon HaRav Aaron Yehuda Leib Shteinman Shlita spoke out regarding persons using iPhones, stating they are pasul l’eidus. 

HaGaon HaRav Moshe Yehuda Schneider tells of the gadol hador’s words in the weekly Pri Chaim publication. 

He explains “we merited hearing Maran’s opinion regarding iPhones, the impure device, and I am presenting these words after Rabbeinu questioned regarding a bochur that R”L fell victim as a result”.

He begins by stating the Rosh Yeshiva was made aware of the high cost of such a phone, resulting in his response that it is quite costly to sin and people are willing to pay a great deal of money – the main thing is to sin. 

He adds that a good esrog is less expensive and when he heard one person say that one who spends so much on an iPhone will not buy an expensive esrog, Rav Shteinman stated this is not necessarily so, for there are those who will pay for an esrog, as well as for an iPhone l’havdil.

Rav Shteinman was informed that HaGaon HaRav Shlomo Halevy Wosner Shlita ruled one who possesses an iPhone is ‘pasul l’eidus’ as Rav Wosner disqualified a witness at a chupah when learning of his phone. 

Rav Shteinman stated “The Klall is a prohibition that incurs malkos renders one pasul from d’oraissa and a prohibition that does not incur malkos only pasuls d’rabbonon. Hence, one with an iPhone is pasul from eidus d’rabbonon since malkos are not involved here. 

Rev. Graham: Obama ‘Ignoring These Are Islamic Extremists’ ‘Bent on Destroying the West’ – ‘He’s Given a Pass to Islam’

President Barack Obama will not acknowledge the truth of Islamic terrorism, its religious grounding in the Quran, and that it is bent on “destroying the West,” but instead Obama, whose “entire life” was shaped by Islam, cannot accept the evil in front of him and apparently is trying to “protect Islam,” said reverend Franklin Graham, president of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.

“We have to understand who we’re dealing with and you have to deal with it accordingly,” said Rev. Graham in a Feb. 17 On the Record interview with Greta Van Susteren. “The president is ignoring the fact that these are Islamic extremists, these are terrorists, and ISIS is a terrorist organization and they are bent on destroying the West. They’ve already said they want the flag of Islam to fly over the White House.”

“The president, his entire life, his whole influence has been Islam,” said Rev. Graham, whose father is the world-renowned preacher Billy Graham. “His mother was married to a Muslim. His father’s a Muslim. Then she married a [Muslim] man from Indonesia.”

“He [Obama] was raised in Indonesia,” said Rev. Graham. “He went to Islamic schools. I assume she was a Muslim. So, his whole life experiences have been surrounded by Islam. He only knows Islam. And he’s given a pass to Islam. He’s refusing to accept and understand the evil that is in front of him.”

Van Susteren’s interview questions were prompted by the White House’s decision to not state that the 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians beheaded by the Islamic State over the weekend were, in fact, Christians and were killed for their faith, as their murderers stated on video.

Columnist George Will said that Obama administration’s unwillingness to honestly discuss radical Islam or even say the two words in the same sentence was “beyond burlesque, its pathological, its clinical their inability and unwillingness to say …”

Also, author and psychiatrist Charles Krauthammer said on Feb. 16, “We have an administration that is truly pathological in its inability to actually state what’s going on. In the video that was released that showed the savage beheading, it was addressed to the nations of the cross. It pledged itself to the conquest of Rome.”

Krauthammer further noted that Pope Francis publicly mourned for the Egyptian Copts who were killed and said they were murdered by the Islamists precisely because of their Christian faith, yet the White House called them “Egyptian citizens,” not Christians.

In her interview with Rev. Graham, host Greta Van Susteren asked, “ISIS beheading 21 Christians just because they are Christians, and still the White House is refusing to acknowledge the Egyptian victims were Christians. … Reverend, I just read your Facebook page in which you say in part, ‘I am perplexed as to why our president will not acknowledge the truth and call Islamic extremism what it is. In a statement the White House even called the 21 Christians who were beheaded ‘Egyptian citizens,’ refusing to identify them as Christians.’

“Why do you think the White House called them citizens and not Christians?”

Rev. Graham said, “Greta, I have no idea. I’m just baffled by this White House, and it seems as though they want to believe a lie - that everything’s okay when it’s not okay.”

Eida Chareidie guy Supports Chareidim "integrating in Israeli Work Force" Contradicting Ami Magazine!

Hey! Mr. Frankfurter of Ami, Eat This!
Why don't you interview R' Shmuel Pappenheim? Hmmmm?

Doesn't fit into the "Chareidie Philosophy" that you wrote about last week? 

 

Shmuel Pappenheim of the Eda Haredit ultra-Orthodox community, appeared in a campaign ad for none other than Yesh Atid, a party frequently denounced by Charedi hard-liners as iniquitous.

Pappenheim, who previously served as a spokesman for the anti-Zionist Eda Haredit communal organization, has in recent years advocated for moderation within the Charedi (ultra-Orthodox) community and for members of the Charedi public to integrate into the workforce and play a greater role in Israeli society.

This stance led to criticism against him, and he was disowned by the Eda Haredit.

Speaking in the Yesh Atid ad, Pappenheim highlighted the lack of basic education in the Charedi sector and advocated greater participation in the workforce.

“I think haredi Jews need to bring in an income, need to take care of their children,” he said in the ad. “You can find adults, 45 years old, they don’t even have a basic understanding of the ABC, it gets you stuck.”

Pappenheim continued by saying that the Charedi community has things to contribute to Israeli society and vice versa, adding that “all we need is the places to connect the two together a little bit.”

He did not explicitly endorse Yesh Atid and could not be reached for comment.

Yesh Atid MK Rabbi Dov Lipman, who comes from the US Charedi community, worked during the outgoing Knesset to increase employment opportunities for Charedi men.

He said the Knesset lobby for the integration of Charedim into the workforce, which he chaired, received 500 résumés every month from Charedi men looking to leave yeshiva and find work.

“In every single place where we've been campaigning, at least one Charedi man has come over to me and said that they’re fed up with the representatives from the Charedi parties, and that they will support Yesh Atid at the ballot box,” Lipman said.

US Solution to ISIS ...." give them jobs!"

No kidding! ....

Marie Harf sat down for an interview with Chris Matthews of MSNBC and the result was every bit as erudite as you could hope for. 
Video courtesy of NewsBusters:

http://www.mrctv.org/videos/mad-matthews-america-getting-humiliated-sounds-we-cant-stop-isis
After wringing his hands for a bit about how the foreign policy of his beloved Barack Obama didn’t seem to be doing much to slow the Islamic State down –

 “If I were ISIS, I wouldn’t be afraid right now!” – Matthews asked Harf, “Are we killing enough of them?”

Her answer will be studied by connoisseurs of blinkered stupidity for decades to come: 

“We cannot win this war by killing them. We cannot kill our way out of this war. We need in the longer term – we need the longer term to go after the root causes that leads people to join these groups.  Whether it’s lack of opportunity for jobs…”

“We’re not going to be able to stop that in our lifetime, or fifty lifetimes,” Matthews interrupted, a note of incredulity creeping into his voice. 

“There’s always going to be poor people. There’s always going to be poor Muslims, and as long as there are poor Muslims, the trumpet’s blowing and they’ll join.” 

But what he says to Harf is correct, and he shouldn’t be surprised by her answer at all. This is the world Matthews helped to build by doing his bit to park Barack Obama in the White House for eight years.

Obama's shameless Jewish cheerleaders

Obama's shameless Jewish cheerleaders by Issi Leibler While U.S. President Barack Obama determinedly pursues his policy of appeasement, which may enable the world's most dangerous terrorist state to become a nuclear threshold power, some Israelis and American Jews have initiated a campaign against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.  The campaign calling for the maintenance of bipartisanship toward Israel is in reality undermining the hitherto strong bipartisan congressional opposition to the catastrophic U.S. policy on Iran. Israeli opposition groups and the anti-Netanyahu media are now concentrating their efforts on discrediting and calling on the prime minister to cancel his address to the joint session of Congress scheduled for March 3. Disregarding the gravity of the negotiations with Iran -- the underlying reason for the invitation -- they accuse Netanyahu of destroying the U.S.-Israeli relationship by failing to obtain Obama's advance approval to address Congress (which would never have been forthcoming). The White House even falsely alleged that Netanyahu accepted the invitation before they were aware of it. Labor leader Isaac Herzog, in an irresponsible breach of propriety while attending a conference on security in Munich, slandered the prime minister, calling on "Bibi to act as a patriot … cancel his speech … which was born in sin … and not throw Israel's security under the bus of the elections." The timing of his comments were even more shameful as on that same day and in the same city U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry was meeting Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Zarif. Similar sentiments were echoed by other political leaders, whose primitive electioneering tactics display utter indifference and contempt for the repercussions on the greatest threat facing Israel. They warn that Israel would suffer serious ramifications if Netanyahu persisted in addressing Congress and demand that he postpone his address until after the elections -- when the "negotiations" will be over. They also accuse him of forcing Democrats to choose between supporting their president or undermining his policies, and thus destroying bipartisanship. That surely sends the wrong message to Congress about limiting Obama's actions. Worse still, it sends bad vibes to American Jews, reinforcing their inability to stand up and protest against Obama's hostile policies.  The White House, of course, uses this to discredit Netanyahu on the grounds that he is merely engaged in an electoral stunt. Truth be told, a failure by Netanyahu in this area could cost him the election. But Iran has genuinely been Netanyahu's greatest concern and without his intervention would already be a nuclear state. Israel remains the target for annihilation by the Holocaust-denying Iranians who brazenly repeat their determination to eradicate the "cancerous" Israel from the map. Yet Israel is marginalized by the P5+1 nations determining the outcome. Netanyahu regarded the invitation not only as a means to promote his case to Congress but also as a platform to convey his message to the entire world. But this is ignored by his Israeli political opponents who are more concerned with electoral populism than displaying a united front in the face of an existential threat. Yet Obama is on extremely shaky ground. Even the normally supportive Washington Post published an editorial warning him against presenting the world with a fait accompli over Iran's nuclear goals and granting them regional hegemony. It accused Obama of seeking "to avoid congressional review because he suspects a bipartisan majority would oppose the deal he is prepared to make." It is in fact Obama, not Netanyahu, who has made this a partisan issue, because of his fear that an effective presentation by Netanyahu at Congress could have a major impact on legislators and the public. It is this, rather than pre-election protocol, that explains the frenzied efforts and threats that the White House has engaged to discredit Netanyahu. Netanyahu's efforts are also being undermined by extreme left-wing groups like J Street, which call on congressmen to boycott his speech and launch petitions proclaiming that he does not represent the views of American Jews. This is buttressed by media court Jews like New York Times columnist Tom Friedman resurrecting the traditional anti-Semitic dual loyalties accusation, warning Jews that if they protest against Obama's policies on Iran, Americans will be convinced that Israel controls Washington, was responsible for the war in Iraq, and is now dragging the U.S. into another war. American Jews claim that they live in a unique democratic country and enjoy full equality. Yet, whereas most Americans have no hesitation in criticizing their president when they disagree with his policies, the traditionally feisty and outspoken American Jewish leaders seem fearful of criticizing their president even in the most respectful terms. This, even after Obama's repeated and crudely appalling behavior aimed at humiliating his ally, the Israeli prime minister, in direct contrast to his servility to representatives of rogue states including Iran. On this issue, most of the Jewish leadership establishment remained silent. This included the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, whose officials, according to the White House, privately distanced themselves from Netanyahu's visit. To his credit, Malcolm Hoenlein, the executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, was one of the few mainstream leaders stressing that Netanyahu's intention was neither to personally attack the president nor become engaged in U.S. domestic politics. Rather, it was to promote Israel's concerns about developments that it considers an existential threat and great danger to the world. But shockingly, a number of Jewish leaders also publicly slammed Netanyahu. Abe Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, went so far as to describe the issue as a "circus" and called on House Speaker John Boehner "to withdraw" the invitation and Netanyahu to rescind his acceptance. He was followed by Rabbi Rick Jacobs of the Reform movement, who said Netanyahu's speech was "a bad idea" and urged him "to bite the bullet and postpone his address" or he would "turn Israel into a partisan issue." This was outrageous. Who gave Foxman and Jacobs a mandate to challenge the decision of Israel's prime minister to appeal against enabling the Iranian terrorist state to become a nuclear state -- an act of appeasement that would dwarf Chamberlain's concessions to Hitler in Munich? Foxman's subsequent effort to modify his outburst by condemning J Street's "inflammatory and repugnant campaign" against Netanyahu did not detract from the damage he caused. Jacobs and Foxman may have convinced themselves that by seeking to avoid a conflict with their president, they were acting on the side of the angels. It was left to the hawkish Zionist Organization of America to bitterly condemn their intervention and make chilling parallels between their behavior and that of Rabbi Stephen Wise, who in 1944 urged Jewish leaders to cease campaigning to pressure the White house to intervene on behalf of the Jews in Europe in order not to embarrass President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Today, Netanyahu is desperately appealing to the world to prevent an evil apocalyptic Islamic terrorist state, committed to Israel's destruction, from becoming a nuclear power. Yet Foxman and Jacobs seem more concerned to placate their president. In making such negative statements, it is they who are transforming this into a partisan issue and providing enormous satisfaction to Iranian mullahs who undoubtedly appreciate their efforts. Shame on them! Not surprisingly, the White House exploited these outbursts as a means of encouraging Democrats to boycott the address. The president even shed crocodile tears bemoaning that Israel would become a partisan issue.  Conveniently, U.S. Vice President Joe Biden announced that he would be out of the country and unable to attend. Yet very few Democrats have indicated that they would absent themselves. Indeed, while unhappy with the timing, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi said she would attend, and dismissed calls for a boycott. Rep. Eliot Engel, the senior Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, also made it clear that he intends to hear what Netanyahu has to say. There is, in fact, a growing awareness that Obama's proposed deal represents a sellout to the Iranians. What were hitherto considered wild accusations that Obama was abandoning the traditional allies of the U.S. in order to enter into an alliance with the Iranians has now become a genuine concern. Netanyahu's speech from a U.S. Congress platform will undoubtedly enjoy massive media exposure and may bring public pressure on the P5+1 countries to refrain from committing an act that would have horrific implications not only for Israel but the entire world. Those committed to overcoming the global threat of Islamic fundamentalism and preserving the well-being of the Jewish state should pray that Netanyahu will succeed in his efforts. Isi Leibler's website can be viewed at www.wordfromjerusalem.com. He may be contacted at ileibler@leibler.com.

Bochrim block traffic to celebrate release of Draft Dodgers, VIDEO

3 of the released draft dodgers

Watch the "brimmed up hatters" and "fancy glasses" dance in the streets blocking traffic .... frustrating those running to  "Chap the Daf," or grab a bite, running to get a glimpse of their children before they go to bed!
Just in case you are wondering what your Bochur does at night, watch the video below, and see your Tzaddikel block people, cars and buses, that are trying to get home after a hard days work! 
Hey Eligible Girls, looking to get married? Watch your future husband leave his night seder and be "mevateil Torah"  to dance in the streets... 

Watch your "Ben Torah" discard "Ve'uhavtah Le'riacha Kamoicha" so he can have a good time at the expense of people sitting in cars, whose wives are waiting for them to come home!

Notice that there isn't 1 "working guy"
 dancing....
I wonder why?

The video below is from THEYESHIVAWORLD blog, 

MK Eichler ignores "Satmar" and Calls for All Jews to vote in this "Holy War"

Satmar wants to pay each non-voter $100.00.  On the other side of the spectrum, MK  Eichler wants All Jews to vote and is calling for a "Holy War" against the "haters of Torah."

MK Eichler

Both, Satmar & Eichler claim that they are representing "daas Torah"
So which is it? 
Confused? .... don't be, both shitas are not daas Torah. 
Daas Torah is to vote for Likkud! You heard it here first!
But at least MK Eichler is asking people to be part of the process and vote, even though, the only reason he is calling for people to vote is to hold on to his seat. 
He is screaming against the "high cost of apartments" but he has been sitting in the Knesset for years, and it never seemed to bother him until now  .... now that he is afraid of losing his seat, he came out of hibernation to yell!
Better late than never!


Speaking at an election rally in Kiryat Gat, MK Yisrael Eichler called on the chareidi tzibur to wage a holy war in the upcoming elections for 20th Knesset. He added that “A half million haters of Torah did not ask me when they voted for Yesh Atid, motivated by their hate and jealousy running to the polls in their war against chareidim”. - 

Eichler continued with an attack against the “evil government” and the cost of apartments, cost of living while most of the money goes to pay the government clerks and unacceptable cultural events. “They pass evil gezeiros against Torah and those who study and against tenokos shel beis raban. All the more reason that we must wage a holy war in elections without any other considerations”.

“As is the world practice he who asks in the time of war what will I profit from this fire will soon be defeated in battle and fall captive to his enemies” Eichler warned. “After years of evil government each chareidi voter must become active and bring at least one addition vote for Yahadut Hatorah. This is how we can correct the damage done to Yiddishkheit in all aspects of life”.

“Pharaoh and his troops came to the Red Sea to battle Israel, united in the mission. Amalek exhibited mesirus nefesh. The eternal response is kabolas Torah with mesirus nefesh, all united”, stated Eichler.