Reprinted with permission.
מאגר זה פועל באופן אוטומטי, על ידי שליחת מייל, אתה מקבל את הספר תוך דקות ספורות חזרה לתיבת המייל שלך.
בחר את הספר הרצוי, ושלח מייל וכתוב בשורת הנושא את הכיתוב המופיע בצידו. שים לב לדייק, כל אות מיותרת, מעכבת.
הכתובת לשליחה וקבלה – COM.GMAIL@A548483320
מצווה לפרסם
חשוב להביא מידע זה לציבור הרחב, אפשר לבטל כל דו”ח קורונה כל עוד וזו פעם ראשונה. פשוט עושים במנוע חיפוש ‘גוגל’ “משטרת ישראל דוחות קורונה” ממלאים פרטים ותוך כמה ימים הם מעדכנים אם הדו”ח בוטל. מנסיון אישי, כתבתי שזו עבירה ראשונה שלי וביטלו לי את הדו”ח. אחרי הבקשה אפשר לבבר אם בטל בוואטסאפ של משטרת ישראל במספר 0506110110.
שי (ירושלים)
נשלח אלינו ע”י אחד הקוראים.
An influential friend of the site tried to involve a certain high-up “Gadol” on behalf of Hyehudi’s NetFree ban. This person, after hearing something of the site’s views, requested to hear about Hyehudi’s stance on ascending Har Habayis. I responded, loud and clear. And… that was the end of that, of course. NetFree blocks Rabbi Yitzchak Brand’s site for this very reason.
It’s one thing to oppose restoring the Temple, which begins by conquering it with our footsteps, but quite another to censor any and all contrary views. In Charedi society, one cannot send one’s children to the best schools unless one first signs a paper proclaiming the parents don’t own “uncensored” internet (even if the children have zero access). The basic standard acceptable to the Thought Police is either NetFree or Nativ (the latter is easily hacked, by the way).
I empathize with Hashem: “Nobody likes me, everybody hates me, I think I’m going to…” How is He Whose Name Dwells In This Building ever to get His home back without nullifying our free will?!
This Rosh Yeshiva (almost my own) is a “comrade of Yeravam ben Nevat”!
Taanis 28a:
תנו רבנן מה הן בני סלמאי הנתופתי אמרו פעם אחת גזרה המלכות גזירה על ישראל שלא יביאו עצים למערכה והושיבו פרוזדאות על הדרכים כדרך שהושיב ירבעם בן נבט על הדרכים שלא יעלו ישראל לרגל מה עשו יראי חטא שבאותו הדור הביאו גזיריהן ועשו סולמות והניחו על כתפיהם והלכו להם כיון שהגיעו אצלן אמרו להם להיכן אתם הולכים אמרו להם להביא גוזלות משובך שלפנינו ובסולמות שעל כתפינו כיון שעברו מהן פירקום והביאום והעלום לירושלים ועליהם ועל כיוצא בהם הוא אומר זכר צדיק לברכה ועל ירבעם בן נבט וחבריו נאמר ושם רשעים ירקב.
Yalkut Shmuel 1:8, 106:
ויאמר ד’ אל שמואל שמע בקול העם. תני ר’ שמעון בן יוחאי אומר לא אותך מאסו כי אותי מאסו וכו’ בשלשה דברים עתידים למאוס, במלכות שמים, ובמלכות בית דוד, ובבנין בית המקדש, אימתי מאסו שלשתם בימי ירבעם, הדא הוא דכתיב ויען איש ישראל ויאמרו אין לנו חלק בדוד זו מלכות שמים, ולא נחלה בבן ישי זו מלכות בית דוד, איש לאהליו ישראל ולא לבית המקדש אל תקרי לאהליו אלא לאלהיו.
א”ר סימון בר מנסיא אין ישראל רואין סימן גאולה לעולם עד שיחזרו ויבקשו שלשתם, הדא הוא דכתיב אחר ישובו בני ישראל ובקשו את ה’ אלהיהים זו מלכות שמים, ואת דוד מלכם זו מלכות בית דוד, ופחדו אל ה’ ואל טובו זה בית המקדש.
By the way, there many such topics I am too affected to write about. I wait until somebody else approximates my message, and let them say it for me (though this makes me seem less fervent on the matter).
Thursday, July 2, 2020, 12:27
The owners of the “Tzivei HaKeshet” printing house appealed to the Be’er Sheva District Court regarding the ruling by Be’er Sheva Magistrates Court Judge Orit Lipschitz which obligates them to compensate the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), specifically Israel’s LGBT Task Force associated with it, known as “The Aguda”, for discrimination. The owners of the printing house were required to pay The Aguda the sum stipulated in the suit and also the maximum compensation set by law. In the appeal the printing house owners claim that they acted in accordance with the freedoms of religion, conscience and trade, and point out the flaws in the court ruling.
The appeal was filed by Honenu Attorney Menashe Yado, who wrote that the fundamental question in the case is, “Is it appropriate and is it possible to compel a religious business owner to produce a product contrary to his beliefs, his values, his sensitivities, and the commandments of his religion?” Also the court ruling faced the appellants with the dilemma of either earning an income or following the Torah.
Yado stated that the court ruling “creates secular coercion according to the LGBT narrative and imposes it on religious people, and that is a severe and precedential violation of the freedom of religion and trade in the private sector.” He explained that the Be’er Sheva Magistrates Court erred in its interpretation of the anti-discrimination law being as in the case of the printing house there was no discrimination: the place in question is not a public place, the service requested was not a public service, the matter did not involve a product or the supply of a product, but rather the matter pertained to providing a service.
The appeal claimed that the right of the appellants not to perform a service contrary to their beliefs – such as when an issue involves tension between social groups based on the rights of an individual – is the right of the religious public as a whole. Additionally, the Be’er Sheva Magistrates Court erred when it did not consider the freedom of trade of the appellants and their freedom of religion and also did not consider the halachic opinion which they submitted.
Concerning the principle of tolerance, the appeal claimed, “It is obvious that butcher shop owners would not order design work from a vegetarian designer, members of the ‘No’am’ political party would not request printing of ‘Man + Woman = Family’ fliers from a printing house owned by LGBT owners, right-wingers would not print fliers in memory of Rahavam Ze’evi, z”l, at a Muslim Arab printing house and a bereaved parent would not be required to provide stage services for an evening in joint memory of Israeli and Palestinian victims.”
In the appeal Yado mentioned a similar ruling handed down in the USA concerning a Christian baker who refused to bake a wedding cake with male figurines for a homosexual couple. There the court ruled that with all due respect to desire of the couple to receive recognition, it was not possible to force someone to give them the recognition at the expense of his sensitivities and his conscience. “There must be tolerance for the values, the beliefs and the sensitivities of others, in this instance those of a religious person.”
The summary of the appeal states that the Be’er Sheva Magistrates Court compelled the appellants to violate religious prohibitions and that the court erred in its decision to convict the appellants of discrimination against the respondent, because there had not been discrimination but rather ideological opposition.
Honenu Attorney Menashe Yado, who is representing the appellants, the printing house owners: “The appeal is supported by strong and sound claims and we hope and believe that the [Be’er Sheva] District Court will accept our claims and overturn the ruling handed down by the [Be’er Sheva] Magistrates Court.”
“We reiterate that approximately two months ago a court ruling was handed down concerning the refusal of a printing house in Be’er Sheva to produce material for the LGBT association on the Ben Gurion University campus. The association emailed a request for a price estimate for printing material. In response, the printing house emailed a warning not to send them abhorrent material: ‘We do not handle abhorrent material; we are Jews,’ and refused to print the requested material. The Association for Civil Rights in Israel sued the printing house owners and the Be’er Sheva Magistrates Court convicted them of discrimination. The owners have filed an appeal on the decision, and we hope that our claims will be accepted.”
Honenu: Support the printing house!
Immediately after the Be’er Sheva Magistrates Court ruling Honenu distributed fliers – see image above – calling on the public to support the printing house: “Today, in the Jewish State, a printing house that refused to print fliers which violated Jewish law and their faith, was fined over 50,000 NIS [50,00 NIS to the plaintiffs in addition to legal expenses] by the court!! This is the price of keeping mitzvot in the State of Israel.
“Following the publication of the scandalous ruling we have received many requests for information from citizens interested in assisting the business owner who was fined. Whoever needs quality printing services is invited to place an order.”
Shmuel (Zangi) Meidad, the director of Honenu: “Today, unfortunately a court in Israel crossed a line. What is left for us is the People of Israel, solidarity, and mutual assistance. ‘They helped every one his neighbor; and every one said to his brother: “Be strong”.’ (Isiah 41:6) The Torah and faith in G-d were here long before the court and they will be here forever.”
Monday, July 6, 2020
As we have lifted the lockdowns, we move closer and closer to whatever the “new normal” may be. Those have been clamoring for extended lockdowns worry that the lockdowns have been lifted prematurely. The New York Times dismally lamented about a gloomy picture. The Los Angeles Times analogize the spread of COVID-19 to a forest fire. One of the main metrics that lockdown proponents have used to try to justify either returning to lockdowns or prolonging reopening provisions is that of increased confirmed cases. As we see below (figures extracted from Johns Hopkins website on July 5), the number of confirmed cases has reached 52,391. The percent of positive cases has also increased to 7.6% from its 4.4% trough. Dr. Anthony Fauci called last week “a very disturbing week” in terms of this increase. While it might make some intuitive sense to use number of confirmed cases as basis for whether the pandemic is getting worse in the United States (especially relative to other countries), I have some reasons to doubt that assertion.
From Libertarian Jew, here.