Saturday, January 5, 2019

No, Mexico isn't paying for border wall through USMCA trade deal, despite Donald Trump's claims

another failed campaign promise



President Donald Trump campaigned on the promise that Mexico would pay for a border wall, yet stands firm on his call to U.S. lawmakers to provide money to construct it. All while also claiming that Mexico is already paying for the barrier.
"Mexico is paying for the Wall through the new USMCA Trade Deal. Much of the Wall has already been fully renovated or built. We have done a lot of work. $5.6 Billion Dollars that House has approved is very little in comparison to the benefits of National Security. Quick payback!" Trump tweeted Jan. 2.

73 comments :

  1. Torah thought on this week’s parsha בא
    “So Moses and Aaron were brought back to Pharaoh and he said to them, Go, worship the Lord your God! Who are the ones to go? Moses replied, We will all go, young and old: we will go with our sons and daughters, our flocks and herds; for we must observe the Lord’s festival. But he said to them, The Lord be with you the same as I mean to let your children go with you! Clearly, you are bent on mischief. No! You menfolk go and worship the Lord, since that is what you want. And they were expelled from Pharaoh’s presence.” (Exodus 10:8-12).
    Pharaoh asks who exactly is to go? This is a normal request since festivals in Egypt were kept by the whole population. Pharaoh replies ironically.
    שמות פרק י פסוק יא
    לֹא כֵן לְכוּ נָא הַגְּבָרִים וְעִבְדוּ אֶת יְקֹוָק כִּי אֹתָהּ אַתֶּם מְבַקְשִׁים וַיְגָרֶשׁ אֹתָם מֵאֵת פְּנֵי פַרְעֹה:
    רש"י שמות פרשת בא פרק י פסוק יא
    לא כן - כאשר אמרתם להוליך הטף עמכם אלא לכו נא הגברים ועבדו את ה':
    כי אתה אתם מבקשים - כי אותהח בקשתם עד הנה (שמות ה ח) נזבחה לאלקינו, ואין דרך הטף לזבוח
    מלבי"ם שמות פרק י פסוק יא
    לא כן לכו נא הגברים וכו' כי אותה אתם מבקשים. בקשה זו הוא מענין תפלה, ר"ל הלא אתם הולכים לבקש אותה היינו את הרעה שהיא נגד פניכם תלכו לבקש ולחלות אותה לבקש מלפניה רצון שהרעה בל תרע לכם [כמו בצאנם ובבקרם ילכו לבקש את ה' [הושע ה'] לבקש את ה' צבאות [זכריה ח']] וא"כ איך תקחו את הטף:
    The Malbim says that Pharaoh advises Moses and Aaron to seek the Lord that the sign that Pharaoh saw of blood and killing not harm them, as in Hosea 5 and in Zachariah 8:
    “Then they will go with their sheep and cattle To seek the Lord לבקש את ה', but they will not find Him. He has cast them off: [Because] they have broken faith with the Lord, Because they have begotten Alien children. Therefore, the new moon Shall devour their portion.” (Hosea 5:6-7)
    “Thus said the Lord of Hosts: Peoples and the inhabitants of many cities shall yet come—the inhabitants of one shall go to the other and say, Let us go and entreat the favor of the Lord, let us seek the Lord of Hosts לבקש את ה' צבקות; I will go, too. The many peoples and the multitude of nations shall come to seek the Lord of Hosts in Jerusalem and to entreat the favor of the Lord. Thus said the Lord of Hosts: In those days, ten men from nations of every tongue will take hold—they will take hold of every Jew by a corner of his cloak and say, Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you.” (Zacharia 8:20-23).
    Today in America, many Jews have begotten alien children. Here in Israel, G-d is with us. Hosea 5 applies to America and Zachariah 8 to Israel. Another reason rabbis in the US must teach more of the importance of Aliyah.

    ReplyDelete
  2. He's using the word "pay" in the way someone might say, "You'll pay for that remark!" He's putting the hurt on them in other ways by driving for tough trade agreements, etc.

    Donald Trump is an honest man. He may play around with the truth, but if you live in the Trumpian Universe, that is honest behavior. You just have to get used to it. Get in the habit of interpreting and parsing what he says. Seriously.

    ReplyDelete
  3. How do you reconcile what you wrote with fag marches in Tel Aviv?

    ReplyDelete
  4. You are being ridiculous. That is not at all what he meant. He meant that through his amazing negotiating skills he will get them to actually pay for it. And he probably believed that he would do that. He is as divorced from reality as the vast majority of his supporters.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 6, 2019 at 2:34 PM

    you think they don't have them in USA? USA is where all this started, unfortunately it has become a pgam, where they don't seem to have freewill anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 6, 2019 at 2:36 PM

    In any case, most Orthodox rabbis encourage homsosexual bahaviour, because they think it is more acceptable than heterosexual behaviour, for those who are single. Some even practice pederasty.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Joseph Orlow says “How do you reconcile what you wrote with fag marches in Tel Aviv?”
    “Hear this, O priests, Attend, O House of Israel, And give ear, O royal house; For right conduct is your responsibility! But you have been a snare to Mizpah And a net spread out over Tabor; For when trappers dug deep pitfalls, I was the only reprover of them all. Yes, I have watched Ephraim, Israel has not escaped my notice: Behold, you have fornicated, O Ephraim; Israel has defiled himself! Their habits do not let them Turn back to their God; Because of the lecherous impulse within them, They pay no heed to the Lord. Israel’s pride shall be humbled before his very eyes, As Israel and Ephraim fall because of their sin (And Judah falls with them). Then they will go with their sheep and cattle To seek the Lord, but they will not find Him. He has cast them off: [Because] they have broken faith with the Lord בה' בגדו, Because they have begotten Alien children כי בנים זרים ילדו. Therefore, the new moon Shall devour their portion. (Hosea 5:1-7).
    Fag marches in Tel Aviv – awful – no comparison to adultery, one of the 10 commandments... The K-G heter, ORA, Agunah International and such can lead to adultery. My argument with SCOTUS is that Judge Prus overstepped his authority to approve the fake/phony 1995 Rigler Order of Separation. Rabbis Kamenetsky, Greenblatt, ORA etc overstepped their authority to approve fake/phony documents to nullify a marriage. Did Judge Prus want his son to marry Susan? Rabbis Kamenetsky, Greenblatt wanted Tamar to marry her lover without a divorce... That’s adultery. “Because they have begotten Alien children כי בנים זרים ילדו. Therefore, the new moon Shall devour their portion.”

    ReplyDelete
  8. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 6, 2019 at 3:35 PM

    Technical adultery might not be the same as real cheating adultery. Perhaps in biblical times there was a mechanism for a woman to Grant a divorce or for a prophet to annul the marriage .

    Homosexual behavior has similar status to adultery.

    ReplyDelete
  9. IN OTHER WORDS YOU CAN ONLY UNDERSTAND HIS WORDS BY TWISTING THEM!
    IS ENGLISH HIS NATIVE LANGUAGE OR DO YOU NEED TO FIND A TRANSLATOR?

    ReplyDelete
  10. In all seriousness, a Trumplation translation app on phones would go a long way towards uniting the country.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Reality and I are happily married and she says, "Hi!"

    ReplyDelete
  12. if you are saying you are married to Trump
    it sounds like time for divorce

    ReplyDelete
  13. (Bli Neder) Never! Even ORA can't separate me from my allegiance.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "most Orthodox rabbis encourage homsosexual bahaviour (sic)"???
    What are you smoking? Orthodox? "Most"???,

    ReplyDelete
  15. According to Torah Law, there is NO mechanism for a woman to grant a divorce to her husband.

    Nor is there a special mechanism for a prophet to annul a marriage. If there is halachic grounds for it, then any Beis Din can do so. If there are insufficient halachic grounds for an annulment, then even a prophet as great as Moshe Rabbeinu would not be able to pull off an annulment.

    Male-male homosexual behavior carries a much more severe form of death penalty over adultery. Whereas adultery "merely" gets חנק, homosexuality "earns" סקילה for those engaging in it.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 8, 2019 at 2:04 AM

    Are you a prophet? Do you know all the Torah that was known in biblical times?

    Gerald is suggesting otherwise, because he argues it's in the 10 commandments.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 8, 2019 at 2:08 AM

    Most orthodox forbid contact with females, correct?
    They do permit physical contact with males and social contact in all male situation, yeshiva.
    Homosexual means same - sex (Greek for same). Hence homosexual behavior. Also, heterosexual thought is assur, which can only lead to other forms of sexual thoughts.

    ReplyDelete
  18. The Trump campaign released a detailed plan how Mexico would pay for the wall. They said they would ban undocumented people from sending wire transfers, thereby threatening the money Mexican laborers send back to their families. If Mexico would pay for the wall, the U.S. would cancel the ban. This is publicly available information.
    His administration had 2 years when they were in full control of the government and could have enacted this plan if they wanted. They did not, because Trump would much prefer to have the wall as a talking point to rile up his base then to have an actual wall, which would be 99% pointless.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I note, that the term "homosexual behavior" usually refers to SEXUAL contact between the same sex.
    https://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual_behavior

    According to Torah Law, male-male contact is only permitted if it doesn't have any sexual undertones. If all that you were referring to is regarding platonic behavior, then I apologize.

    ReplyDelete
  20. If I must say so myself, I'm quite well versed in most areas of Torah Law, which includes the Torah that was known in Biblical times. I'm not a prophet, but I know the rules applying to prophets and to the annulment of marriages.

    According to many commentators (Ibn Ezra, Chizkuni, Sforno) לא תנאף does not ONLY mean "Do not commit adultery". It also includes any type of prohibited sexual acts.

    According to the Talmud (Niddah 13b) the verse also includes proscribes male masturbation.
    תנא דבי רבי ישמעאל "לא תנאף", לא תהא בך ניאוף בין ביד בין ברגל
    Rashi (ibid.)
    ביד - מוציא זרע לבטלה
    [See also Bach (EH 23, s.v Assur)].

    ReplyDelete
  21. IsraelReader says “If I must say so myself, I'm quite well versed in most areas of Torah Law...” May I show here my letter today?
    1.I request permission to submit these papers concerning my motion 2018 - 1149 12/10/2018. I'm attaching an affidavit of service proving I mailed by UPS a true copy to Susan.
    I attach: 1) Exhibit A: Jerusalem Court to Rabbi Ralbag 1/21/1993.
    2.Allow me to show here my Etrack cases:...
    3.Exhibit A: Jerusalem Court to Rabbi Ralbag 1/21/1993 shows that indeed Susan was under the jurisdiction of the Jerusalem Court. Why? Rabbi Ralbag was Susan's friend in many feminists matters of forcing gittin on recalcitrant husbands. Rabbi Ralbag knew that Susan would never leave America and I would never leave Israel. Allow me to quote Kethuboth 110b Soncino translation:
    Mishnah. [a man] may compel all [his household] to go up [lit., cause to go up] [with him] to the land of israel., but none may be compelled to leave it. All [one's household] may be compelled to go up [lit., cause to go up] to Jerusalem [from any other Palestinian place], but none may be compelled to leave it. [this applies to] both men and women [A wife also may compel her husband to live with her in Jerusalem or the Land of Israel and, if he refuses, she is entitled to demand a divorce and the payment of her kethubah.]. If a man married a woman in the land of Israel and divorced her in the land of Israel, he must pay her [her kethubah] in the currency of the land of Israel. If he married a woman in the land of Israel and divorced her in Cappadocia he must pay her [her kethubah] in the currency of the land of Israel [The Cappadocian coins were dearer than the corresponding ones of the Land of Israel.]. If he married a woman in Cappadocia and divorced her in the land of Israel, he must a gain pay [her kethubah] in the currency of the land of Israel. R. Simeon b. Gamaliel, however, ruled that he must pay her in the Cappadocian currency. If a man married a woman in Cappadocia and divorced her in Cappadocia, he must pay her [her kethubah] in the currency of Cappadocia.

    4.Rabbi Ralbag knew well that Jewish law is that a man may compel his wife to leave America and live with him in Jerusalem. All of Susan's court actions in NYS were nonsense and a waste of time. Certainly the rabbinic court in Jerusalem had jurisdiction over the 2/17/1993 divorce/get. I quote the Bible: “The first to plead his case seems right Till the other party examines him” (Proverbs 18:17).
    IsraelReader, are you Rabbi Ralbag?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 8, 2019 at 5:18 PM

    hugging a girl vs hugging a guy

    ReplyDelete
  23. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 8, 2019 at 5:24 PM

    Even if you are a Posek HaDor, that does not mean you know Torah like King Solomon or King David did. You only know how recent poskim interpret the Law, but you do not really know how they interpreted it 3000 years ago.

    Do you think that in Biblical times they had a shulchan aruch, and minhagim? Did they concern themselves with wearing kippot, nagelwasser etc? It was a completely different Torah then. So yes, in terms of the current Shulchan Aruch based halacha, you are probably correct - but that does not mean they followed shulchan aruch in Biblical times.

    ReplyDelete
  24. It's great sport those rallies where we get riled up. The wall itself is really pointless. It's just a way to score points over the pro-open borders crowd.

    ReplyDelete
  25. In the literal sense of the word, you would say that a guy hugging a guy is technically "homosexual" behavior, since it involves two people of the same sex.
    I argue that we need to look at the intent of the hugging. If it was for sexual reasons, then it would be prohibited.

    Hugging a girl who is not related to you, is prohibited in any situation, regardless of intent.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negiah

    ReplyDelete
  26. Don't introduce red herrings like kippot and negel-vasser.

    The discussion is exclusively regarding a woman to granting her husband a divorce, or regarding a prophet annulling a marriage.

    Regarding the above issues, I believe that the Torah we have today is exactly as Hashem commanded us at Sinai.

    As spelled out in Devarim 24:1-2, a married couple is released from the bonds of matrimony through the transmission of a bill of divorce from the husband to the wife. There is absolutely no Biblical mechanism for a woman to grant a divorce to her husband.

    Once that point is established, we continue to the next point, which is that a prophet may not transgress Torah law, or create "new" laws.
    (שבת ק"ד ע"א)
    "אלה הדברים, שאין הנביא רשאי לחדש דבר מעתה"
    (תורת כהנים סו"פ י"ג)
    "אלה המצוות, אין נביא רשאי לחדש עוד דבר מעתה"

    There is no Biblical source that a prophet has special authority to override Devarim 24:1-2.

    ReplyDelete
  27. There is no "pro-open borders" crowd.

    ReplyDelete
  28. No. I'm not Rabbi Ralbag, nor am I his spokesperson.
    Please don't mix me into your issues with Susan.
    If you have a point in Halacha that you would like to discuss, I can try to help you.

    ReplyDelete
  29. IsraelReader says “No. I'm not Rabbi Ralbag, nor am I his spokesperson. Please don't mix me into your issues with Susan.If you have a point in Halacha that you would like to discuss, I can try to help you.”
    I just spoke with NYS Ct of Appeals. All my letters go before all the judges. Thursday is the next decision release date. If my motion 18-1149 is on the list Thursday, then they will return my letter today, follow IsraelReader? Note that I quote the Mishna in Yevamouth to the judges in my letter today. Do you think it helps my case? Truth is I don’t take NYS court matters seriously. Should I?
    Torah thought on this week’s parsha בא
    “And the Lord said to Moses, I will bring but one more plague upon Pharaoh and upon Egypt; after that he shall let you go from here; indeed, when he lets you go, he will drive you out of here one and all. Tell דבר נא באזני העם the people to borrow, each man from his neighbor and each woman from hers, objects of silver and gold.” (Exodus 11:1-2).
    רש"י שמות פרשת בא פרק יא פסוק ב
    דבר נא - אין נא אלא לשון בקשה, בבקשה ממך הזהירם על כך שלא יאמר אותו צדיק אברהם (בראשית טו יג) ועבדום וענו אותם קיים בהם, (שם יד) ואחרי כן יצאו ברכוש גדול לא קיים בהם:
    “And He said to Abram, Know well that your offspring shall be strangers in a land not theirs, and they shall be enslaved and oppressed four hundred years; but I will execute judgment on the nation they shall serve, and in the end they shall go free with great wealth ברכוש גדוך.” (Genesis 15:13-14).
    The great wealth G-d promised Abraham was the Torah on Mount Sinai. The Jews then didn’t know Torah, but did know of G-d’s promises to Abraham. Objects of silver and gold are not great wealth to Jews that keep Torah. There is a message that G-d keeps his promises however we interpret them.
    Follow, IsraelReader? I’m not after gold and silver. I never was.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 8, 2019 at 7:45 PM

    ", I believe that the Torah we have today is exactly as Hashem commanded us at Sinai."

    Really? I think that's a misreading of the Rambam 13 ikkarim.
    Read Rav Yaakov Weinberg s book on the 13 principles.
    There is no Torah master scroll from 3300 years ago for us to compare with. It used to be with the kohen gadol, but sadly we no longer have it. Even the Hebrew script we use is not the same.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Do you think that Devarim 24:1-2 was not in the original Torah from Hashem?
    Do you believe that a prophet has special authority to override explicit verses in the Torah?

    ReplyDelete
  32. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 8, 2019 at 8:47 PM

    Gerald, you keep asking people on here if they are ralbag or other characters in your personal drama. Please try to separate your private life from discussions that unconnected persons on here are having. Follow?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 8, 2019 at 8:52 PM

    Yes I do believe in bereishis all the way to Devarim.
    WHAT was Moses? A prophet.
    What did he do regarding daughters of tzelophachad? He asked via Nevuah to override existing Torah law.
    So, it is possible that a later prophet, or shofet , or Kohen gadol with urim vtuvtumim could likewise ask a question.

    ReplyDelete
  34. No laws were "overridden" in the case of the daughters of Tzelafchad.
    Hashem merely broadened the inheritance of the Land of Israel to include them, and laid down the parameters for the chain of succession in various cases of inheritance [Bamidbar 27]. All this became part of the canon of Torah.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 8, 2019 at 9:26 PM

    You cannot discuss Torah interpretation over the ages without discussing how both methodology and halachic changes over time.
    Those examples show how Halacha changed historically.
    I have no proof, I'm just saying its possible there were other solutions in the past.

    ReplyDelete
  36. there is no open border crowd it is s just another of Trump's a alternative facts

    ReplyDelete
  37. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 8, 2019 at 9:33 PM

    This was a change in the law based on perception of injustice. Had the daughters not made such a fuss , it might not have changed. Torah itself tells us to go to the shofet or kohen when we cannot resolve something locally. The point being, the Torah is speaking about life after the giving of the Torah. Why do you think we have shofetim, as per the sefer? If a problem arises that the rabbis in bnei brak cannot solve, you go to the shofet or kohen. Do you accept that verse in the Torah?

    ReplyDelete
  38. The case of the daughters of Tzelafchad is not "after the giving of the Torah". It's PART of the Torah, and nothing was overridden.
    Going to the shofet or kohen is for getting clarification regarding obscure areas of Torah, not for getting a pass to override the Torah.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I'm not discussing "Torah interpretation over the ages".
    I'm addressing the very specific cases that you alleged.
    They are not dependent on "interpretation". They are pretty explicit verses.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 8, 2019 at 10:20 PM

    Up until the request of the daughters of Tzelophachad, the Torah law was inheritance to the males.

    In Bamidbar 27, we see their petition, and G-d's answer:

    7 'The daughters of Zelophehad speak right: thou shalt surely give them a possession of an inheritance among their father's brethren; and thou shalt cause the inheritance of their father to pass unto them.

    You don't like the word "override", but instead you suggested Hashem "broadened" the existing Torah law.

    The fact that this took place during Moses' time is irrelevant, since the right and commandment to petition the L-rd continues after the completion of the Humash of Moses, via the navi or the Kohen or the Shofet.

    If, there was an agunah who could not get a divorce from her husband, and she did petition, eg via the navi, it is up to Hashem to answer. It would not "override" the divorce laws, and according to your terminology, would "broaden" them to allow the woman to give the get. that is still an if, since I do not have evidence this was ever asked, nor that it was ever granted. however, the possibility remains.

    "Going to the shofet or kohen is for getting clarification regarding obscure areas of Torah, not for getting a pass to override the Torah."


    Or for injustices or circumstances not specified in the existing Torah.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 8, 2019 at 10:23 PM

    Hugging a girl is prohibited, hence it is pererting the natural behaviour of healthy men - which in an all male environment can lead to homosexual perversion.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 8, 2019 at 10:33 PM

    Everything is dependent on interpretation. the fact that the Torah mentions a Book of Kritut does not mean there are no other ways the divorce can take place.

    How do you know that there was no other interpretation in Biblical times? All we can infer from Devarim 24 is that whereas a woman who remarries, cannot return to her former husband after divorcing the subsequent husband, this does not apply to a man who marries a second woman and then wants to return to his first wife.

    Rambam's MT Mamrim 2:1.

    בֵּית
    דִּין הַגָּדוֹל שֶׁדָּרְשׁוּ בְּאַחַת מִן הַמִּדּוֹת כְּפִי מַה
    שֶׁנִּרְאָה בְּעֵינֵיהֶם שֶׁהַדִּין כָּךְ, וְדָנוּ דִּין, וְעָמַד
    אַחֲרֵיהֶם בֵּית דִּין אַחֵר, וְנִרְאָה לוֹ טַעַם אַחֵר לִסְתֹּר אוֹתוֹ
    הַדִּין--הֲרֵי זֶה סוֹתֵר, וְדָן כְּפִי מַה שֶׁיֵּרָאֶה בְּעֵינָיו:
    שֶׁנֶּאֱמָר "אֶל-הַשֹּׁפֵט, אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם" (דברים יז,ט)--אֵין אַתָּה חַיָּב לָלֶכֶת, אֵלָא אַחַר בֵּית דִּין שֶׁבְּדוֹרָךְ.


    therefore, there is no limitation on a Beit Din gadol on reinterpreting Torah and halacha the way they see fit. this is also logically true fo the Kohen gadol and shofet.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I told you it is your Klipois talking!

    ReplyDelete
  44. Correct ! Indisputable!

    ReplyDelete
  45. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 8, 2019 at 10:59 PM

    blah blah berel - you are not acquainted with the Rambam. Are you rejecting what Rambam says here? Berel Apikores!

    ReplyDelete
  46. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 8, 2019 at 11:02 PM

    That's why you attack the Arizal, the Rambam, the Ramban, Rav Chaim Vitale, etc. because of someone's "klipos".
    Does Rambam use the term "klipos"?

    ReplyDelete
  47. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 8, 2019 at 11:04 PM

    It is indisputable, then it is also disputable - if another BD learns differently

    ReplyDelete
  48. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 8, 2019 at 11:46 PM

    In the torah, Bamidbar 27, Hashem says "7 'The daughters of Zelophehad speak right: thou shalt surely give them a
    possession of an inheritance among their father's brethren; and thou
    shalt cause the inheritance of their father to pass unto them."


    Hos so? how can daughters , who are am haartzim, speak right, to the already established torah law?



    IR says this is the Torah - but it was after they petitioned.
    Follow, Gerald, IR, Berel?

    ReplyDelete
  49. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 9, 2019 at 12:29 AM

    IR said "The case of the daughters of Tzelafchad is not "after the giving of the Torah"."
    It is after the Giving/receiving of Torah at Sinai, which was approx 50 days after Yetziat Mitzrayim. From the context of Bamidbar, this is well after Matan Torah - it is on the plains of Moav, before entering EY.

    Not trying to play semantics with you - the point being that this is a case where a lowly petition from daughters of a sinner, affects the final form the Torah Law.

    ReplyDelete
  50. I theorize that someone coming from a secular background, where he was used to being physical with women, and is now thrust into abstention, might be more tempted to satisfy his cravings with what’s available; men.

    Whereas people who were religious from birth, and never experienced active sexuality, will not be as tempted to be sexually physical with another male.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Torah was being given to B'nei Yisrael for 40 years, and the stories that happened during those years became part of the Torah.
    At the end of Moshe's life, Torah was sealed, and nothing could be added or changed.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Rambam does not refer to negating explicit verses.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 9, 2019 at 1:41 AM

    Berel, this is your kelipos:



    "Moshe Ayre Friedman, an Austrian rabbi, argued that the figure of six
    million Jewish dead had come from a prophecy by Theodore Herzl, founder
    of modern Zionism, long before the second world war. He said recent
    research suggested the true figure was about one million. "Politically
    and historically, the land of Palestine doesn't belong to the Jews and
    should be returned to Palestinians," he said."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/dec/12/iran.israel


    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5aae9fdfbbb083600ab6c1bfe1ec99e4ee859c302d7c2b39ce4b78819085f45d.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  54. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 9, 2019 at 1:50 AM

    Berel, here are the people you associate with

    https://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/8215911

    Contents


    Address by H.E. Rabbi yisroel Dovid Weiss from Neturei Karta

    Orthodox Jewish attitude to the Holocaust / Rabbi Ahron Cohen

    The victories of revisionism / Robert Faurisson

    Material evidence, documentary evidence, and eyewitness testimony in the Holocaust controversy / Jurgen Graf

    The Holocaust-Shoah in time & space, not memory / Fredrick Toben

    The untold story of men of Jewish descent who served in Hitler's Wehrmacht and Waffen-Schutz Staffel / Veronica Clark

    The Nazi gas chambers : rumours, lies, and reality / Alexander Baron

    Our mission : to disrupt the global slander and help build a more honest world / George Theil

    The Holocaust demography / Jan Bernhoff

    A philosopher looks at the Holocaust / Patrick Henry McNally

    The Israeli Mossad role in the JFK assassination conspiracy / Michael Collins Piper

    The Holocaust, the Achilles' heel of an ancient Jewish Trojan / Tarik Ahmed

    The geopolitical environment of the Holocaust myth / Alfonsos Pangas

    Israel : the doomed Zionist project / Mohammed A. Hegazi

    Freedom of speech and the Holocaust / David Duke

    Ashkenazi warriors : liberalism, Holocaust, and the war on Muslims / Shiraz Dossa

    The Holocaust debate in Danish media, 1998-2006 / Christian Lindtner

    The Islamic looking-glass of sacrifice & offering / Leonardo Alaeddin Clerici

    The irrational vocabulary of the American professorial class with regard to the Holocaust question / Bradley R. Smith

    Freedom of speech / Michele Renouf

    The Holocaust, the Zionists' insiduous benchmark for war atrocities / Matthias Chang

    Freedom of speech and the stance of Holocaust deniers in the west / Peter Topfer

    Holocaust and black propaganda / Bernhard Schaub

    Genocide and Holocaust : from philosophic ideas to inhuman practice / Victor Nadein-Raevskiy.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 9, 2019 at 2:19 AM

    I agree with you. When did circumcision become part of the Torah for example? Why didn't Moshe circumcise his sons, or in fact the whole Israelite people in the Midbar? But that is going off in a tangent.



    At the same time the Torah tells us to go to High Priest or High Court to deal with areas we cannot get answers to.

    I maintain that there may have been solutions to problems we cannot solve today. You are saying that the halachic solutions we have today were also the only ones we had 3000 years ago. But how can you prove your statement? (i cannot prove mine either).



    BTW, when King David's wife was taken by another man, how comes he was permitted to take her back? She was actually married to another man!

    ReplyDelete
  56. You !attack The Whole torah . You are a Klipah

    ReplyDelete
  57. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 9, 2019 at 2:20 AM

    really, why is there so much child abuse in the frum world then?

    ReplyDelete
  58. Only a BD that is Greater in Number or chochmah

    Today not Possible too much KLipos!

    ReplyDelete
  59. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 9, 2019 at 2:21 AM

    you are totally nuts. and nuts have a very hard klipah!

    ReplyDelete
  60. Kfirah!
    Go back to Aish Hatorah for a few years!
    or go to the Zahal

    ReplyDelete
  61. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 9, 2019 at 2:22 AM

    i'm not talking about today, you have not been following the discussion, so you have entered into the wrong end of the stick.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 9, 2019 at 2:24 AM

    Rambam is kfirah? who are you to say so? imbecile!

    ReplyDelete
  63. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 9, 2019 at 2:25 AM

    how do you define what is explicit?

    He is saying that a different BD might use midot to interpret things differently from a previous BD. That is all I am saying.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 9, 2019 at 2:27 AM

    Zahal? No, it is shmad! hhhaaa

    ReplyDelete
  65. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 9, 2019 at 2:32 AM

    berel, do you know who your friends are?

    ReplyDelete
  66. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 9, 2019 at 2:36 AM

    ד וּדְבוֹרָה אִשָּׁה נְבִיאָה, אֵשֶׁת לַפִּידוֹת--הִיא שֹׁפְטָה אֶת-יִשְׂרָאֵל, בָּעֵת הַהִיא.




    .


    ה וְהִיא יוֹשֶׁבֶת תַּחַת-תֹּמֶר דְּבוֹרָה, בֵּין הָרָמָה וּבֵין
    בֵּית-אֵל--בְּהַר אֶפְרָיִם; וַיַּעֲלוּ אֵלֶיהָ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל,
    לַמִּשְׁפָּט.


    You see, the halacha as we have today was not the same as it was 3000 years ago. Today Orthodoxy does not permit women rabbis, dayanim, or poskim. In the Tenach times it did.

    ReplyDelete
  67. That is total nonsense. The Rambam rules explicitly (Mamrim 1:2) that that condition applies only to gezeiros and takanos, not to derashos.

    ReplyDelete
  68. It says in the verse that a sefer kerisus works. The idea that only that works is a derasha.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 9, 2019 at 12:05 PM

    Greater in numbers is regarding fences, as Yehoshua points out. Raavad does not accept this, showing how yochanan b. Zakkai cancelled a gezeira. HaMeiri says that when the reason disappears, the gezeira disappears, no bd required.
    I'm talking about Bible times, eg Devorah was Eim beit din! Not allowed in meah reform shearim.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 9, 2019 at 1:17 PM

    Almonds and walnuts have really tough kelipos. Sunflower seeds not.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Kalonymus AnonymusJanuary 9, 2019 at 4:37 PM

    You cannot entertain the possibility of having an Eim Beis Din - not possible in Eidah, and not possible in Tehran, with your Amalek kin.


    However, for those of us who do accept the Neviim, we had an Eim Beis Din 3000 years ago!

    ReplyDelete
  72. the above people are not Jews, they are Muslim and pseudo muslims.

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.