As Political Deadlock Leaves Israel Without Chief Rabbis, High Court Sets September Deadline
Israel's
Chief Sephardi Rabbi Yitzchak Yosef (left) and Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi
David Lau at a Western Wall
Israel’s High Court of Justice on Thursday ordered a committee
responsible for choosing the country’s Chief Rabbis to convene and fill
positions left open by a political stalemate.
For the first time in the country’s history, Israel is without Chief
Rabbis after Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi David Lau and Sephardic Chief Rabbi
Yitzhak Yosef’s 10-year terms expired on July 1.
The Chief Rabbinate has jurisdiction over issues of personal status,
such as marriage, divorce and conversions, as well as burials, kosher
certification, holy sites, rabbinical courts and religious seminaries
known as yeshivas. The Chief Rabbis often represent Israel abroad as
well.
Chief rabbis, including for local municipalities, are elected by an
election assembly consisting of 80 rabbis representing local religious
councils and 70 public officials representing the Knesset and local
authorities. By law, replacements are supposed to be elected at least 21
days before the end of their term.
The assembly also appoints local rabbinic authorities as well as
members of Chief Rabbinate Council, which oversees the rabbinate’s
day-to-day affairs.
The High Court instructed the assembly to meet by September 30.
The chief rabbis, local rabbis and public officials on the national
and local levels each select a certain number of members to the
assembly. But disagreements over the assembly’s makeup persisted and the
Ministry of Religious Affairs never convened the assembly.
A vote was originally supposed to be held in August 2023. But the
Knesset postponed the vote, at the behest of Religious Affairs Minister
Michael Malkieli who argued that the timing would interfere with
municipal elections scheduled for October 31. Critics accused Malkieli
of trying to get individuals onto the assembly with more favorable views
of certain candidates. The municipal elections were postponed to
February when war with Hamas broke out.
Matters became more complicated when the Attorney General said both
Rabbis Lau and Yosef could not be involved in selecting members of the
statutory body over conflicts of interest.
Both come from rabbinic
families and have brothers seeking positions in the rabbinate, raising
accusations of nepotism. Rabbi David Lau’s father, Rabbi Israel Meir
Lau, was Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi from 1993-2003. Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef’s
father, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, was Chief Sephardi Rabbi from 1973-1983.
In another twist, the High Court of Justice in January ruled that
women were under-represented in the election assembly and ordered the
Chief Rabbis to include women among their selections.
No clear front runners to replace Rabbis Lau and Yosef have emerged.
Josh Shapiro quotes Rabbi Tarfon in statement about not being Kamala Harris’ VP pick - My faith teaches me that no one, no one is required to complete the
task, but neither are we free to refrain from it. That means that each
of us has a responsibility to get off the sidelines, to get in the game
and to do our part.”
Now, after losing the battle to be Kamala Harris’ running mate,
Shapiro has turned to the same adage, attributed to Rabbi Tarfon, a sage
who lived nearly 2,000 years ago.
“Since I first ran for State Representative 20 years ago, I’ve been
called to serve because I want to leave our community, our Commonwealth,
and our country better off for our children – and because my faith
teaches me that no one is required to complete the task, but neither are
we free to refrain from it,” Shapiro, who is Jewish, said in a statement Tuesday morning, following reports that Harris had chosen Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her vice presidential nominee.
The quotation
— “It is not your duty to finish the work, but neither are you at
liberty to neglect it” — is generally taken as a reassurance to those
facing monumental or seemingly unreachable goals. It has become a
mainstay of Jewish activist circles across the political spectrum.
Shapiro’s statement came after a two-week period when he was thought to be one of the frontrunners in Harris’ veepstakes.
By Monday, he and Walz were reportedly the final two contenders. The
distinction between them had been framed as a choice between one
swing-state governor — Shapiro — with a reputation for centrism and
bipartisanship, and another — Walz — with a folksy demeanor and cachet
with the party’s progressive wing.
Rumors that Shapiro was the leading candidate ignited a campaign by progressives to sink his bid,
focused on his support for Israel, his criticism of pro-Palestinian
college student protesters, and his positions that buck Democratic
norms. Several of Shapiro’s Jewish allies, noting that Walz also has a
pro-Israel record, suggested that the anti-Shapiro effort was
antisemitic. No parallel anti-Walz campaign emerged in the public eye.
He added, “As I’ve said repeatedly over the past several weeks, the
running mate decision was a deeply personal decision for the Vice
President and it was also a deeply personal decision for me.”
He congratulated Walz and his wife, whom he referred to as “Tim and
Gwen,” and whom he called “good friends of ours.” He wrote that Harris
“has my enthusiastic support,” and he pledged to campaign for her in
Pennsylvania, seen by many analysts as a must-win state. He said he
would appear at a rally with Harris later on Tuesday in Philadelphia,
where she will publicly appear with Walz as her running mate.
Shapiro took office at the beginning of last year, and recommitted in
his statement to serving as Pennsylvania’s governor, referring back to
the Rabbi Tarfon passage.
“Pennsylvanians elected me to a four-year term as their Governor, and
my work here is far from finished there is a lot more stuff I want to
get done for the good people of this Commonwealth,” he wrote. “In just
19 months, we’ve made a meaningful, positive impact in peoples’ lives,
and I’m proud of how Americans all across the country have taken notice
of what we’re accomplishing here.
Rejoining IDF, Ex-Envoy Michael Oren Warns: ‘We’re Fighting the Wrong War’
Former Israeli Ambassador to the US Michael Oren in IDF uniform.
Israel’s former Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren has
traded his diplomatic credentials and suits for a dog tag and combat
uniform by joining an Israel Defense Forces (IDF)
rapid response counter-terrorism unit in a northern kibbutz, warning
that the fall of the embattled north would pose the most significant
threat to Israel’s central heartland.
Oren recently returned from Washington, DC, where he accompanied a
delegation of displaced Israelis from the north for a series of talks
and high-level meetings in the US capital. The former envoy criticized
Biden administration officials for lacking adequate answers for the
evacuees they met with, implying they expected the evacuees to simply
accept living in close proximity to a terror threat.
“No one is going to go back to living, say, in Metulla, which is
literally a war zone with 150 houses destroyed and with Hezbollah on the
other side of the fence,” he said, referring to the powerful
Iran-backed terrorist organization in Lebanon. Oren cited army estimates
that as much as 40 percent of Israel’s evacuated north, numbering some 80,000 people, would not return home in the event of a ceasefire with Hamas in Gaza.
“We now know what terrorists on the other side can do to Israelis,” he added.
Oren asserted that Israel was misdirecting its focus with the
fighting in Hamas-ruled Gaza to the south, investing its manpower and
resources against the wrong enemy. “We’re fighting the wrong war. We
should focus our main energy on the north, which is a strategic threat.
Hamas was and is a tactical threat. It’s not going anywhere.”
Hezbollah, which wields significant military and political influence across Lebanon, has been firing drones, missiles, and rockets at northern Israel daily
since October, when the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza began. The onslaught
has forced Israelis living near the Lebanon border to flee to other
parts of the country for safety.
Oren assailed the response by world leaders and global press to last
week’s targeted assassinations of Hezbollah commander Fuad Shukr in
Beirut and Hamas terror chief Ismail Haniyeh
in Tehran, and rejected claims that the killings would make hostage
negotiations tougher and foil the chances for regional quiet.
“The reaction of the world was extraordinary. By eliminating two mass
murderers, they’re saying Israel has jeopardized peace. You can’t make
this stuff up,” Oren said. “What foils the chances for a hostage
agreement [with Hamas] and for regional stability is not standing up to
terror and not fighting.”
“Leaders of the United States and the world should thank Israel for
eliminating the murderer of not just Israelis, and of Palestinians, but
the murder of Americans,” he added.
Oren rejected claims that Israel was not operationally or logistically prepared for a full-scale war with Hezbollah,
asserting that Israel had untapped resources ready for deployment. “We
have conventional means that we’ve never used before, and we could use
them now, like our submarine force,” he said, declining to elaborate
further.
Kobi Levy, a resident of Kfar Blum who is part of the rapid response
team alongside Oren, hailed the former envoy’s decision to dust off his
uniform for the first time in over a decade. Oren fought in the First
Lebanon War in 1982 in the Paratroopers Brigade.
According to Levy, many lawmakers and politically-affiliated groups,
including the Brothers in Arms anti-government protest group, have
briefly visited the kibbutz for what he termed “photo ops and empty
promises.”
Oren, he said, “came with all his heart to listen. To us, the people
of the north. He’s the only politician who understands exactly what the
residents want.”
Levy also said that Oren wasn’t above doing whatever was needed for
the team, from early morning drills to overnight guard shifts. He
predicted that Oren, who also served as a deputy minister in Israel’s
19th Knesset, had a “bright future” ahead of him should he make a return to Israeli politics.
Asked if such a scenario was on the cards, Oren was coy. “Whether in a
suit or a uniform, I’ve always been about service to our country and
our people, and I’ll continue serving in any way I can.”
Former Israeli Ambassador to the US Michael Oren in IDF uniform.
For the meantime, Oren was happy to be the “oldest guy by far” in the
rapid response squad. “I knew that if I wanted to advocate for the
north, I needed to see it firsthand,” he said.
That experience has led him to discover things he would never
otherwise have known. One example he gave is the lack of financial
support for Kfar Blum, which was not evacuated by the IDF and therefore
receives no compensation. More than 60 percent of the kibbutz’s
residents have self-evacuated, including Levy’s own family which
evacuated only last week over fears of a reprisal after last week’s
double assassination. The kibbutz, once known for being the cultural
center of the north with several music festivals, has hosted thousands
of soldiers passing through in the past ten months of war, and
authorities have yet to pick up the tab, Oren said. “They do it with
love of course, but even just the water bill is a tremendous burden on
this community.”
“I’m deeply impressed by the people here and their commitment to the north and to Israel,” he said.
“I’m not being sentimental; they are the embodiment of the Zionist
ideal,” Oren added. “But the sense is that they’ve been forgotten.”
He Took His 68-Year-Old Secret to Court and Finally Confronted His Ghost
By the time Robin Davis testified at trial, nearly everyone involved in the events that led to his lawsuit was dead.
AN ABBREVIATED VERSION OF THE NYT ARTICLE:
The
79-year-old man sat silently in the back of the courtroom on Long
Island, 20 miles from his home in Queens. He wore a dark suit over his
slim frame, as if back at his old offices in Manhattan’s financial
corridors, at Merrill Lynch and Bank of America and other blue-chip
firms.
Here the man, Robin Davis,
settled in for what promised to be a strange trial in this mostly empty
room. His lawsuit centered on the actions of a person long dead. His
adversaries were Long Island bureaucrats who had never heard of that
person or his reported misdeeds.
Generations
had passed since the terrible acts that Mr. Davis described in his
lawsuit, a dark stretch of weeks 68 winters ago, during the first
Eisenhower administration. In this courtroom in 2024, he faced lawyers, a
judge, a jury of strangers and a ghost who had haunted him for the
better part of seven decades.
A ghost who had made him — for good and for bad — what he is today.
Mr.
Davis had long been widely known for his philanthropy on behalf of one
cause: fighting child abuse. Twenty-five years ago, he created a charity
to raise money in the business community to fund boots-on-the-ground
agencies in New York City and beyond that sought to treat and prevent
the abuse of children.
Now, the trial would reveal the answer to a question about the charity that he’d been asked many times: Why? Why child abuse?
But the real reason he’d devoted himself
to this singular cause would be made public in this courtroom in
Mineola, when he could speak about what had happened when he was 10
years old and a new coach arrived at his school’s gymnasium.
He
knew the poster boy for child abuse, all right. That boy had stared
back at him in the mirror, ashamed, every day for going on 70 years.
‘I never got the words out’
Rob
Davis was a student at the public Caroline G. Atkinson School in the
Village of Freeport when, in the fifth grade, he brought home a
permission slip to join an evening basketball clinic at the school. His
mother signed it, and the boy showed up on the first night, short and
scrawny and hardly able to throw a basketball with enough force to reach
the basket.
But
a coach he’d never seen before, Vernon Alleyne, was encouraging, and
praised him when Rob finally made a basket. The coach offered him a ride
home later and pulled over around the corner of the school to give him
candy, Mr. Davis recalled in sworn testimony and in an interview.
“‘Have
you ever seen a big man’s penis?’” Mr. Davis recalled that the coach
asked. “I said, ‘My father.’ He said, ‘Well, we’re going to be friends.
I’d like you to see mine.’”
The coach
went on to touch the boy’s privates and, later, during a series of
escalating encounters in the same car, parked in the same spot, forced
him to perform oral sex, Mr. Davis said.
During
the weeks of abuse, the coach gave the boy money to buy himself candy,
and Mr. Davis said he ate so much that he developed a mouthful of
cavities that made his father, a spendthrift facing new dental bills,
angry.
No one realized that his mouthful of decay was a clue that something was wrong. It was the only clue. Because he said nothing.
“I never told my mother and father,” he said in an interview. “I never got the words out of my mouth.”
And for the rest of his life, he has lived with guilt and shame over that silence.
“He
never got caught,” he said of the coach. “Because of me, how many
people did that guy nail? Because I didn’t tell my mother? That’s
crushing to me.”
But all along, he carried a thinly hidden
obsession. It was understandable, even noble. But it was
self-destructive. He could not tolerate any situation in which he
believed someone — especially a child, but anyone, really — was being
mistreated or treated unfairly. Or, of course, abused.
His
revulsion to it was physical, as if he was trying to compensate for his
inaction that winter when he was a 10-year-old boy who did not speak up
when it mattered. As an adult, he spoke up all the time.
During
his brief career teaching, he became convinced that three of his
fourth-grade students were probably being abused at home. He reported
his suspicions to the school nurse and the principal. We’ll handle it,
he was told. But he didn’t stop there.
Taking the stand
In
2019, the New York State Legislature passed the Child Victims Act,
which allowed a window during which victims of childhood abuse could sue
those they felt were responsible, regardless of whether the statute of
limitations had passed. Thousands of lawsuits were filed, many involving
abuse dating back to the 1990s, the 1980s and earlier.
Mr. Davis decided it was time to go public: “It’s just a way of trying to get even with life a little bit.”
His
lawsuit in 2021 would become among the oldest on file, with the abuse
having happened in 1956. As a result, the case brought unique
challenges.
“Do you have any
documentation or paperwork regarding this basketball program?” Mr. Davis
was asked during the deposition in 2022.
“I don’t.”
The
trial began on July 17. Freeport officials said they had found no trace
of a Vernon Alleyne coaching basketball or anything else in the 1950s,
and only a few mentions of him in old payroll ledgers in the early
1960s.
Vernon Alleyne is not a
defendant in the case, and no one was called to testify on his behalf.
Little was revealed about the man besides a home address on an old
payroll entry, on Colonial Avenue in Freeport. Public records indicate
that a man with that name who once lived at that address died in 2008.
Mr.
Davis took the witness stand and faced the jury to tell his story. He
explained how the details of the abuse returned to him in his dreams,
and said that only exhausting himself by running and bicycling long
distances eased his anxiety. He said he is haunted by the fact that he
didn’t speak up.
“I could not get the
words out,” he testified. “It’s horrifying, the fact I didn’t tell my
mother — it would have stopped him in his tracks. She knew the police,
she knew everybody in town.”
A
psychologist hired by Mr. Davis’s lawyers testified about the effects of
trauma on a person. The judge paused testimony when he noticed a juror
sleeping and called for a coffee break. But Mr. Davis, listening in
court, was riveted.
But he kept his own story a secret. He told The New York Times
in 2007 that his interest in the area emerged from his brief time as a
teacher. “There are so few big organizations that do child abuse work,”
he said in that interview. “There’s no poster child for the movement,
because it’s such a painful subject.”
He later renamed the charity Help For Children. Now 25 years old, it has given away some $61 million and has chapters in five countries.
A verdict, and an absolution
After
a weeklong trial, the jury reached a verdict. It found that Mr. Davis
had been molested by Mr. Alleyne. But it also found that the Village of
Freeport was not responsible for or liable for what had happened.
Mr. Davis had wanted to hit the village in its wallet to send a message. Instead, he left court crestfallen.
“That
seems to be the height of irresponsibility,” he said while driving home
to Queens. His lawyers, Jared Scotto and Nicholas Wise, had asked for
whatever financial damages the jurors found appropriate, and their
answer was zero.
Mr. Davis said he’d hoped to pump whatever money he was awarded into the charity.
But
something else had happened during that trial, something that felt to
him like a different kind of verdict. It was during the dry testimony of
the psychologist, Valentina Stoycheva, which had put a juror to sleep.
She
had been explaining that besides the familiar “fight or flight”
responses to trauma, there is another — “The three F’s,” she called
them.
“The ‘freeze’ response,” Dr.
Stoycheva said. “Which is, basically, your nervous system tells you stop
whatever else you are doing, just endure, just survive, just make sure
you get through this.”
Mr. Davis, listening, silently wept into his hand.
That
single word, “freeze,” was like a pardon, handed down upon a
10-year-old boy who had lived with the weight of having said nothing. To
the 79-year-old man he became, that word swept in feelings altogether
new to him. Absolved. Not guilty.
“That
was something of — relief is the wrong word. But explanation,” he said
later. “I’ve never been able to explain that, even to myself.”
He drove toward home, the city skyline before him, the village and the parked car and the ghost at his back.
Is Israel too passive in waiting for the Iranian response?
Israel faces a tense period
of anxiety and preparation, reminiscent of 1967, as it braces for
potential retaliation from Iran and Hezbollah after recent high-profile
assassinations.
DAVID RUBINGER’S iconic photo of the IDF paratroopers at the Kotel during the Six Day War in 1967.
One of the most tense periods in Israeli history was the three weeks preceding the Six Day War in 1967, a period known as the “waiting period” or tekufat hahamtana.
This
was a period of anxiety, uncertainty, and preparation within Israel as
the country faced the imminent threat of an all-out regional war. Egypt had closed the Straits of Tiran, an act of war, and the rhetoric from the Arab lands was chilling.
Only
19 years old and isolated internationally, there was genuine concern
that the country might not survive. Anxiety was palpable, with mass
graves being dug in parks as a grim precaution.
This
anxiety-filled period ended on June 5, 1967, when Israel preempted its
enemies, destroying the Egyptian Air Force on the ground in a matter of
hours and changing the course of history.
That
period comes to mind today as the country is again gripped by
apprehension, waiting for a response from Iran and Hezbollah – either
together, separately, or with other non-state actors in the “axis of
resistance” – to the twin high-profile assassinations last week of
Hezbollah’s Chief of Staff, Fuad Shukr in Beirut, and Hamas’s leader,
Ismail Haniyeh, in Tehran.
An anti-Israel billboard is seen next to the Iranian flag
It
would be wrong to say that the country is panicking – it most
definitely is not. Brisk sales on home generators, bottled water, canned
tuna, and salami are signs of preparedness, not panic.
Panic
comes in the form of people clamoring to leave the country, refusing to
leave their homes, or seeing daily life come to a standstill. That is
not what Israel is experiencing.
It is, however, experiencing anxiety. And who can blame it? With Hezbollah
and Iranian leaders threatening retaliation and with the media full of
endless speculation about what kind of retaliation to expect and when,
the nervousness is understandable.
The
question, however, is whether similar anxiety is being felt in Beirut
and Tehran. Are they, too, stocking up on tuna, bottled water, and
salami? Are they wondering when Israel will hit, how, and from what
direction?
If not, why not?
Something
about the current situation feels off. Two arch-terrorists are
eliminated – one in Beirut with a US-issued bounty on his head, the
other in Tehran without Israel even claiming responsibility – yet Israel
is the one adopting a defensive posture, what is called in Hebrew,
konnenut sfiga, bracing for an attack.
Instead
of Israel being in a defensive posture for eliminating the terrorists,
Beirut and Tehran should be the ones worried – since they harbored them.
Even
more than this period being reminiscent of the tekufat hahamtana, it is
reminiscent of early April after Israel killed Islamic Revolutionary
Guard Corps commander Mohammad Reza Zahedi in Damascus when Israel
braced for an Iranian response that came in the form of over 300 drone,
cruise, and ballistic missiles fired at the country.
Watching
television broadcasters announce on a Saturday night in mid-April when
the drones, missiles, and rockets were scheduled to arrive was like
monitoring the arrival screen at Ben-Gurion Airport. It was a bizarre
feeling: you saw a bullet headed in your direction and just prayed that
the country’s defenses would work and the bullet would either be
intercepted or miss its mark. In other words, someone was trying to kill
you, and you just prayed they would not succeed.
One
problem with the current situation is that it engenders a feeling of
powerlessness among the population: waiting for the second shoe to drop,
waiting for the inevitable.
But
Israel is far from powerless. Rather than just waiting to see what
happens – or how many people are killed – before responding, it should
already be projecting its power. If it does not want to exacerbate the
situation or is being held back by the US from taking further action,
the country should at least make it clear that any type of attack will
be met with immediate and overwhelming force. Planning for such a
response should, as it certainly is, already be well underway.
This
time the threats need to be backed up with immediate action, not, as
has been the case up until now, with empty rhetoric from Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, or Chief of Staff
Herzi Halevi about “sending Lebanon back to the Stone Age” – threats
issued so often it is doubtful anyone takes them seriously. This time,
the response needs to be immediate and devastating.
PROJECTING
POWER is also crucial for the country’s morale. Israel is not helpless.
It has one of the strongest militaries in the world. The population
needs to be reminded of this and see it to maintain psychological
well-being. Feeling powerless is detrimental, and this defensive crouch
in the face of Iranian and Hezbollah threats saps morale.
The
hit on Shukr came only after 12 children and youth were killed by
Hezbollah rocket fire at Majdal Shams. Only after this atrocity was
Shukr assassinated, and that reinforces a bad pattern: if an attack is
“successful” and causes casualties, Israel responds; if not, it will let
it slide.
This
approach is flawed. Had Israel acted to destroy Hamas’s capabilities
after the terrorist organization fired countless rocket attacks since
2001, rather than waiting for a mass casualty event before responding,
the current situation might have been quite different.
Why are we on the defensive?
It
is a mistake for the country to be in this defensive crouch. It sends
the wrong message to Israel’s enemies and to its own people.
That said, there are similarities and differences between the current waiting period and the one that preceded the Six Day War.
First,
in 1967, there were doubts about whether the Israeli army could
withstand a coordinated attack by neighboring Arab states. Today, while
there is concern about potential damage, there is greater confidence in
the army’s ability to manage the threat.
Israel’s
military capabilities were more limited in 1967; today, it has a much
mightier force and the most formidable missile defense system in the
world.
Second,
in 1967, Israel felt completely isolated in the world, especially after
Egypt demanded the removal of UN peacekeeping forces from Sinai, to
which the UN acquiesced. There was also skepticism about the level of
support Israel could expect from the world.
Today,
the US has sent warships to the region to assist Israel in batting
drones, rockets, and missiles out of the sky, as it did in April.
Additionally, there is coordination with a regional defense alliance
established after the Abraham Accords under the leadership of the US
Army Central Command (CENTCOM). This represents a significant regional
alliance.
Finally, there’s a significant difference in the nature of the existential threat facing Israel now compared to 1967.
Back
then, there was a genuine fear that a war could lead to Israel’s
destruction – that enemy armies would invade, conquer, and eradicate the
Jewish state. Today, while Israel still views itself as engaged in an
existential battle, the immediacy and nature of the threat have changed.
The
current concern is not that an immediate attack by Iran, Hezbollah, and
their allies would destroy the state outright, at least not until Iran
gets nuclear capabilities. Instead, the fear centers on the potential
for a prolonged war of attrition if Israel fails to decisively defeat or
deter its enemies now. Such a war could gradually grind down the
country, making life increasingly difficult for its citizens, destroying
the economy, and threatening Israel’s long-term viability.
This
persistent threat – also an existential one – demands proactive
measures. Israel cannot afford to wait passively for attacks. The
country must take preemptive action or respond swiftly and decisively to
secure its future and survival.
HaRav Zilberstein: “Attack Was Near An Area Of Chillul Shabbos B’Farhesiah”
FROM YWN:
HaGaon HaRav Yitzchak Zilberstein, a member of the Moetzes Gedolei
HaTorah and the Rosh Kollel of Beis Dovid in Holon, published a special
letter of chizzuk after the murderous terror attack in Holon at the request of the city’s residents who wanted his Daas Torah on the tragedy.
“To my dear and beloved brothers and friends,” HaRav Zilberstein
wrote. “We are shocked and pained by the tragedy that befell our city of
Holon, the murderous attack by a heinous terrorist today, Sunday
morning, erev Rosh Chodesh.”
“And each one of us should examine our deeds, why this happened in
our city, why Hashem is showing His anger. Chalilah that we should point
fingers at who we think is responsible for the tragedy. Instead, each
person should think that it is because of him and his sins that this
terrible tragedy happened. Like Yona HaNavi said: כי יודע אני כי בשלי
הסער הגדול הזה עליכם” (יונה א-יב) – despite the fact that Yonah could
have blamed all those who worshipped avodah zara who were on the boat
with him, he blamed only himself!”
“And seemingly, since it was right after Motzei Shabbos Kodesh, and
right near a place where public Chillul Shabbos takes place, in our many
sins – the Shabbos HaKedoshah is pained by the Chillul Shabbos and we
must appease it and be mechazeik in shemiras Shabbos.”
“And therefore every one of us should be mechazeik in Shemiras
Shabbos, at home and on the street, and influence those around him in
Shemiras Shabbos. And each person should learn at least two halachos of
hilchos Shabbos every day.”
“ובזכות החיזוק בשמירת השבת, נזכה לברכת השבת, וכדברי רבינו אברהם אבן עזרא “כי אשמרה שבת א-ל ישמרני”, ונזכה לגאולה בקרוב. אמן”.
AG says army must also draft full-time yeshiva students, not just working Haredim - זה מה שמקבלים הגאונים על התעסקות עם הציונים
IDF’s decision to begin ultra-Orthodox draft with
those not studying Torah full-time is legally problematic and
constitutes ‘selective enforcement,’ argues deputy Gil Limon
Protesters
clash with police outside an army recruitment conference for young
ultra-Orthodox Jews in Tel Aviv, July 30, 2024.
The Attorney General’s Office on Wednesday instructed the Israel
Defense Forces to expand its mobilization of ultra-Orthodox men to
include full-time yeshiva students and not only those members of the
Haredi community who do not study Torah, and who are part of the
workforce.
Earlier this month, the IDF announced that it would begin the process of conscription for 3,000 ultra-Orthodox men aged 18-26 in the wake of last month’s High Court ruling that service exemptions, which were previously granted to Haredim, were illegal. The first thousand went out on July 21 and the military is preparing to send out its second batch.
Ahead of this unprecedented mobilization, the IDF asked the National Insurance Institute social security agency to provide it with the employment details of young ultra-Orthodox men who are eligible for military service.
According to the army, the first batches to be mobilized include men
who have jobs, are enrolled in institutions of higher education, or hold
driver’s licenses — indicators that they are not engaged in full-time
yeshiva studies despite having received previous exemptions to study.
In a letter to the IDF, Deputy Attorney General Gil Limon stated that
the military “must act immediately to implement the ruling on the
recruitment of yeshiva students who are required to do military service,
in accordance with the needs of the army and its capabilities,”
according to a copy obtained by the Kikar Hashabbat news site.
According to Limon, “the High Court determined that at this time,
there is no legal infrastructure to prevent the enlistment of Haredi
yeshiva students and the state must act to enforce the provisions of the
Security Service Law in their case.”
The Haredi religious and political leadership would fiercely resist
and protest any effort to draft mainstream yeshiva students — and it
appears that the military intended to first send conscription orders to
men who were not involved in yeshiva study as a way of putting off open
conflict with the Haredi community.
However, according to Limon, such an approach is legally problematic
and failure to recruit yeshiva students while drafting working Haredim
“would amount to selective enforcement.”
The Finance Ministry has also warned that enlisting working ultra-Haredim into the army would damage efforts to integrate them into the labor market.
Israeli soldiers from the ultra-Orthodox
Netzah Yehuda Battalion attend a swearing-in ceremony at the Western
Wall in Jerusalem’s Old City, July 10, 2024
According to the Israel Democracy Institute, at least 22 percent of ultra-Orthodox yeshiva students under the age of 26 are illegally employed, in violation of the terms of their exemption from military service.
These exemptions were vacated by the court’s recent decision,
however, and the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee is
currently debating how to regulate yeshiva students’ ability to engage
in academic study and join the workforce as part of a controversial
enlistment bill under discussion.
Addressing the committee earlier this month, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said that the military currently requires some 10,000 new soldiers
but can only accommodate the enlistment of an additional 3,000
ultra-Orthodox this year, due to their special needs, which would be in
addition to the 1,800 Haredi soldiers who are already drafted annually.
Many ultra-Orthodox Jews believe that military service is
incompatible with their way of life, and fear that those who enlist will
be secularized. Israelis who do serve, however, say the decades-long
arrangement of mass exemptions unfairly burdens them, a sentiment that
has strengthened since the October 7 Hamas attack and the ensuing war,
in which hundreds of soldiers have been killed and over 300,000 citizens
called up to reserve duty.
According to a Smith Consulting poll
presented to the Knesset State Control Committee this month, while 72%
of ultra-Orthodox respondents oppose mobilizing Haredim at age 18 like
all other Jewish Israelis, 59% indicated — to one degree or another —
that the creation of service tracks which would allow them to maintain
their lifestyle would have a beneficial effect on overall enlistment
numbers.
The poll showed 22% of Haredim believed that establishing Haredi
units would increase enlistment by a small degree, while 27% indicated
that they believed it would boost recruitment to “a certain extent but
not by much.” A further 10% said it would increase enlistment to “a
large extent.”
On Tuesday ultra-Orthodox protesters, chanting “To jail and not the
army,” clashed with police outside an IDF enlistment conference in Tel
Aviv.
Global news outlets and anti-Israel activists reacted curiously to the news of the killing of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh on Wednesday, mourning for the terrorist mastermind and labeling him as “moderate.”
In the early morning hours of Wednesday, an explosion killed Haniyeh,
the Palestinian terrorist group’s political chief, while he was staying
in Tehran, the Iranian capital city, for the inauguration of the
country’s new president.
No country or group has claimed responsibility for the strike that
killed Haniyeh, but Hamas and Iran blamed Israel, which has remained
quiet about the attack. Some observers have argued the strike could
result in regional escalation and make it harder to secure a deal to
release the more than 100 hostages still held by Hamas and reach a
ceasefire in Gaza. Others argued it established a certain level of
deterrence and will incentivize Hamas to come to a deal soon.
Regardless, many journalists and anti-Israel activists were quick to lionize Haniyeh, who was placed on the US State Department’s Specially Designated Global Terrorists list in 2018, and castigate Israel.
The American writer and activist Shaun King described
the assassination as “murder” at the hands of the United States and
Israel. “I must admit that I am furious, because they [Israel] murder
people with impunity. It’s absurd. But you can never destroy a people
who do not believe that death is the end.”
King also said that he admired Haniyeh for negotiating with Israel.
“He was working hard, day and night, on the ceasefire even though these
genocidal monsters had murdered his own kids and grandchildren. I never
understood how he had such strength to push forward. But he knew and
said that he was no different than the average Palestinian who has lost
so much.”
As the Hamas terror group’s political chief, Haniyeh has become known for his role in recent Gaza ceasefire negotiations
“In the face of this, Brother Ismail remained steadfast to Islam and to a free Palestine,” King said.
Palestine Action US, one of the biggest anti-Israel groups in the
country instrumental in organizing pro-Hamas protests, reposted a person
on its Instagram story expressing that they are “genuinely in tears” at
the news of the death of Haniyeh.
More mainstream groups also had striking reactions to the news.
Yolande Knell, BBC’s Middle East Correspondent, described Haniyeh as “moderate and pragmatic.” Meanwhile, Sky News’s Alex Crawford told viewers on air that the terror leader is “very moderate.”
The Wall Street Journal‘s news story on the strike — written
by Rory Jones, Omar Abdel-Baqui, and Summer Said — labeled Haniyeh as
“Hamas’ leading advocate for a Gaza cease-fire,” seemingly suggesting
that the long-time terrorist, who reportedly has close links with Hamas’
military wing and has been involved in attacks against Israeli
citizens, is an agent for peace.
The top quote in the Journal‘s story is from a Hamas
official, who said, “They [Israel] didn’t just kill Ismail Haniyeh …
They are killing peace in the Middle East.”
Zahra Billoo, the executive director of the San Francisco Bay Area office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR),
wrote on X/Twitter that “tonight, we mourn Ismail himself but know his
martyrdom is not in vain. From the river to the sea, Palestine will be
free.”
She also quoted a line from the Quran
in reference to Haniyeh, which read, “Never say that those martyred in
the cause of Allah are dead — in fact, they are alive! But you do not
perceive it.”
Haniyeh was 62. He became a part of Hamas during the First Intifada
against Israel and eventually rose to become the political leader of the
group, which is an internationally designated terrorist organization
with the stated goal of destroying the Jewish state through armed
struggle.
Alleged sex-abuse Touro Univ. professor kept teaching in department chaired by mother-in-law
Menachem Kiwak (center) was allowed to keep teaching even after
students complained about his alleged sexually inappropriate behavior in
the classroom.
Touro University is accused of ignoring sex-related allegations
against a professor whose mother-in-law chairs the department where he
works, The Post has learned.
An adjunct professor in mental health counseling, Menachem Kiwak was
allowed to remain in the classroom even after students complained in
March 2023 that he quizzed them about sex, used profanity and slang to
discuss sex, and argued that people who don’t like sex are sick, sources
said.
Kiwak, 38, remained on staff even after an advocate for Jewish
sexual-abuse victims, Asher Lovy, wrote to Kiwak’s mother-in-law, Faye
Walkenfeld, and other Touro officials in March, alerting them to an
allegation that Kiwak had sexually abused one of his patients.
Lovy questioned Kiwak’s fitness to teach aspiring counselors.
Kiwak
remained on staff even after an advocate for Jewish sexual abuse
victims wrote to his mother-in-law, Faye Walkenfeld — who chairs the
department that the alleged perv worked in. Touro University School of Health Sciences
Kiwak was arrested for the alleged abuse in May — but Touro apparently let him finish the school year, sources said.
The university’s handling of the scandal has raised alarm among
victim advocates, who question whether college officials protected Kiwak
because of his mother-in-law’s position.
The private Jewish university, with campuses in Times Square, Brooklyn and Long Island, touts itself as “a leader in health-care education.”
Walkenfeld, chair of Touro’s behavioral science department, is a well known mental-health expert for the orthodox Jewish community, which Kiwak and his alleged victim are part of.
It’s unknown what actions, if any, Walkenfield took in response.
She declined to comment.
It was only after Kiwak was arrested and the Post inquired about his status that Touro revealed they had removed him from teaching.
“Mr. Kiwak is currently on administrative leave and Touro is
reviewing this matter internally,” Matthew Lieberman, a lawyer for the
university, said Friday.
Lovy, who heads the anti-abuse organization Za’akah, accompanied the
alleged victim to the NYPD’s Special Victims Unit, he told Walkenfeld in
a March 5 email.
The patient described to police “in excruciating detail” Kiwak’s
“using the authority of his position to coerce her to have sex with him
against her will and without her consent,” the letter said.
Lovy also cited the March 2023 complaints by Touro students to his
program director “about the inappropriate nature of Kiwak’s [classroom]
discussions about sex, porn, sexuality, and sexual assault.”
Kiwak shocked the students by arguing that there is no such thing as
marital rape. Days after they lodged their complaints, Kiwak
“clarified” in an email to his class that “intimate partner violence,
including marital rape, is illegal in the United States.”
Kiwak was arrested for the alleged abuse in May, but Touro apparently let him finish the school year, sources said.
“It’s impossible to overstate what a thorough failure Touro’s
handling of Mr. Kiwak’s alleged predation has been,” Shulim Leifer, a
victim advocate in the orthodox community, told The Post
“The fact that Mr. Kiwak’s own mother in law chairs his department
raises serious questions about what role nepotism played in Touro’s
essentially sweeping it under the rug when students complained or when
they were made aware of criminal accusations by a patient, and whether
Ms. Walkenfeld and her family of therapists should be trusted to work in
this space going forward.”
Kiwak referred questions to his lawyer, Michael Farkas, who said,
“Mr. Kiwak will handle this matter and any inquiries about it in court,
not in the press.”
The criminal charges against Kiwak — forcible touching, sex abuse and harassment — are misdemeanors.
Solomon's Temple in ancient times. North Wind Picture Archives
Roots of Music
Solomon's Temple, a Hebrew temple built around 950 B.C.E. in Jerusalem, may be one of the earliest influences on Western classical music.
Isaac Newton described the physical proportions of the nave of the
temple as a length of six, a width of two, and a height of three.
Scholars believe those dimensions optimized the flow of voices and sound
inside the space. Temples and religious buildings that followed used
similar dimensions, as well as architectural features like towers and
columns to control sound waves.
Why this matters: The acoustic features of these
structures shaped early music composition. Musicologist Denis Stevens
observed that even simple doubling of sung intervals on the scale of
notes in fourths, fifths and octaves in a large building such as an
abbey or cathedral is "magnificently sonorous." The buildings spurred
the creation of harmonies and polyphony (the layering of simultaneous
voices), which evolved into Western classical music. And the dimensions
of ancient temples, churches and cathedrals inspired the concert halls
of today.
What the experts say:
"Early music composers chose pitches, silence (rests), rhythms and
simple harmonies that sounded well throughout the physical building,"
writes Lynn Whidden, ethnomusicologist and professor emerita at Brandon
University in Manitoba. "When ornamentation was added inside, limiting
reverberation, the basic dynamics of classical music were set, even as
it spread among different societies and religions."
Israeli military says it will begin drafting ultra-Orthodox men. That could rattle the government
JERUSALEM (AP) — The Israeli
military on Tuesday said it would begin sending draft notices to Jewish
ultra-Orthodox men next week — a step that could destabilize Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government.
The announcement followed a landmark Supreme Court order
for young religious men to begin enlisting for military service. Under
long-standing political arrangements, ultra-Orthodox men had been exempt
from the draft, which is compulsory for most Jewish men.
The
exemptions created resentment among the general public in Israel,
especially after more than nine months of war against Hamas militants in
Gaza.
The army summons is the beginning of a months-long enlistment process
that could be difficult to enforce if there is large-scale refusal to
comply. The army did not say when it expects ultra-Orthodox men to begin
serving or how many it expects to enlist.
The court ruled that the system of exemptions, which allow religious
men to study in Jewish seminaries while others are forced to serve in
the army, was discriminatory. Ultra-Orthodox leaders say religious study
is equally important for the country’s future and that their
generations-old way of life will be threatened if their followers serve
in the army.
Netanyahu’s government relies on the support of ultra-Orthodox
parties that oppose changes to the system. Religious leaders have not
said what steps they will take. If they leave the ruling coalition, the
government would likely topple and the country would be plunged into
early elections two years ahead of schedule.
Past attempts to enlist ultra-Orthodox men have triggered mass protests in ultra-Orthodox communities.
Hundreds
of ultra-Orthodox men blocked a main highway in central Israel for
several hours on Tuesday in the ultra-Orthodox city of Bnei Brak, near
Tel Aviv. Police on horseback pushed the crowd back, and officers
dragged protesters away. Police said nine people were arrested.
“The army is not an army for fighting. It’s an army with
indoctrination” against religion, said Yona Kay, a protester. “Therefore
our children, our boys — and I have a son over here — will not go to
the army, not for one minute.”
On Monday night, dozens of
ultra-Orthodox surrounded the cars of senior military commanders who
were meeting with local rabbis in Bnei Brak to discuss an ultra-Orthodox
unit in the army. The crowd threatened the officers, calling them
“murderers” and throwing bottles, according to Israeli media.
Once full-scale war broke out after the State of Israel
declared its existence on May 14, 1948 [CE] Reb Shraga Feivel’s [Mendlowitz] thoughts
were never far from Eretz Yisrael.
A group of students saw him outside the Mesivta building
one day, talking excitedly with Rabbi Gedaliah Schorr
and gesticulating rapidly with the newspaper held in his hand.
“If I were your age,” Rabbi Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz
told the students, “I would take a gun and go to Eretz Yisrael.”
SOURCE: Reb Shraga Feivel: the life and times of Rabbi Shraga
Feivel Mendlowitz, the architect of Torah in America
(chapter 26, page 338) by Yonoson Rosenblum for Artscroll / Mesorah,
year 2001, based on Aharon Sorasky’s Shelucha DeRachmana,
ISBNs: 157819797X, 9781578197972, 1578197961, 9781578197965
The question of age and its impact on the effectiveness of leadership is becoming increasingly pertinent as the United States faces the prospect of having octogenarian leaders. Both Joe Biden and Donald Trump, prominent figures in American politics, are pushing the boundaries of age in the presidential office. This raises concerns about whether they are too old to serve as president. To illustrate, one might ask: Would you feel comfortable boarding an airplane with an 80-year-old pilot? This analogy sheds light on the broader issues of age, cognitive ability, and the demands of high-stakes leadership roles.
Age and Cognitive Decline
Aging is a natural process that often brings about cognitive decline. While not all individuals experience significant cognitive impairment as they age, the risk increases with each passing year. Critical thinking, memory, and decision-making capabilities can be adversely affected. For a role as demanding as the presidency, which requires sharp mental acuity, quick decision-making, and the ability to manage a complex array of domestic and international issues, cognitive decline can be a significant liability.
Joe Biden, born in 1942, and Donald Trump, born in 1946, are both well into their seventies and eighties. As they age, the likelihood of cognitive decline becomes a legitimate concern. The rigors of the presidency—intense schedules, high-stress decision-making, and the need for constant vigilance—are daunting even for younger individuals. The cognitive demands on an 80-year-old president could lead to lapses in judgment or slower responses in critical situations, potentially endangering national security and effective governance.
Physical Health and Endurance
The physical demands of the presidency are also considerable. Presidents are expected to maintain grueling schedules, travel frequently, and endure the stress of constant public scrutiny and decision-making under pressure. Physical stamina and overall health are essential to managing these responsibilities effectively.
At 80, most individuals face inevitable physical challenges, from decreased energy levels to the potential for serious health issues. Both Biden and Trump have had their health scrutinized, with Biden experiencing incidents that raise questions about his physical resilience and Trump facing his own set of health concerns during his presidency. The potential for a sudden health crisis is higher in older individuals, which could lead to instability in leadership.
The Airplane Pilot Analogy
Imagine boarding an airplane with an 80-year-old pilot at the helm. Would you feel secure knowing that the pilot, while possibly experienced and knowledgeable, might face age-related challenges such as slower reaction times or health issues that could impair their ability to handle emergencies? This analogy helps underscore the stakes involved in electing an elderly president. Just as we rely on pilots to ensure our safety, we depend on presidents to navigate the country through turbulent times. The physical and cognitive demands are analogous, and the risks associated with age are similar.
Representation and Generational Change
Another consideration is the need for generational change and representation in leadership. The United States is a diverse nation with a wide range of age groups, each facing unique challenges and perspectives. Younger leaders may be more in tune with the issues and aspirations of the younger population, which is crucial for forward-looking policies and innovation.
The dominance of older politicians can stifle fresh ideas and perpetuate outdated approaches. A younger president might bring new energy, perspectives, and solutions to the table, better reflecting the dynamic and evolving nature of American society. Generational change can invigorate the political landscape and ensure that leadership is responsive to the needs of all citizens, not just those of a particular age group.
While age alone should not disqualify someone from the presidency, the unique challenges and risks associated with elderly leaders cannot be ignored. The cognitive and physical demands of the presidency are immense, and the potential for age-related decline poses a significant concern. The airplane pilot analogy vividly illustrates the risks involved, highlighting the importance of ensuring that leaders are fully capable of meeting the demands of their role.
Moreover, embracing generational change and fostering a diverse leadership that includes younger voices can enrich the political discourse and better address the needs of all Americans. As the nation considers its future leadership, it is essential to weigh the implications of age and prioritize the qualities that will ensure effective, dynamic, and responsive governance.
Joe Biden: The Perils of Policy and Perception
Joe Biden, inaugurated as the 46th president of the United States in January 2021, brought a promise of stability and a return to traditional political norms following the tumultuous Trump administration. However, his presidency is not without significant concerns.
Economic Challenges and Inflation
One of the most pressing issues under Biden's administration has been the surge in inflation. Critics argue that the administration's expansive fiscal policies, including substantial stimulus packages, have contributed to rising prices. The inflationary pressure erodes the purchasing power of American households, disproportionately affecting the middle and lower classes. This economic instability can lead to increased public discontent and erode trust in the government’s ability to manage the economy effectively.
Immigration and Border Control
Biden's more lenient stance on immigration compared to his predecessor has led to a sharp increase in the number of migrants attempting to enter the United States. The situation at the southern border has been described by some as a crisis, with inadequate facilities to accommodate the influx and growing concerns about national security and public health. The administration's handling of this issue has fueled divisive rhetoric and deepened political polarization.
Foreign Policy and Global Perception
Biden's foreign policy decisions, such as the withdrawal from Afghanistan, have also drawn significant criticism. The chaotic and abrupt exit not only left behind a humanitarian crisis but also damaged America's credibility with its allies. Such actions can undermine global trust in American leadership and embolden adversaries, potentially destabilizing international relations.
Donald Trump: The Dangers of Divisiveness and Disinformation
Donald Trump's presidency from 2017 to 2021 was marked by a distinct departure from conventional political norms, characterized by his unorthodox communication style and polarizing policies.
Erosion of Democratic Norms
Trump’s repeated assertions of electoral fraud and his refusal to concede defeat in the 2020 presidential election culminated in the unprecedented storming of the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. This event highlighted the fragility of democratic institutions and the dangers posed by undermining public confidence in the electoral process. Such actions threaten the foundational principles of American democracy and can lead to increased political violence and instability.
Rise of Populism and Extremism
Trump’s rhetoric often resonated with populist and nationalist sentiments, leading to a rise in extremist ideologies and groups. The emboldening of such factions poses a significant threat to social cohesion and can lead to an increase in hate crimes and domestic terrorism. The polarization fostered during his tenure continues to affect American society, making it challenging to achieve consensus on critical issues.
Disinformation and Mistrust
Trump’s frequent dissemination of disinformation, particularly regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and the integrity of the electoral system, has contributed to a widespread mistrust of mainstream media and public institutions. This erosion of trust is detrimental to public health efforts, as seen with vaccine hesitancy, and undermines the collective action needed to address national crises effectively.
Broader Implications for American Democracy
The presidencies of both Biden and Trump highlight a deeper, systemic issue: the growing polarization and fragmentation of American society. This divide is exacerbated by the media landscape, which often amplifies extreme viewpoints and fosters echo chambers. The inability to bridge ideological divides and engage in constructive dialogue threatens the very fabric of American democracy.
Moreover, the international implications of domestic instability cannot be overlooked. The world looks to the United States for leadership, and internal strife weakens its position on the global stage. Adversaries may exploit these vulnerabilities, while allies may question America's reliability.
Conclusion
The dangers posed by both Biden and Trump are reflective of broader challenges facing the United States. While Biden's policies may lead to economic and immigration-related issues, Trump's legacy of divisiveness and disinformation poses a threat to democratic norms and social cohesion. Addressing these dangers requires a concerted effort to bridge political divides, restore trust in public institutions, and reaffirm the core values of American democracy. Only through such efforts can the United States navigate these turbulent times and emerge stronger.
