Yet in many synagogue, our prayer shawls have black broad stripes and not blue threaded colours. Some do make a less serious attempt with silk not woolen shawls to follow the blue colour tradition. Surely the true meaning of Tehelet is not for the colour to come from only one rare kind of sea creature, because any shade of blue can provide us with the same meaning, to be aware of the presence of GOD!
The black stripes developed as a reminder of the blue strings. For hundreds of years, Jews were banned from using the Techelet, since that particular shade of blue was reserved for the Roman nobility and royal class. So the blue string of the Tzitzit migrated into a black stripe in the garment itself as a reminder. There are communities from various parts of Europe (Austrian, British, and others) who generally wear a blue stripe in the Tallit and not a black one, since the prohibition from Roman times didn't apply in their communities.
We are no longer under Roman domination and the blue thread (not black stripe) should be re-introduced according to the mitzvah in the paragraphs following in our prayer "Shema". Are we still so traditional that we forgot that we now can choose again?
Many people, particularly in Israel, are in fact reintroducing the use of the Techelet thread. Personally, I wear Techelet threads in my Tzitzit, and I would hazard a guess that about half the people in my shul do as well. See: https://tekhelet.co.il/
Do you have any evidence that the reason why Jews stopped using actual Tyrian purple (a.k.a. tekheles) was because the Romans limited it's use rather than because production of Tyrian purple disappeared with the fall of the Roman Empire?
I also assume that you're aware that tekheles was actually midnight blue and not light blue, as per Koren (2022):
I will same the same to you: do you honestly believe that there is no difference between targeting Hamas terrorists and infrastructure and the tragic innocent deaths that sometimes occur at the same time, versus intentionally targeting innocents - something Israel never has done?
Let me add the obvious: war is hell. People make mistakes. No army, including the IDF, is perfect. And there remains a massive difference between a moral army that makes human mistakes in the midst of a brutal war, and those who are actively trying to kill innocents. I have a hard time believing that you don't already know this.
No, I don't. But your question is irrelevant to my earlier comment & then I didn't publish a Substack post arguing for Israeli and the IDF's moral superiority.
Are you just comparing the morality of Israel and the IDF to Hamas?
If so, that's trivial as few armies in the world act like Hamas.
When Israel bombed Gazan refugee camps they made a moral calculation that collaterally killing Palestinian infants, toddlers, & mothers was worth the cost of killing Hamas leaders.
When Israel decided to solely control food distribution in Gaza through the IDF, messed it up and shot and killed civilians and then decided to do the same a week later resulting in further civilian murders by IDF soldiers, what that a display of their moral superiority.
You are choosing to believe a lot of what the media tell you at face value. The media has proven over decades that they are very willing to adopt the anti-Israel narrative without first making sure that their reporting is accurate. During the current war, the media have generally adopted Hamas talking-points in terms of numbers of circumstances of Palestinian victims at face value, without any form of verification.
The reality is that Hamas has actively stolen all of the foreign aid being sent into Gaza until the middle of May 2025, and has then shot people trying to receive the aid meant for them. The reality is that Hamas actively holds its own population hostage and uses them as human shields to protect their weapons depots, development facilities, and launching points.
The fact that huge caches of weapons have been found the basements of hospital and schools, in operating rooms, in treatment rooms, and in civilian apartments is not only an internationally recognized act of war, it absolves - under international law - Israel from any collateral damage.
And WITH ALL OF THAT, Israel makes every effort to avoid civilian casualties as much as it can - even to the extent of scrapping attacks when it perceives too much risk of civilian casualties. Of course none of that appears in your talking points because you simply rely too much on media reports that are based on partial or inaccurate information.
If you choose to continue basing your opinions on half-truths or willful omissions, that is your prerogative. But I suggest that you look at the full story, and include all the relevant data, before adding to the vast antisemitism that can be found on the Internet and in the media.
1) Kindly explain why Israel doesn't allow reporters into Gaza.
If you want people to reject the Mainstream Media, you'll have to provide an alternative other than the Israeli Ministry of Information.
"And WITH ALL OF THAT, Israel makes every effort to avoid civilian casualties as much as it can - even to the extent of scrapping attacks when it perceives too much risk of civilian casualties."
2) How do you know that?
Because the Israeli Ministry of Information told you?
(I'm aware that the IMI doesn't officially still exist.)
3) Do you believe that Israel bombed Gazan refugee camps making a calculation that collaterally killing Palestinian infants, toddlers, & mothers was worth the cost of killing Hamas leaders?
4) Do you believe that Israel should have decided to continue solely control food distribution in Gaza through the IDF, after having messed it up and shot and killed civilians?
5) Would believe that both were wrong make one an antisemite?
6) Is criticizing Israel's actions definitionally antisemitism?
Given that Israel has embedded reporters in IDF units operating in Gaza, I don't believe that "Israel doesn't allow reporters into Gaza". What they don't allow are obviously anti-Israel reporters, since that would not further the reporting of the truth.
As you state, Israel doesn't have a "Ministry of Information". So your repeated references to one, despite your disclaimer, is somewhat disingenuous, and speaks to your own anti-Israel bias.
My source for what I stated is actually from Israeli media outlets - those that are ignored by foreign mainstream media.
In terms of Israel bombing Gazan refugee camps, I believe that those bombings were unintentional collateral damage to intended targets located near (or next to) the camps.
Israel no longer controls food distribution in Gaza. Since May, that has been controlled by the international organization and security team put together by the US as part of the most recent ceasefire. I am also not convinced that the shootings of civilians were done by the IDF, or that if they were, they were not done under conditions where IDF forces securing the area were under immediate and significant threat.
As to your last question, no, criticism of Israel is not necessarily antisemitism. I myself have often questioned and criticized Israel's actions and/or policy. But you are not just questioning or criticizing Israel's actions. You are adopting the talking points of its enemies - the same enemies that perpetrated October 7 unprovoked. It is not the criticism of Israel that is antisemitic. It is the formulation of such criticism in terms that give aid and comfort to our terrorist enemies, or the equating of Israel with those terrorist enemies, that is antisemitic.
1) Do you intellectually honestly believe that having Israeli approved reporters embedded with troops is the same as allowing foreign journalists into Gaza?
Hopefully, you're aware that this ban is relatively unprecedented.
Excellent. The broad, smooth path leads to destruction. The narrow, rocky path leads where we yearn to go.
Yet in many synagogue, our prayer shawls have black broad stripes and not blue threaded colours. Some do make a less serious attempt with silk not woolen shawls to follow the blue colour tradition. Surely the true meaning of Tehelet is not for the colour to come from only one rare kind of sea creature, because any shade of blue can provide us with the same meaning, to be aware of the presence of GOD!
The black stripes developed as a reminder of the blue strings. For hundreds of years, Jews were banned from using the Techelet, since that particular shade of blue was reserved for the Roman nobility and royal class. So the blue string of the Tzitzit migrated into a black stripe in the garment itself as a reminder. There are communities from various parts of Europe (Austrian, British, and others) who generally wear a blue stripe in the Tallit and not a black one, since the prohibition from Roman times didn't apply in their communities.
We are no longer under Roman domination and the blue thread (not black stripe) should be re-introduced according to the mitzvah in the paragraphs following in our prayer "Shema". Are we still so traditional that we forgot that we now can choose again?
Many people, particularly in Israel, are in fact reintroducing the use of the Techelet thread. Personally, I wear Techelet threads in my Tzitzit, and I would hazard a guess that about half the people in my shul do as well. See: https://tekhelet.co.il/
Do you have any evidence that the reason why Jews stopped using actual Tyrian purple (a.k.a. tekheles) was because the Romans limited it's use rather than because production of Tyrian purple disappeared with the fall of the Roman Empire?
I also assume that you're aware that tekheles was actually midnight blue and not light blue, as per Koren (2022):
https://traditiononline.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/54.1-Koren.pdf
The color of the sky referenced in the Midrash was livnat ha-sapir from Matan Torah, not cloudless Mediterranean light blue.
So why does Israel ban reporters from Gaza?
"Every individual alive is witness to the difference between the IDF, which tries to avoid civilian injuries and deaths,"
What about bombing refugee camps to kill Hamas leaders and collaterally killing infants and toddlers?
Please explain the recent murder of starving Gazan Palestinians waiting for rations and then doing the same tte next week.
"and our adversaries, who target and hit hospitals with no military objective other than killing Jews."
Do you honestly believe what you just published?
I will same the same to you: do you honestly believe that there is no difference between targeting Hamas terrorists and infrastructure and the tragic innocent deaths that sometimes occur at the same time, versus intentionally targeting innocents - something Israel never has done?
Let me add the obvious: war is hell. People make mistakes. No army, including the IDF, is perfect. And there remains a massive difference between a moral army that makes human mistakes in the midst of a brutal war, and those who are actively trying to kill innocents. I have a hard time believing that you don't already know this.
No, I don't. But your question is irrelevant to my earlier comment & then I didn't publish a Substack post arguing for Israeli and the IDF's moral superiority.
Are you just comparing the morality of Israel and the IDF to Hamas?
If so, that's trivial as few armies in the world act like Hamas.
When Israel bombed Gazan refugee camps they made a moral calculation that collaterally killing Palestinian infants, toddlers, & mothers was worth the cost of killing Hamas leaders.
When Israel decided to solely control food distribution in Gaza through the IDF, messed it up and shot and killed civilians and then decided to do the same a week later resulting in further civilian murders by IDF soldiers, what that a display of their moral superiority.
Kindly clarify what you believe.
You are choosing to believe a lot of what the media tell you at face value. The media has proven over decades that they are very willing to adopt the anti-Israel narrative without first making sure that their reporting is accurate. During the current war, the media have generally adopted Hamas talking-points in terms of numbers of circumstances of Palestinian victims at face value, without any form of verification.
The reality is that Hamas has actively stolen all of the foreign aid being sent into Gaza until the middle of May 2025, and has then shot people trying to receive the aid meant for them. The reality is that Hamas actively holds its own population hostage and uses them as human shields to protect their weapons depots, development facilities, and launching points.
The fact that huge caches of weapons have been found the basements of hospital and schools, in operating rooms, in treatment rooms, and in civilian apartments is not only an internationally recognized act of war, it absolves - under international law - Israel from any collateral damage.
And WITH ALL OF THAT, Israel makes every effort to avoid civilian casualties as much as it can - even to the extent of scrapping attacks when it perceives too much risk of civilian casualties. Of course none of that appears in your talking points because you simply rely too much on media reports that are based on partial or inaccurate information.
If you choose to continue basing your opinions on half-truths or willful omissions, that is your prerogative. But I suggest that you look at the full story, and include all the relevant data, before adding to the vast antisemitism that can be found on the Internet and in the media.
1) Kindly explain why Israel doesn't allow reporters into Gaza.
If you want people to reject the Mainstream Media, you'll have to provide an alternative other than the Israeli Ministry of Information.
"And WITH ALL OF THAT, Israel makes every effort to avoid civilian casualties as much as it can - even to the extent of scrapping attacks when it perceives too much risk of civilian casualties."
2) How do you know that?
Because the Israeli Ministry of Information told you?
(I'm aware that the IMI doesn't officially still exist.)
3) Do you believe that Israel bombed Gazan refugee camps making a calculation that collaterally killing Palestinian infants, toddlers, & mothers was worth the cost of killing Hamas leaders?
4) Do you believe that Israel should have decided to continue solely control food distribution in Gaza through the IDF, after having messed it up and shot and killed civilians?
5) Would believe that both were wrong make one an antisemite?
6) Is criticizing Israel's actions definitionally antisemitism?
Yehuda & Scott: Please answer my questions.
Given that Israel has embedded reporters in IDF units operating in Gaza, I don't believe that "Israel doesn't allow reporters into Gaza". What they don't allow are obviously anti-Israel reporters, since that would not further the reporting of the truth.
As you state, Israel doesn't have a "Ministry of Information". So your repeated references to one, despite your disclaimer, is somewhat disingenuous, and speaks to your own anti-Israel bias.
My source for what I stated is actually from Israeli media outlets - those that are ignored by foreign mainstream media.
In terms of Israel bombing Gazan refugee camps, I believe that those bombings were unintentional collateral damage to intended targets located near (or next to) the camps.
Israel no longer controls food distribution in Gaza. Since May, that has been controlled by the international organization and security team put together by the US as part of the most recent ceasefire. I am also not convinced that the shootings of civilians were done by the IDF, or that if they were, they were not done under conditions where IDF forces securing the area were under immediate and significant threat.
As to your last question, no, criticism of Israel is not necessarily antisemitism. I myself have often questioned and criticized Israel's actions and/or policy. But you are not just questioning or criticizing Israel's actions. You are adopting the talking points of its enemies - the same enemies that perpetrated October 7 unprovoked. It is not the criticism of Israel that is antisemitic. It is the formulation of such criticism in terms that give aid and comfort to our terrorist enemies, or the equating of Israel with those terrorist enemies, that is antisemitic.
1) Do you intellectually honestly believe that having Israeli approved reporters embedded with troops is the same as allowing foreign journalists into Gaza?
Hopefully, you're aware that this ban is relatively unprecedented.
2) Did Israeli have a Minister of Information until 2023? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Public_Diplomacy_(Israel)
I was using the IMI as a synecdoche for Israeli Hasbara.
3) Where did I adopt the talking points of Hamas?
Accusing a Jew of Sinas Chinam, antisemitism, inaccurately, is a significant aveirah (sin).