16 Sep SPEAK YOUR VUES WITH THE VUES MASTER
Please note that the author of Speak Your Vues is in no way affiliated with the publisher of
this paper. The author of this column is an independent third party contributor. The views and
opinions expressed by this author may not reflect the views and opinions of the publishers. If
one has any issues with any of the views, please write a letter to the Vues Master.
SHANA TOVA
Dear Vues Master,
Last year, a friend shared something that stayed with me. Every
year, she sends out personal messages, heartfelt texts and voice
notes, to friends and family before Rosh Hashanah, wishing them a
good year and sharing her gratitude for their presence in her life.
But last year was different. Last year, she didn’t text me. I left her
a voice text. Just a few simple words: wishing her and her family
good health, parnasah, and brachot in the year ahead, and my hope
that our friendship would grow even stronger. Basically mirroring
what she had modeled for so many years. I didn’t hear back from
her before Rosh Hashanah. I didn’t hear back from her before Yom
Kippur. I worried I upset her. I relistened to my message. It sound-
ed OK I thought to myself. Still, I worried. So I left her another. I
didn’t hear back. That Yom Kippur, I kept her and her family in my
prayers not knowing what was wrong but knowing something
wasn’t right. One morning, just before Sukkot, I woke up to a voice
text. Here’s what she said: Every year, she tries to convey how
much each person she is voice texting means to her. Every year, she
feels a little let down when few reply to her messages. Every year,
she goes into Rosh Hashana thinking she doesn’t matter. Every
year, she contemplates not sending the messages. This year was
different. A family emergency left her overwhelmed and too
drained to send her usual messages. This year, she opted out. She
was worried for her family members. She was sad that no one
seemed to notice she didn’t send out her usual messages. Then she
shared this. My message was like a balm. It carried her through a
difficult Yom Tov and reminded her she wasn’t forgotten. My mes-
sage encouraged her to leave a few of her own What she didn’t
know is how special she always makes me feel. That she’s usually
the one who remembers me first. That her words are often the spark
that remind me to reach out to others. Last year, without realizing
it, I finally had the chance to return the gift she’s given me so many
times. As we approach Rosh Hashanah this year, I’ve been thinking
about that moment. About how powerful it can be to pause, even
for a moment, and tell the people in our lives: You matter to me.
I’m grateful for you. I forgive you. I love you. I’m davening for
your happiness, health, and parnassah in the year ahead. You never
know who might be carrying something heavy… and how far your
words might carry them. This year, take 30 minutes and leave a few
short voice texts for friends, old and new, and relatives, young and
old. Tell them how much they mean to you. Don’t be shy. Let them
know you care about them. Leave a message that their presence in
your life is important to you. List all (or just a few) of the reasons
you love them Say the words. You won’t regret it. וחתימה כתיבה
.טובה
Tova Plaut
Vues Master’s Note: Beautiful! Thanks for sharing!
HOCHUL
Dear Vues Master,
As a Jewish New Yorker, I am outraged and deeply disappointed by
Governor Kathy Hochul’s endorsement of Zohran Mamdani in the
upcoming election. This decision is not just politically question-
able, it’s morally troubling. At a time when antisemitism is surging
across New York and the country, our leaders should be standing
with the Jewish community, not aligning themselves with figures
who have repeatedly shown hostility or indifference to our con-
cerns.
Mamdani has a documented record of supporting movements and
organizations that are openly antagonistic toward Israel and, by
extension, dismissive of Jewish identity and safety. For Governor
Hochul, the leader of one of the largest Jewish populations in the
world, to publicly back such a candidate is a slap in the face to
Jewish New Yorkers. It sends a chilling message: that political cal-
culations matter more than the lived experiences and safety of our
community.
This is not about party politics. This is about principle. It’s about
whether our governor is willing to draw a line when it comes to
antisemitism and stand firmly with a community that has contrib-
uted so much to the fabric of this state. We’re not asking for special
treatment, we’re demanding the same respect, protection, and con-
sideration afforded to every other group.
Governor Hochul’s endorsement is more than a misstep, it’s a be-
trayal. We call on her to reconsider this decision and to publicly
reaffirm her commitment to fighting antisemitism in all its forms,
including when it comes from within her own party.
Jewish New Yorkers are watching. And we will not stay silent.
BY
Vues Master’s Note: Politics as usual! She is a front-runner and a
loser! Remember, she didn’t want congestion pricing until after she
won the election!
MAMDANI
Dear Vues Master,
I am writing with deep concern and growing alarm over the news
that Zohran Mamdani is leading the New York City mayoral race
by a significant margin. As a lifelong New Yorker and a member
of the Jewish community, I find this development profoundly trou-
bling.
Mamdani has consistently taken radical, anti-Israel positions that
go far beyond legitimate criticism of Israeli policy. His refusal to
denounce the extremist slogan “globalize the intifada” and his deci-
sion to condemn Israel the day after the horrific October 7th Hamas
attacks are not just political stances—they are moral failures. They
reflect a deep disregard for Jewish lives and the trauma our com-
munity continues to endure.
The fact that three-quarters of Jewish voters disapprove of Mamda
ni should send a loud and clear message: this is not
someone who represents our values or safety. His
rise signals a disturbing normalization of rhetoric
that marginalizes Jewish New Yorkers and embold-
ens those who traffic in hostility and hate.
We cannot afford to be silent while someone so di-
visive and hostile to our community edges closer
to City Hall. This is not about left versus right—it
is about whether New York remains a place where
Jews feel safe, respected, and represented.
I urge every voter who cares about pluralism, decen-
cy, and the protection of all New Yorkers to reject
Mamdani at the ballot box. BL
Vues Master’s Note: Just remember, we are in ga-
lus and will be reminded of it very often under this
Mamzer-Dani.
ASSASSINATION
Dear Vues Master,
How can this happen in America?
I write today with a heavy heart and profound sad-
ness over the senseless killing of Charlie Kirk. The
news that the suspected shooter, Tyler Robinson,
was identified only after his own father turned him
in is both tragic and deeply unsettling.
What does it say about where we are as a nation
when political violence reaches such horrifying
extremes—when young men are driven to murder,
and their own families are left to bear the weight
of justice?
Charlie Kirk was a prominent and passionate voice
in our national conversation. Agree or disagree with
his views, no one can say he deserved to be gunned
down. This wasn’t just a crime against a man—it
was a blow to civil society, to free speech, and to the
very fabric of democracy.
And yet, many of us are left asking: How did it
come to this? What has happened to our country that
disagreement now leads to deadly violence? Where
are we headed when political discourse becomes a
battlefield?
I commend the father who had the courage to do the
right thing, but we should never have reached this
point in the first place.
This isn’t just sad. It’s terrifying, and it’s unaccept-
able. We need to look inward, as a society, and ask
ourselves what we are doing, and what we are will-
ing to do, to stop this from happening again. RWS
Vues Master’s Note: You see that anything goes!
MIXED MINHAGIM
Dear Vues Master,
As someone whose family includes both Ashkenazi
and Sephardi members through marriage, I’d like to
share how difficult it can be to celebrate Yom Tov
together while respecting everyone’s traditions.
On the surface, it’s beautiful, a true display of Jew-
ish unity. But in practice, the differences in min-
hagim can be deeply challenging. We’ve had de-
bates over kitniyot on Pesach, whether rice belongs
on the table or not. On Rosh Hashanah, the customs
around simanim vary, and some of us have never
even heard of half the symbolic foods that are so
meaningful to others.
The differences go beyond food. We face questions
like: Should we say Hallel with or without a bracha?
When do we start counting the Omer? Can we eat
milchigs on Shavuot, or is it considered a non-tra-
ditional Sephardi practice? The different nusach in
davening makes family prayer complex, and often
one side feels like they’re compromising more than
the other.
While love and respect help bridge the gap, the re-
ality is that observing Yom Tov as a blended fam-
ily can be spiritually confusing and even divisive.
I believe more guidance and sensitivity from our
rabbinic leaders on how to navigate mixed-minhag
families would be helpful.
MR
Vues Master’s Note: You’ve got two options:
1- Stick to your own minhag—and that’s that!
2- Or… get a new minhag from scratch!
CHARLIE KIRK
Dear Vues Master,
Words cannot fully express the dark moment our na-
tion has entered. America was founded on the prin-
ciples of free speech, freedom of expression, and the
right to debate. It was never supposed to be the place
where bullets would end a debate—those were the
marks of regimes like Cuba, Venezuela, China, and
Russia. America was supposed to be different. But
now, it’s not. Today, we live in a time when, instead
of debating with words, people resort to violence.
Once upon a time, America was a country where,
despite disagreements, arguments, and political
divisions, its people accepted each other as fellow
Americans. We prided ourselves on being a beacon
of hope and a light in a world of darkness. When
bombs exploded, when innocent people were mur-
dered at work, when soldiers died fighting for their
country, or when politicians were attacked for their
beliefs—Americans came together. We had to.
We weren’t Republicans or Democrats—we were
Americans.
In moments of tragedy, we took down our campaign
signs, removed our red and blue hats, and paused
political discourse to reflect. We remembered
the values of our country. We honored the
sacrifices made in the World Wars. We lived
by the hallowed words: “I can hear you! The
rest of the world hears you! And the people
who knocked these buildings down will hear
all of us soon!” We stood together, united not
as political adversaries, but as countrymen. We
grieved, we rebuilt, and we tried to make a bet-
ter nation.
Tyranny plagued the nations of old; freedom
was not a dream, but a threat to those in power.
America was founded as the place where tyr-
anny would die and liberty would live. We’ve
faced division before. We fought a Civil War.
We endured the violent riots of the 1960s. But we
emerged from the Cold War as a global leader, a
shining example where freedom reigned not only
domestically, but internationally. Americans were
united because our vision prevailed.
But since then, the disease of complacency has set
in. America is no longer a place of respectful dis-
agreement or shared values. It’s become a place
where people are killed for what they believe. Char-
lie Kirk could have told you that, but he can’t any-
more. He has a bullet lodged in his neck.
Politics has taken a dangerous turn. The word
“politics” once meant discussing governance and
seeking the best path forward. Today, in America,
politics has been replaced by violence. For decades,
conservatives and Republicans have stood for one
thing: preserving the ideals our Founders gave us.
Even when they gained power, they refrained from
abusing it. They didn’t weaponize the Department
of Justice against their opponents. They didn’t ar-
rest peaceful parents at school board meetings. They
governed with the ideal of one system of equal jus-
tice for all.
When a political opponent died, Republicans of-
fered condolences. They lowered their flags. They
reflected sincerely. But when a Republican dies—or
is shot—their political “opponents” don’t respond
with that same humanity. Instead, they dance on
graves. When Rush Limbaugh passed away, the
Left celebrated. When President George H.W. Bush
died, many on the Left cheered and predicted he was
in hell. When President Trump was nearly assassi-
nated, twice, they demanded more.
Yes, there are always fringes on both sides. But
is a tweet celebrating Charlie Kirk’s death, with
over 300,000 likes, just a fringe view? Is MSNBC
blaming Charlie for his own shooting the voice of
a fringe lunatic? After Erika Kirk, Charlie’s wife,
delivered a heartfelt eulogy, thousands responded
by calling her “as hateful as her husband.” Is that
still fringe?
Where is the line between fringe and mainstream?
What used to be the rant of a drunk guy at a bar is
now the rallying cry of a movement that sees 50%
of the country as enemies.
As a conservative, I’m done treating the Left as a
political opponent. They are my moral enemy. They
are not my fellow countrymen. They are scum. Are
all of them responsible? No. But those with power,
those screaming the loudest, and those showing up
at the ballot box—they are responsible for the death
of a conservative free speech martyr.
The millions who liked tweets praising Charlie’s
death didn’t pull the trigger, but many would have,
given the chance.
If you think this was just one conser-
vative shot by one radical actor, you
haven’t been paying attention. Presi-
dent Trump once said, “They’re not
after me, they’re after you. I’m just in
the way.” Those words have never been
more true.
This week was tragic. Charlie Kirk, a
conservative leader and voice for mil-
lions of young Americans, was killed
simply because the Left lost too many
debates to him. His articulate, charis-
matic, and pointed arguments were too much, they
had to silence him.
Now, the conservative movement must rise. We are
all Charlie Kirk. He debated for us. He stood for us.
His graciousness toward those who disagreed with
him embodied the spirit of democracy. But now we
know, the Left no longer wants a democracy. They
want dominance.
We must never respond with violence. But we must
respond, with legal action, with exposure, with
truth, with cancellation, and with strength. Maybe
then, they’ll finally understand. Conservatives still
want a united America, but we won’t have it until
those who hate this country are held accountable.
#WeAreCharlieKirk
Donny Simcha Guttman
Vues Master’s Note: Welcome back, we haven’t
heard from you in a long while!
NIGHT
Dear Vues Master,
RIDDLE
What are you forbidden to do only during the month
of Elul?
The Aruch HaShulchan (Orach Chaim 581:12)
writes: “It is forbidden to blow the shofar at night
during the month of Elul, even for practice, so as not
to awaken the negative spiritual forces of the night.”
The Tur (Orach Chaim 581) writes that in Ashke-
naz, the custom is to blow the shofar every morning
and evening (b’chol boker v’erev).
Rav Moshe Feinstein zt”l (Igros Moshe, Orach
Chaim 4:21) explains: “It makes sense that ‘eve-
ning’ in this context does not mean nighttime, but
rather daytime, either after Mincha or after an early
Maariv (as it was common to daven Maariv while it
was still day).”
The Chayei Adam brings the custom of blowing the
shofar after Mincha (the Ashkenaz/Yekkish cus-
tom).
MF
Vues Master’s Note: This riddle is a real wake-up
call!
THE FIRST DAF
Dear Vues Master,
When Rabbi Levi Yitzchak of Berditchev was asked
why every Masechta begins with page 2 (Daf Beis)
and not page 1 (Daf Alef), he replied: “It’s to remind
you that no matter how much you’ve learned, you
still haven’t reached the first page.”
MB
Vues Master’s Note: It’s like you can’t steal first
base, lehavdil (to draw a distinction)!
9/11
Dear Vues Master,
As we mark another solemn anniversary of 9/11,
I write with a question that continues to trouble
many in the Jewish community, particularly those
in frum neighborhoods throughout New York. Why
are there no visible representatives from Hatzolah
or frum families who lost relatives in the attacks
included in the annual reading of the names at the
official memorial ceremonies?
This is not about seeking special attention. It’s
about acknowledgment and inclusion. Hatzolah
volunteers were among the first to respond on that
horrific day, risking their lives to save others. Frum
Jews, like many others, perished in the towers,
some while helping coworkers escape. Their names
are etched on the memorial, yet their community
remains consistently absent from the public rituals
of remembrance.
This lack of representation sends a message, inten-
tional or not, that some losses are less worthy of
public mourning. That is especially painful for com-
munities that suffered deeply and continue to bear
emotional and psychological scars. For the families
and neighbors who live with this loss, recognition is
not just symbolic, it is essential to healing.
In a city as diverse as New York, inclusivity should
be the standard, not the exception. We urge the or-
ganizers of the 9/11 Memorial to take meaningful
steps to ensure all affected communities are seen,
heard, and honored in the ceremonies going for-
ward. GS
Vues Master’s Note: Anti-Semitism does not
change!
KILLERS
Dear Vues Master,
What kind of human being is capable of walking
up to another person, an innocent, defenseless, un-
armed civilian and, at close range, shooting him or
her?
That question must be on the minds of many who
are reading about the Palestinian Arab terrorist at-
tack on bus passengers in Jerusalem this week. The
killers were within a few feet of their victims.
Prof. Daniel Goldhagen considered this question
in his famous book Hitler’s Willing Executioners.
Some may object to comparisons between contem-
porary terrorists and the Nazis, but let’s take a closer
look at Goldhagen’s analysis and consider whether
it’s valid to compare up-close killers, then and now.
Goldhagen focused on a particular German police
unit, Reserve Police Battalion 101, which carried
out close-range shootings. That segment of the
genocide, what historians today call “the Holocaust
by bullets” occurred before gas chambers became
the Germans’ primary method of mass murder.
In June 1942, 500 battalion members were assigned
to the town of Józefów, in German-occupied south-
ern Poland. They were instructed to force local Jews
out of their homes, take them to a nearby forest, and
shoot them point-blank.
When a truck unloaded its Jewish prisoners at the
edge of the Józefów forest, each waiting policeman
selected a victim. The two then walked together
to the nearby execution site. Many of the captives
were children. The walk, Goldhagen noted, “afford-
ed each perpetrator an opportunity for reflection.”
He wrote: “It is highly likely that, back in Germany,
these men had previously walked through woods
with their own children by their sides. . . . In these
moments, each killer had a personalized, face-to-
face relationship to his victims.”
Goldhagen wondered if the typical killer ever
“asked himself why he was about to kill this little,
delicate human being who, if seen as a little girl by
him, would normally have received his compassion,
protection, and nurturing.” Or perhaps it was that
the killer could only “see a Jew, a young one, but a
Jew nonetheless,” and therefore accepted “the rea-
sonableness of the order, the necessity of nipping
the believed-in Jewish blight in the bud.”
The killing mechanics were necessarily “a grue-
some affair,” Goldhagen noted. “Each of the Ger-
mans had to raise his gun to the back of the head,
now face down on the ground, that had bobbed
along beside him, [and] pull the trigger.” They had
to “remain hardened to the crying of the victims,
to the crying of women, to the whimpering of chil-
dren,” and to the bloody corpses at their feet. The
reserve police officers slaughtered defenseless Jews
in this manner for hours on end.
Goldhagen emphasized the formative role of antise-
mitic ideology in facilitating the deeds of these kill-
ers. The German government-controlled news me-
dia and schools dehumanized Jews, depicting them
as rats, spiders, or lice that needed to be destroyed.
The only solution to the “Jewish problem” was the
“final solution”, death.
The atrocities of October 7 echoed the savagery of
the Józefów forest: shooting disabled children and
elderly people at close range, binding and execut-
ing entire families, beheading infants. Until just a
few years ago, the perpetrators of October 7, and
this week’s killers in Jerusalem, were all students in
schools run by the Palestinian Authority or Hamas,
where they were taught to hate Jews and glorify
violence.
The Jerusalem terrorists, Muthanna Amro, 20, and
Mohammad Taha, 21, came from the towns of Qu-
beiba and Qatanna, respectively. Since 1995, those
towns have been governed by the PA. As they were
growing up, their teachers, religious authorities, and
media taught them to view Jews as less than human
and to idolize perpetrators of anti-Jewish violence.
Only such indoctrination can explain how terrorists
were capable of murdering the two youngest Israeli
hostages in Gaza, four-year-old Ariel Bibas and his
nine-month-old brother, Kfir “in cold blood, with
their bare hands,” as the pathologist reported. Or
how other terrorists could walk up to defenseless
bus passengers in Jerusalem and shoot them point-
blank.
Just two weeks ago, official PA Television aired
a sermon in a mosque by a PA-salaried shari’ah
judge, Abdallah Harb. He proclaimed: “O Allah,
strengthen our stance and grant us victory over the
infidels…count them one by one, kill them one by
one, and do not leave even one…” According to
Palestinian Media Watch, PA TV has aired the ser-
mon at least seven times in the past year.
The Jerusalem bus killers heard such rhetoric every
day of their lives, and then they acted on it.
Dr. Rafael Medoff
Vues Master’s Note: What is even more sad is that
Charlie Kirk got more sympathy than our murdered
Israeli kedoshim!
DAF ROSH HASHANAH AND SIMANIM
Dear Vues Master,
We are all familiar with the inspirational yehi rat-
zons recited at dinner tables around the world on
Rosh Hashanah, accompanied by the symbolism of
unfamiliar foods such as fenugreek, leek, and chard,
items that most of us only hear about or see once a
year at this time (simanei milsa). The custom of see-
ing (not necessarily eating) these symbolic foods on
Rosh Hashanah is mentioned by Abaye in Horayos
(12), a mesechta in the gemara that many of us nev-
er even heard of during our yeshiva days, let alone
studied, at least not until we got into Daf Yomi.
The formal yehi ratzons evidently came later, com-
plete with symbolism (“like the seeds of a pome-
granate”) and even military-style projections (“that
our enemies be consumed”).
This discussion arises in the Gemara in the context
of omens.
Rabbi Ami said, “If someone wants to know if he
will complete his year or not…” and then proceeds
to give instructions on how to find out. Similarly,
Rabbi Ami advises: “A person who seeks to conduct
a business venture and wishes to know whether he
will succeed or not…” and again provides a method
for discovering the outcome. Finally, for one who
seeks to embark on a journey and wishes to know
if he will return home, Rabbi Ami also offers a test.
(Horayos 12). (Hint: it sounds suspiciously similar
to Groundhog Day, though in our case, even the
groundhogs are often wrong.)
Of course, this can’t be the final word on the sub-
ject, as we’ll see below.
Note: Readers will notice that the writer has cho-
sen not to spell out the specific tests, projections, or
omens suggested in the Gemara. These omissions
are intentional, for four reasons:
1- Some of the advice does not seem to fit within
mainstream Jewish thinking, to put it mildly.
2- To avoid dragging out the article by simply re-
peating Talmudic text.
3- To encourage readers to study the text for them-
selves.
4- Most importantly, because of the caveat that fol-
lows in the Gemara.
The rabbis of the Talmud ultimately reject Rabbi
Ami’s approach—though there is some discussion
about whether their rejection applies only to the fi-
nal test or to all three. Either way, the underlying
reasoning remains consistent.
They reject reliance on these tests/omens because
of the psychological effect it may have on the ques-
tioner. If the omen doesn’t seem favorable, the per-
son may become disheartened, possibly believing
that he won’t make it home, to put it delicately—
and thus might not succeed at all.
In contemporary terms: if someone
is told to expect failure or disaster,
they may become depressed. And
depression often leads to inaction,
failure—or worse.
In fact, if a “fortune teller” (by any
name) tells a person that a business
venture will fail, that person might
not even try. And as we all know:
nothing ventured, nothing gained.
Similarly, if someone is told they
won’t return from a journey, they may choose not
to go at all.
But more important than any omen or prediction is
the traditional and uplifting message of the Days
of Awe: Teshuvah, tefillah, and tzedaka can over-
turn even the harshest decrees (ma’avirin et ro’a
hagezeirah).
May we all merit to fulfill this three-pronged ap-
proach—teshuvah, tefillah, and tzedaka, in a timely
and meaningful way.
The writer looks forward to an inspiring Aseres
Y’mei Teshuvah, and to an effective effort to con-
vince HaShem that we, as surviving individuals, are
worthy of another year of life and health. And after
that, while still in a persuasive mode, to convince
the naïve of the world to finally recognize who the
real victims and aggressors are—and what must be
done about it. AR
Vues Master’s Note: Great letter! We need to inter-
nalize it!
KAMALA JUNK
Dear Vues Master,
Why are we not surprised? Former Vice President
Kamala Harris’s candid reflections in her upcoming
memoir 107 Days confirm what many Americans
sensed long before the 2024 campaign unraveled:
that President Biden’s bid for a second term was
driven less by public service and more by personal
pride and denial.
Harris’s account, painting a White House in quiet
crisis, with advisors clinging to the deflective man-
tra “It’s Joe and Jill’s decision” reveals a culture of
silence and self-preservation. While Harris admits
her own reluctance to challenge Biden publicly,
fearing accusations of ambition or disloyalty, one
has to ask: If not her, then who? And if not then,
when?
This was not a matter of political strategy. It was a
question of national stability. The signs of Biden’s
decline were plain: fatigue, verbal missteps, and an
inability to inspire confidence on the campaign trail.
Yet the decision to forge ahead was made not in the
national interest, but in the insulated echo chamber
of loyalty and legacy.
We are not surprised because we’ve seen this be-
fore, powerful figures surrounded by enablers, un-
willing to confront hard truths. What’s tragic is the
cost: a fractured Democratic Party, a lost election,
and a shaken public trust.
Harris calls Biden’s campaign a “reckless gamble.”
She’s right. But what’s equally reckless is a system
where political calculations override honest leader-
ship. If this memoir is a reckoning, let it also be a
lesson. PY
Vues Master’s Note: Another front-runner.