Have Questions or Comments?
Leave us some feedback and we'll reply back!

    Your Name (required)

    Your Email (required)

    Phone Number)

    In Reference to

    Your Message


    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.




    Dear Vues Master:

    This past Monday the YWN Editorial Board wrote an excellent

    post online that I wanted to share with your readers. This

    past week brought an extraordinary assault against the Chassidishe

    community by the New York Times. Timed to appear

    the day before a New York Board of Regents vote on regulations

    opposed by yeshivas, the true target of the Times story

    wasn’t educational enhancement nor was it the rights of school

    children. It was to stigmatize and delegitimize the entire Chassidic

    community, and to undermine their standing as New Yorkers

    and Americans. There is room for healthy debate about

    the scope and extent of the responsibility to provide children

    with a basic education. Had the Times wanted to add its voice

    to that debate, it could have named the dozen schools whose

    performance it featured and called for improvements in those

    schools. Instead, without naming the schools the Times painted

    a picture of horrible neglect at dozens and dozens of yeshivas.

    The Times claimed that corporal punishment was “common” in

    chassidishe schools today, that parents have to bribe Rabbeim

    not to beat their kids and that abuse was rampant in yeshivas

    because there were a dozen 911 calls to yeshivas over a five year

    period (without specifying the reason for those calls or whether

    they were substantiated). To compound all this, the Times trumpeted

    the fact that over a five-year period chassidishe schools

    received $1 billion dollars in government funding. The Times

    glossed over the fact that $200 million of the funds were related

    to the pandemic relief efforts, and that a large part of the remaining

    money was for breakfast and lunch for students, transportation

    and the like. All in all, the sensationalized $1 billion

    figure amounts to about $2,000 per student per year – versus

    nearly $30,000 per student per year in the public schools. Yet

    the Times Page One headline screamed “In Hasidic Enclaves,

    Failing Private Schools Flush With Public Money.” It is unclear

    why $2000 a year per child makes the schools flush with public

    money. And one can search in vain for the Times articles bemoaning

    the many billions of dollars annually flushed down the

    toilet of the public school system. But the Times wasn’t content

    to stop there. The Times then pressed public officials to condemn

    yeshivas. The Times reported on those who had negative

    things to say about yeshivas, and called out those who wouldn’t

    take the bait. But they ignored those elected officials who questioned

    the thrust of their article and had good things to say about

    yeshiva education. That isn’t journalism. It is advocacy. It seeks

    not to enlighten readers or improve education, but to inflame

    public sentiment against chassidim and to penalize them for

    their way of life. The Times claims to want to protect chassidish

    children – from their parents, but the only protection those kids

    need is from the Times and its fellow liberals who believe that

    government should have more say over a child’s education and

    upbringing than parents do. That is the true danger, not only for

    chassidim but the entire Orthodox community. Notably absent

    from the Times numerous articles and nearly 10,000 words is

    what they might do to assist and enhance education at schools

    that far from being financially flush are run on shoestring budgets.

    That is what failing public schools get: more money, more

    resources, more time and more support. Contrast that with what

    the Times demands for yeshivas: threats, penalties and punishments.

    That should tell you what their target truly is. In case you

    had any doubt, Times editorial board member Mara Gay tweeted

    this yesterday: “Happy Sunday! Today is a great day to read

    about how politicians in New York have allowed your taxpayer

    money to keep flowing to schools that purposefully deny Hasidic

    children basic education.” Your taxpayer money? As if the

    parents of the 170,000 yeshiva children in New York don’t pay

    lots of taxes. Or as if poor chassidish children should be denied

    the nutrition provided to all low-income kids in New York. Ask

    yourself: is that tweet more likely to lead to better education, or

    to another attack on a chassid minding his own business on the

    street of New York. Threats, penalties and punishments was

    also the theme of the New York State Education Department last

    week. A day after the Times article appeared, the Board of Regents

    adopted regulations meant to impact yeshivas. In the days

    leading up to the vote, the Deputy Commissioner of SED gave

    an interview in which he highlighted the financial penalties they

    will impose on yeshivas that SED finds lacking and the even

    harsher penalties – including jail time – that await parents who

    send their children to these schools. There was nothing about

    working together to enhance education, or about providing resources

    and support to those schools working to improve. That

    is for the public schools. For yeshivas, it is all about, threats,

    penalties and punishment. The regulations adopted last week

    may not affect all yeshivas right now, but the precedent of government

    control of yeshiva curriculum and faculty is dangerous

    and unprecedented in our American experience. K-8 yeshivas

    will need the blessing of their local school districts. The list of

    required classes is long today, and will only get longer. The criteria

    a local school district will use to define whether a teacher

    is “competent” is likely vastly different that those employed by

    yeshivas. And all the while we will be at the mercy of those

    who want to penalize yeshivas and punish yeshiva parents. The

    final chapters of this story are not yet written. These events

    are occurring in Elul. Let us all take the opportunity offered by

    these Yemei Tefillah and Yemei Rachamim and let us all daven

    for a reversal of these g’zeiros.


    Vues Master’s Note: A Jewish person should not buy the NY

    Times! It’s clearly an anti-semetic paper.



    Dear Vues Master:

    Is it just me or does it bother other people also? I have cleaning help that comes to my house once a week to help keep my house in order. She’s here for only five hours. That’s all I can afford. From when she comes until she leaves she’s on her cell phone talking to her friends. Is that fair? She gets the job done, but do I need to hear her talking in Spanish to her friends while I’m paying her

    Vues Master’s Note: These days it’s hard to get good help! It’s not fair. You are right. If she gets the job done, you might have to live with it.


    Dear Vues Master:

    Last Friday there was a very interesting letter being shared on social media about “musical Selichos”. Last week, rabbonim have come out against the phenomenon. This includes the Ponovezh Rosh Yeshiva Rav Gershon Edelstein, who signed a letter on the subject. The letter states, “We warn about those who break through the fence to change and turn the sacred Selichos into an evening of entertainment and hold ‘Selichos evenings’ with the participation of singers and orchestras, both in shuls and in the streets… “We hereby call on both the organizers and the singers to cease their actions.” The letter is signed by Rav Zvi Weber, Rav Yehuda Silman, Rav Sariel Rosenberg and Rav Yitzchak Mordechai HaCohen Rubin, who were joined, as mentioned, by the Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Gershon Edelstein. This past Motzei Shabbos there were musical selichos all over New York. I’m curious if anyone cares what these gedolim wrote?


    Vues Master’s Note: I am curious where in Eretz Yisrael they even have musical Selichos? I thought it was only in America!


    Dear Vues Master:

    A wealthy Am Haaretz bought Chassan Torah on Simchas Torah and according to the prevalent custom a Chupah was prepared for him, as is done for a Chassan going to greet the Kallah. One of the congregants asked the Rav how he could permit such a boor to go under the Chupah with the Torah? The Rav answered: “It’s an old custom that the Chasan does not know his Kallah.”


    Vues Master’s Note: Maybe he should be kovea ittim and then have a date with the Torah!


    Dear Vues Master:

    The Chareidim quote a Teshuvas Haran who writes that the Mitzvah of Uvacharta BaChaim is not only applicable to performing Mitzvos. It also applies to worldly matters. If one has a choice between a risky or safe way and he chooses the safe way he is mekayem the mitzvah of Uvacharta BaChaim (even when risk is minimal). By canceling your ticket to Uman you will be mekayem the mitzvah of Uvacharta BaChaim.


    Vues Master’s Note: You need to cancel more than one ticket. There is no direct way you need to take a train from Poland!


    Dear Vues Master:

    Friendship is challenging to analyze. There are no set categories of friendship and there are no rules to what makes up or breaks up friendships. Friends are supposed to support one another. There’s an expectation that friends will be there for you when there’s trouble. At the same time a true friend warns you when you are making a mistake or going down the wrong path. If not done well, or intentions are misunderstood, acts of friendship can seem like acts of betrayal. It is in criticism that friendships are put to the test. When friends criticize each other, their criticism can easily be seen as a lack of support, or even an attack. While one friend might think they are being supportive, the friend they’re supporting can think they’re undermining their friendship with acts of cruelty. The line between support and cruelty can be whether the words being offered are prescriptive. Criticism that sounds like a warning is appreciated, criticism that prescribes how their friend should act is a sign of a dysfunctional friendship. Instead of the friends respecting each other they tell each other what to do – without respecting their friend knows what’s best for them. America and Israel are allies – friends as countries go. Their friendship is based on shared values and strategic goals. There are those who misunderstand friendship and support. They advocate for America and Israel’s relationship to be prescriptive. They don’t recognize how corrosive America prescribing to Israel how to act would be to their relationship. Thankfully, the American government understands the difference between support and prescribing how to act. State Department spokesman Ned Price said last Tuesday, “No one knows the IDF’s processes and procedures better than the IDF, and so it is not on us or any other country or entity to say precisely what the IDF or any military or security organization around the world should do. We’ve noted and underscored the imperative of accountability, but we haven’t been prescriptive.”


    Vues Master’s Note: As long as we are friends and not fiends!


    Dear Vues Master:

    Hypocrisy is when a person or group states or acts on a belief, while subsequently contradicting it. It is a human quality that many of us share ranging from habits to even how we practice religion. Many times there are valid explanations for why one thing was true, while the opposite was true at another moment. Any cynic who understands the world understands the association of politics with hypocrisy. A politician says one thing and then does the opposite thing the next day. As is true for many areas in life, valid explanations are plausible, but the basic recognition that something is hypocritical, at least on the surface, is required to be an intellectually honest human being. To do otherwise requires mockery to the fullest extent. “I know speaking of unity can sound to some like a foolish fantasy these days. I know the forces that divide us are deep and they are real. But I also know they are not new. Our history has been a constant struggle between the American ideal that we all are created equal and the harsh, ugly reality that racism, nativism, fear, demonization have long torn us apart.” This quote is a very unifying quote calling for the unity of a divided nation that yearns to bring out the best in people. To anyone listening to such a unifying speech, the hope and longing for unity in some sense would be expected to the listeners. “Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our Republic, [they] promote authoritarian leaders and they fan the flames of political violence.” On the other hand, this quote seems very divisive. It can’t be that the first quote and the second quote were said by the same individual?! Well, unfortunately, it was. Joe Biden, the man who called for “unity” in his inauguration speech is the same man calling 75 million “dangerous to the Republic”. The “unity” that Joe Biden pleaded for on his first day as president, really means conformity. If you deny the legitimacy of the 2020 election or have questions about suspicious activity from the FBI or CIA in recent months and years, sorry, you are now flaming the “flames of political violence.” Joe Biden labeled half the country as “dangerous,” Hillary Clinton labeled them as “deplorable”, Democrat after Democrat has called millions of Americans “racist, sexist,” and a million other derogatory falsehoods. Republicans in Congress have to wake up to the fact that the other side of the aisle hates them to the extent they would celebrate their deaths. Don’t believe me? Well, let’s not forget the terror they caused in the summer of 2020 with their BLM riots, their life threats to Supreme Court justices, or their passive endorsement of assassinating Donald Trump. Donald Trump as he once said that they hate him because they hate you. Mitch McConnell, Kevin McCarthy, and any other elected Republican leader or politician need to stop the cowardice of treating the Biden administration and the Democrat party with kid gloves, it’s time to fight them till the end. The other side changed the rules of the game, it’s only fair that we give it right back to them in their faces that will soon be colored red from the incoming Red Wave!

    Sincerely, DSG

    Vues Master’s Note: It might be very hard to beat fraud!


    Dear Vues Master:

    R. Elchonon Wasserman HY” D explained the Rashi, when Klal Yisroel are Chas VeSholom in need of punishment then Hashem sends Rodfim to curse & harass the Yidden. By doing so the Yidden become the nirdaf and Elokim yevakesh-es nirdaf even if the Rodef is a Tzaddik and the nirdaf is a Rasha. Kal V’Chomer when the rodef is the Rasha. This spares Klal Yisroel from punishment. When the UN condemns Yidden (Israel ) with hundreds of resolutions against us, they are actually doing us a favor, turning us into the nirdaf and thereby Hashem protects us.


    Vues Master’s Note: May we finally get Moshiach so we don’t need these punishments anymore!.


    Dear Vues Master:

    We all know that the queen passed away. In a drasha, Rabbi Eytan Feiner said that when the queen was ready to get coronated she got together all of the chief meteorologists in England and told them to find a day that it never rained in British history. After researching they told her June 2nd. As we all know, Queen Elizabeth the 2nd was coronated on June 2nd, 1953. and guess what it rained. Just when she thought she was at the top of England Hashem brought her down. This should be our mindset as we go into the yomim noiraim we should humbly beg Hashem as we are his servants and he is our master and then we will be zoichah to the real teshuvah with the coming of Mashiach bmiheirah biyameinu!

    M F

    Vues Master’s Note: I guess the meteorologists are always wrong!


    Dear Vues Master:

    Yenta’s husband was not feeling well at all. She took him to the doctor. After a thorough examination, the doctor took Yenta aside and said to her “Your husband is suffering from exhaustion and fatigue. He needs lots of rest, peace and quiet. If you want to help him recover, take one tranquilizer four times per day.”


    Vues Master’s Note: Oy! Another joke against women!


    Dear Vues Master:

    According to some Rishonim, the Mitzvah of Shmittas Ksafim (forgiving outstanding loans at the end of Shmitta) is a Mitzvah DeOraysa even bizman hazeh and even in chutz leAretz. 2) Most Rishonim hold bizman hazeh it is only a mitzvah DeRabbanan. 3) Some who hold the mitzvah is not applicable bizman hazeh The Ben Ish Chai recommends, after writing the Pruzbul one should lend a friend a small amount of money. When the friend comes (after Rosh Hashana) to repay the loan he should tell him meshamet ani – I forgive the loan. Thereby he will have fulfilled the Mitzvah of Shmittas Kesafim. Pruzbul is not valid for future loans.


    Vues Master’s Note: Thanks for the financial advice. How about you lend me some money?


    Dear Vues Master:

    I was reading the Jewish Vues from Parshas Ki Savo and was disappointed in one of the letters printed in Speak Your Vues. Apparently it seems that the person who signed his/her letter GS shows little value for our yeshivos and Torah. How is it possible that a frum yid can even think of suggesting that Yeshivos should be closed on 9/11 and Yom Hashoah? Yes it is true that many people perished on that day and that a number of Hatzolah members suffer from lung and heart issues until today and that we lost 6000,000 Yidden during the war Rachmaman Litzlan. But these people would want us to spend these 2 days learning the heilege Torah. Let’s not forget that during the holocaust we lost many great Roshei Yeshiva and Rabbonim who gave up their lives for the Torah. And now you GS have the chutzpah to request that Yeshivos should remain closed especially when our children’s chinuch is under attack? And then you also call today’s Roshei Yeshiva and Menaheilim heartless? No wonder why our Yeshivos are under attack? It seems like we have people who think that Torah is not as important as commemorating 9/11. But there is only one way that our boys could commemorate properly. And that is to spend the day in Yeshiva and to LEARN and to LEARN and to LEARN. By the way I am sure that Yeshivos do speak about 9/11 on that day. Also the Bnei Yeshiva also has a Yom Hashoah. That day is called Tisha B’Av. So in the merit of those who perished in 9/11 and in the war and also of our children’s chinuch please stop berating our Yeshivos. Have a GEMAR KESIVA VECHASIMA TOVAH.


    Vues Master’s Note: I wonder if you read my response to that letter?


    Dear Vues Master:

    Some supporters of former President Donald Trump believe that a group of entrenched bureaucrats, who they call the “Deep State,” prevented Trump from carrying out many of his policy initiatives. Filmmaker Ken Burns is a strong critic of Trump, yet Burns seems to have embraced a version of the Deep State idea in his forthcoming documentary about America’s response to the Holocaust. According to Burns’s narrative, President Franklin Roosevelt wanted to help the Jews in Europe but was obstructed and undermined by his own State Department. In other words, the “Deep State Department.” Burns recounts how State Department officials went out of their way to block Jewish refugees from entering the country. In eleven of FDR’s twelve years in office, immigration from Nazi Germany and other countries was kept far below what the existing quotas would have permitted. What Burns does not explain is that the State Department was implementing FDR’s policy, not sneaking around behind the president’s back. In one 1935 letter to New York Gov. Herbert Lehman, Roosevelt bluntly noted that “nearly all immigration quotas have been considerably under-issued during the past four years.” And that’s how he wanted it. Assistant Secretary of State Breckinridge Long, who was in charge of the department’s visa division, wrote in his diary—never intended for publication—that he briefed the president on the tactics that he and his colleagues were using to restrict immigration. In one diary entry from 1940, Long wrote that in a discussion at the White House on ways to curtail immigration, he “found that [FDR] was 100% in accord with my ideas,” and “expressed himself as in entire accord” and “wholeheartedly in support” of what Long and other State Department officials were doing. Moreover, it was President Roosevelt himself who falsely claimed, at a June 5, 1940 press conference, that some refugees, “especially Jewish refugees,” had agreed to spy for the Nazis out of fear that their relatives back in Germany “would be taken out and shot.” That became a stock excuse for shutting America’s doors even tighter. Burns’s film describes how American rescue activist Varian Fry saved more than 2,000 refugees in Vichy France in 1940-1941, until the Nazis and their Vichyite collaborators complained to Washington, at which point Secretary of State Cordell Hull forced Fry to leave France. Here, too, President Roosevelt is mysteriously absent from Burns’s story. It’s as if Secretary Hull was making up his own foreign policy. In reality, it was FDR’s policy to maintain friendly relations with Nazi Germany and Vichy France during the years prior to America’s entry into World War II. Hull’s action against Fry was part and parcel of the State Department implementing Roosevelt’s policy of appeasing Vichy. Shortly after Hull acted against Fry, the Roosevelt administration publicly condemned De Gaulle’s Free French forces for liberating two islands off Nova Scotia that had been occupied by the Vichyites. And when the Allies liberated North Africa from the Nazis and Vichyites in 1942, it was FDR who decided to leave the Vichy Admiral Francois Darlan in power in the region. That was Roosevelt’s policy, which the State Department and War Department carried out. Of course, the reason Hull and Long were in the State Department in the first place is because President Roosevelt appointed them to those positions. FDR initially chose Long as U.S. ambassador to Italy, but Long had to leave that post after causing controversy by praising Mussolini (including the punctuality of his trains). Instead of getting rid of Long, Roosevelt promoted him to assistant secretary of state, putting him in charge of 23 of the State Department’s 42 divisions. The president could have fired Hull or Long at any time if they were defying his policies. FDR repeatedly demonstrated that he was entirely capable of dismissing government officials who fell out of his favor for one reason or another—including his first two vice presidents. President Roosevelt is often described as strong and decisive in leading America out of the Great Depression and against the Axis powers in World War II. How plausible is it to suggest that officials of the State Department, operating in broad daylight, would have been able to defy and undermine such a president? If FDR had been opposed to appeasing Vichy, and wanted Varian Fry to continue his rescue work, how could the State Department have dared to appease Vichy and force Fry out of France? If Roosevelt wanted the immigration quotas to be filled, why would he knowingly allow the State Department to keep under-filling them? The answer is that there was no “Deep State Department” working against President Roosevelt. FDR was indeed a strong and decisive president, and his subordinates implemented his policies, including those concerning Jewish refugees, with his knowledge and approval—for better or for worse.


    Vues Master’s Note: I don’t know whom to trust anymore. The media is biased! The politician’s are crooked! Etc!


    Dear Vues Master:

    Why does the ben sorer u’moreh (rebellious son) get the capital punishment of stoning instead of beheading? If he is getting punished now for what he will do in future, namely murder, then his punishment should be beheading. The reason he is stoned, at least in theory, is to bring out the gravity of this relationship; that disrespecting a parent is tantamount to disrespecting God. How does stoning show this? Stoning is the punishment for Shabbos desecration and Shabbos is connected to Kibud av v’em as they are the fourth and fifth commandments respectively on the Decalogue. Also, at the beginning of parshas Kedoshim it says, “You shall fear every man, his mother and his father, and keep my Shabbos: I am the Lord your God.” By putting parents and Shabbos together God is elevating the parents to the level of Shabbos; He even put the parents before Shabbos as if to say parents are to be respected like Shabbos. Some say the situation of a ben sorer u’moreh never happened which means the Torah gave one scenario of the punishment awaiting a rebellious son and particularly one who makes his parents do something which is contrary to their very being, to bring him to get killed.

    D G

    Vues Master’s Note: Yes! This is your favorite and maybe only topic you write about!


    Dear Vues Master:

    Cursed be the man that makes any carved or molten idol, an abomination to the Lord, the work of the hands of a craftsman, and sets it up in secret; and all the people shall answer and say, Amen. Cursed be he that dishonors his father or his mother; and all the people shall say, Amen. – Deut 27:15-16

    Why are the first two curses in this order? Chronologically wouldn’t it make more sense that he would rebel against his parents before he makes an idol? The answer is that he can only dishonor his parents after setting himself up with something or someone to replace them first.


    Vues Master’s Note: Oy! Not again!


    Dear Vues Master:

    A woman in the supermarket marveled at the patience of a father whose child was making a racket in the store. The father remained calm and said “Moshe, be calm. We’ll be home soon.” The child didn’t listen and continued to carry on. The father appeared unperturbed and again said “We’re almost done. Be calm. We’re leaving soon.” But the child continued to scream as loud as he could. When they met at the cash register, the woman said: “I really admire how you speak to your Moshe, without getting angry and in a soft voice.” “Thank you,” the father said. “But my son isn’t Moshe. I”m Moshe.”


    Vues Master’s Note: I sometimes need some more patience when I respond to these letters!


    Dear Vues Master:

    Is it true that Rabbi Avigdor Miller was a strong proponent of the practice of writing anonymous letters?


    Vues Master’s Note: I would respond to you but only anonymously. Since we are both not anonymous I will not tell you whether Rabbi Miller was an anonymous letter writer. One thing is for sure his shiurim and lectures were not anonymous!


    Dear Vues Master:

    A fellow Mispallel told me that I’m not living in the real world. He was complaining that I had told someone who was on his phone in shul to please go out, since the rebbe is makpid not to have phones on in shul. I told him that I happened to have been in Lakewood the other day and noticed a sign in all the Batei Medrashim of BMG not to have any phones in the Bais Medrash signed from all the Roshei Yeshivas and the Mashgiach. He told me that I’m not living in the real world. So where is the real world if not on 617 6th st Lakewood NJ 08701? I thought that was the center of the world. My Rav in Monsey always quotes his Rosh Hayeshiva that when the seforim say Haolam Makshim. Do they mean in the Bank or in the Post office? No, they mean the Olam Hatorah! I wanted very much to take a picture on my phone of the new aron hakodosh in Beis Yitzchok BMG. They held the doors open so I can take a picture from the hall and not go in with my smart phone that has been tagged twice. My Rosh Hayeshiva still held that I was wrong and its poretz geder. My chavrusa told me that it should have had a sticker on it from TAG so that people would notice that it was tagged. I wanted the photo for the Papers that is a Torah newspaper. [Mitzvah Haba B’Averah or Avera L’shma.] I apologize to the Roshei Hayeshivas and to the Mashgiach whom I love and would never disrespect them or their takonos. My Rav says the phone is smart but the person is a tipish! A person is in a CELL! My Rebbe gave me permission to be mocheh in his name. When I go to Emunas Yisroel, I respect the Mashgiach’s wishes and put my phone in their cell phone lockers that are located outside the beis medrash. My son once noticed a Shliach Tzibbur answer his phone during chazars hashatz and say Nu! I noticed someone texting during kedusha Kodosh Kodosh Kodosh! By the way when Moshiach arrives it’ll be the sound of a shofar that we will hear, not a What’s App, or Facebook,or a Text, or an email, or Twitter, or on Instagram! Kesiva V’Chasima Tova!!


    Vues Master’s Note: Great Mussar for the Yomim Noraim. Thanks.