02 Apr SPEAK YOUR VUES WITH THE VUES MASTER

MATZOH
Dear Vues Master:
Looking towards Pesach, there has been persistent
news of a Matzo shortage this year. One of the factors
that caused this is the untimely closing of the Shatzer
Matzah bakery. Some say that this is due to the war
in Ukraine – no grain from Ukraine. Also there is a
shortage of workers; they are too busy fighting there to
bake matzos even for eighteen minutes. Other reasons
include legal issues including the impending arrest of
President Trump. However, we must look into the history of the bakery. The Shatzer bakery didn’t start operations last century. It has actually been around for
many centuries beginning during the time of the first
Bais Hamikdash. When Nebuchanetzer destroyed the
Bais Hamikdash, he looted the keilim. What he was
most proud of though was taking the ovens of the bakery. In fact, he eventually gave ownership of it over to
his grandson. His grandson publicized this so much
he became known as the Baal-Shatzer. Of course, we
know he was punished for this and only lived for another few years. Now that we know the rich history of
the bakery, we can only hope that the closing will only
be for this year. Next year, we fervently look forward
iy”h for the reopening of the bakery – the Chazuras
Ha’Shatzer – and let us answer Umein!
D F
Vues Master’s Note: The price of Matzah will only go
up! There is a new excuse every year!

ALLIES
Dear Vues Master:
It is a shame that both Israel and the USA governments are divided. Do they realize that enemies will
take advantage of this. We need a miracle to save us.
Let us hope that this time of year will bring that.
GS
Vues Master’s Note: Maybe it is time to understand
that the only ally we have is Hashem!

NATO
Dear Vues Master:
Thirteen months ago, a war between Russia and
Ukraine began, making it the first war in Europe since
WW2. America and other western countries have given full support to Ukraine unconditionally. Sanctions,
military build-ups, sending Ukraine money, tanks,
and missiles, isolating Russia economically, and the
expansion of NATO have been some of the actions
taken against Russia. The reasons that have been
given for these actions have been to stop “Putin’s
invasion”, to “protect democracy and defend freedom”, and to “stop Russian aggression from spreading”. These reasons have been the prime defense for
America and other nations’ non-aggressive approach
to this war. The questions though remain on this approach; do these goals have legitimate assumptions?
Has the response to the war accomplished the goals?
Are there other consequences that could have more
terrible outcomes? Those questions are obvious and
legitimate to be asked, however, in the past year, if
you were to ask these questions, you were labeled a
“Putin sympathizer”. The overdramatic reaction to
legitimate questions such as these with the implications of something like, I don’t know, nuclear war,
indicates that something more is going on here than
is being laid out on the surface. The response from
western countries has been with one thematic goal of
“defending Ukraine”. Maybe that is a very righteous
cause, but for what interests does a country like the
US have in defending Ukraine? Is it to stop “Putin’s
invasion”? If that was true, why was there an effort
among these same countries to continue this war? As
stated by former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennet, who was involved in secret negotiations at the
beginning of the war, that ,”…Anything I [Bennet]
did was coordinated down to the last detail with the
US, Germany, and France,” he said. But, he noted as
reported by Business Insider, “some believed it would
be better to ‘keep striking Putin,’ lest he or other leaders be emboldened by a seeming desire for peace at
any cost…” Further, if it was about peace, why would
the United States or a pro-Ukrainian group sabotage
the Nordstrom Pipeline to Europe if the goal was to
stop “Putin’s invasion”? If the response to this war is
about “defending democracy and freedom”, defending

a country with historical problems
of being an oligarchy brings up an issue.

Though Ukrainian President Zelensky was elected on a platform to get rid
of this oligarchy, an investigative report
released over a year ago, dubbed “The
Pandora Papers” revealed that Zelensky
has previously undisclosed money in an
offshore company, thereby continuing
his country’s practice of corruption and
oligarchy. Zelensky also in the past year,
has banned religious organizations and
suspended 11 political parties because of
their “pro-Russian” nature. Banning religious organizations and elected members
of parliament because of a belief is in no
way democratic. Finally, if defending
Ukraine is about “preventing Russian aggression from spreading”, why is NATO,
an organization that was primarily created to stop aggression from the Soviet
Union, a country that no longer exists,
constantly putting troops on the border
of Russia even before this war? What
has this spirit of aggression on NATO’s
part created? The answer is a natural feeling of defense on Russia’s behalf. That,
of course, doesn’t mean, that the tragic
killing, torture, etc. that has occurred this
past year, is at all defensible, but to allege that this effort is to prevent Russian
aggression is ludicrous. This year of responding in this environment has led to
the alliance of Russia and China more
closely together. How exactly is uniting
the world’s 2nd biggest economy which
happens to be communist, and a country
with the most nuclear warheads a success
and a “defense for democracy”? Besides
all of the devastating results that this war
has had on NATO country citizens; from
an energy crisis, inflationary prices, gas
shortages, and other effects, how has this
response been successful and effective?
The loss of life that could be prevented
with talks of peace being advanced now
before a nuclear war must be the only
response. This week, Russia transferred
nuclear weapons into Belarus, showing the world that they aren’t bluffing.
Last week, Russia and China pledged
to realign their alliance for the first time
in 100 years. If truly this fight is about
“defending democracy”, the citizens of
NATO countries have a right to debate
and vote on this war, especially with all
of the devastating results that it has had
on the world.
Sincerely,

DSG
Vues Master’s Note: Wait when is WWIII?

CLEANING
Dear Vues Master:
I once asked a young boy what he does
to help out for Pesach? He told me that
his mom told him to go out to the park.
That would be the greatest help. He came
back early saying I’ve helped enough.
I once put on easy off on the stove and
stood there with the kitchen hose like
a fireman hosing down the oven till it
was completely waterlogged! Well at
least it was Kosher L’Pesach Mehadrin
min hamehadrin. I also tried to surprise
my wife when I told her how I bought a
new recliner from the furniture truck that
came down the block. I also told her not
to worry, since I had asked the African
American workers to take down the old
recliner to the garage. Uh oh she keeps
her jewelry in the old one oops! Sorry.
I sat down on erev Pesach to clean out
the vacuum bag of chometz. It did not
have a bag. I tried cleaning out the dust
& chometz from the vacuum cleaner but
the ceiling fan was blowing everything
all over the place. I took the entire vacuum cleaner and chucked into the sanitation truck! B”H Yom Yom! Chag Kasher
V’sameach
RMS
Vues Master’s Note: And then you woke up!

TERMS OF VENERY
Dear Vues Master
If you’ve ever researched the strange terminology for animal groups (known as
terms of venery), you know there’s a lot
more than just herds and packs. There are
some well known ones like a pride of lions, a school of fish, a flock of birds and
a gaggle of geese. There are even some
lesser known ones like a murder of crows,
a bloat of hippopotamuses and a parliament of owls. But did you know there are
some unusual terms used exclusively to
describe various Jewish groups of people
? There really aren’t but there are now!
For example:
1. A Minyan of worshippers
2. A Kvelling of mothers
3. A Moishav of Laitzim
4. A Crockpot of Cholent Fressers
5. A Plopple of talkers
6. A Shlitah of Rabbonim
7. A Zatzal of deceased Rabbonim
8. A Fherd of overweight troublemakers
9. A Shlemazel of Lo Mutzlachs
10. A Kaparah of Balei Teshuvah
11. A Momzer of shul presidents
12. A Shnit of Mohelim
13. A Shayla of Shochtim
14. A Pshurah of Dayonim
15. Ah Bruch of In-laws
16. Ah Klulah of Mother in Laws
17. A Mazal Tov of Kallahs
18. An Extravagance of caterers
19. A Klop of Gabboim
20. A Donation of Meshulachim
21. An Annoyance of Schnorrers
22. A Shtreimel of Chassidim
23. A Gorggle of Chazzonim
24. A Trup of Bal-Korehs
25. A Botlin of Laydigayers
26. A Mesechta of Daf Yomi learners
27. A Nusach of Cantors
28. A Shvitz of Mikvah Goers
29. A Tekiah of Shofer Blowers
30. A Deafening of musicians
31. A Shlock of Sukkah builders
32. A Sermon of pulpit rabbis
33. A Brucha of babies
34. A clasp of jewelers
35. A Pain of dentists
36. A Suit of lawyers
37. A Spread of proctologists
38. An Orbit of astronauts
39. A Dazzle of diamond dealers
40. A Shondeh of prisoners
Country Yossi Toiv
Vues Master’s Note: Hilarious!!

A DEADLY CHOL HAMOED TRIP
Dear Vues Master
A Jew from Texas is visiting Israel for
Pesach. Touring around the country on
Chol Hamoed, he comes to a small kibbutz. Seeing they have horses, he decides
that it’s a great day to go riding, and enjoy
the countryside that way. The kibbutznik
in charge of the stable tells him, “Here we
do things different from America. If you
want Shmuli, your horse, to go, you say
‘Oy Givolt’. If you want him to stop, you
say, ‘Shalom alecheim’. You got that? Oy
Givolt is go, shalom alecheim is stop.”
“Got it”, says the Texan, adjusting his ten
gallon hat, “No problem! Shmuli and I
are gonna get along jest fine!” And with
a loud ‘Oy givolt’, he’s off! Riding along
enjoying the country, he spies Masada in
the distance. What a great idea, he thinks,
I can get up Masada with the horse, and
don’t gotta hike all day! So with a loud,
Oy givolt!, they’re off! And he’s ‘Oy givolting’ the whole trail, Shmuli galloping
for all he’s worth, snorting, sweat flying
in the wind! They get to the top of Masada, and Shmuli is still galloping in a
frenzy, heading right for the edge of the
cliff! The Texan is frantic! “What’s that
word I gotta say! Oy Ribbono Shel Olam!
What…oh yeah!” He yells out, “Shalom
alecheim!” Shmuli stops, his hoofs right
at the edge of the great drop! The Texan
looks at the plunge downward, removes
his hat, wipes his brow with shaking
hands, and loudly exclaims, ‘Oy givolt!’
Vues Master’s Note: Oy givolt! Keep the
jokes coming! We love them!

MORE
Dear Vues Master:
Two women were speaking about their
children. One said that her son is studying medicine and was planning on specializing as an ear, nose and throat doctor.
When they next met several years later,
the woman was asked how her son was
doing. She responded: “He’s a dentist.
Very smart move. He realized that a person has only two ears, one nose and one
throat, but thirty two teeth.”
RW
Vues Master’s Note: I can see the wisdom in that profession!

NACHUM SEGAL
Dear Vues Master:
N-ice A-wesome C-hein H-appy U-nbelievable M-entch S-uper Star E-xcellent
G-evaldig A-lla Maalos L-ikeable
RMS
Vues Master’s Note: I thought it was no
soap radio!

INSTANT
Dear Vues Master:
A man was returning home from the burial of his wife, when a roof tile fell and
just missed hitting him on the head. “Unbelievable!” he said, “We put her in the
ground less than an hour ago, and she’s
already gone up למעלה“.
SA
Vues Master’s Note: These jokes are just
a dead issue!

RON DESANTIS
Dear Vues Master:
The statement by Florida governor
Ron DeSantis that Russia’s war against
Ukraine is just a “territorial dispute” and
is not “a vital American interest” has set
off a firestorm of debate, finger-pointing,
and, inevitably, comparisons to the Hitler era. But are the Nazi analogies completely unfounded this time? The controversy began when Fox News host Tucker
Carlson asked possible GOP candidates
if they consider “opposing Ukraine
in Russia” to be “a vital American national

strategic interest.” Carlson
is a skeptic of U.S. support for
Ukraine and the way he worded
the question made it more likely
respondents would take his side.
Carlson could have asked simply
whether the U.S. should continue
supplying weapons to Ukraine.
Instead, he added the word ‘vital’— “necessary for the success
and continued existence of something,” according to the Cambridge Dictionary; derived from
the Latin word for “life.” That
left the door open for the candidates, even those who support
aid to Ukraine, to say that doing
so is not necessary for America’s
existence. Gov. DeSantis turned
out to be the one who stepped
through that open door. Not only
did DeSantis take Carlson’s bait,
he compounded matters by mischaracterizing the nature of the
Russia-Ukraine conflict. “While
the U.S. has many vital national
interests,” DeSantis said in his
written reply, “becoming further
entangled in a territorial dispute
between Ukraine and Russia is
not one of them.” The patently
erroneous term “territorial dispute” invoked by DeSantis (or his
speechwriters) is reminiscent of
a blatant misstatement about the
Russians made by President Gerald Ford. In his October 6, 1976
debate with Democratic challenger Jimmy Carter, Ford asserted
that “there is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe.” He
named Soviet-occupied Poland as
an example of a country that supposedly was “independent.” Ford
was widely criticized at the time.
DeSantis is now on the receiving
end of similarly withering denunciations. Former New Jersey governor Chris Christie declared that
DeSantis “sounds like Neville
Chamberlain talking about when
Germany had designs on Czechoslovakia.” Senator Lindsey Graham said, “The Neville Chamberlain approach to aggression never
ends well.” It certainly didn’t
end well for the Czechs. In 1938,
Hitler demanded that Czechoslovakia surrender its western region, known as the Sudetenland,
which had a large population of
ethnic Germans. The Nazi leader
presented the matter as a territorial dispute, not a threat to the
existence of Czechoslovakia.
The British and French decided
it was not in their vital interest
to confront Hitler. So they pressured the Czechs to surrender
the Sudetenland in exchange for
Hitler’s promise not to make any
additional demands. The Munich
agreement was signed. Chamberlain declared that he had delivered “peace in our time.” President Franklin D. Roosevelt said
he “rejoiced” that “the outbreak
of war has been averted.” Less
than six months later, Hitler
invaded and occupied the rest
of Czechoslovakia. The Russian war against Ukraine is not
a dispute over some piece of
territory. The Russians never
limited their attacks to the Donestk or Luhansk areas in eastern
Ukraine; recall that the invasion
began with an all-out assault on
the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv.
Vladimir Putin’s statements that
Ukraine should be part of Russia
illustrate his goal of conquering
the entire country. The broader
problem here is the question of
what constitutes a “vital American interest.” Tucker Carlson
and other isolationists or fellow-travelers have embraced
an extremely narrow definition.
And they are far from the first to
have adopted such a perspective.
During the Holocaust, President
Roosevelt saw no American national interest in taking even
minimal steps to interrupt the
Nazis’ mass murder of European Jews. In 1973, Secretary of
State Henry Kissinger advised
President Richard Nixon that
even “if they put Jews into gas
chambers in the Soviet Union,
it is not an American concern.”
In 1994, President Bill Clinton
refused even to jam radio stations that were inciting the massacres in Rwanda, because he
did not perceive any American
economic or strategic interest
in getting involved. Note that
none of those types of intervention would have involved putting American lives in danger.
Bombing the railways to Auschwitz would not have posed
any additional risk to American
pilots who were already targeting other railways in the vicinity. Putting economic pressure
on the Soviet Union or interfering with inciting broadcasts in
Rwanda would not have endangered American lives. Neither
does sending U.S. weapons to
Ukraine. Most Americans believe that our country should
stand for something bigger than
the mere pursuit of economic
or strategic advantages. Values
and ideals stand at the core of
the concept of American exceptionalism. A definition of
“American interests” so narrow
as to exclude interrupting mass
murder abroad or assisting U.S.
allies against aggression betrays
that cherished concept.
RM
Vues Master’s Note: Politics is just
horrible!