Here

this is RaV Moshe frm Tzfat - heputs up hundreds of videos on Judasim - this is surprising that he did this

As if no one reads Making of a Godol anymore. (Not that the two are comparable.)

With all due respect, the man is 100% right. Although I would point out to him that he might make more of an effort to make himself presentable if he is so concerned about how YouTube videos make religious Jews appear in the eyes of others.

Banning it won't get it off YouTube and away from they eyes of others.

I agree.
Though, I don't see what people find to be so "amazing" about these videos. I got bored after a couple of seconds.

Ahem.

Where is the original video? This can't be it, right? Or this?

Or am I the only one who wants to see and judge for myself?

no, i watched it...the first minute of it anyway....*yawn*
THAT's what they're making such a big deal about??

How can people just accept the word of someone else who has no first-hand knowledge of something? Is it because he's a Rav?

I like him.

I have a better question. How could someone who has no first-hand knowledge of something lead others?

Whoa wth, this is really messed up. Thank you Mr. Anonymous Internet Rabbi for causing me to watch a clip with these two idiots.
Disgusting "music" video.



I cannot believe you're comparing the two.

I meant to add that the two are not comparable. Will edit.

It is very surprising since he usually is very soft-spoken and laid back.

I hadn't seen the Miriam and Shoshana videos before, and I decided to see for myself what they were like. I'd say they're funny but nothing special, and I don't see how having two different videos ciriticizing them (there's another one with a guy that calls them "self-hating Jews") doesn't actually promote them.

I don't think that this is causing a chillul Hashem when it's watched by non-frum people- putting it in perspective, it's actually quite tame compared to a lot of stuff on TV- and if anything it gives them the impression that "frum" people have a sense of humor and know how to have fun.

Any frum person that watches all 3 videos will automatically be very skeptical of how "frum" these girls actually are... they dress with 0 regard to tznius for instance.

At any rate, I agree that this could be a very bad hashpaah if watched by pre-teen girls. (and some not-so-smart teenager/young adults)

I found this even more amusing than the video itself....
But M&S are by far h0tter.....

Anyone stupid enough that they don't realize this is BLATANT satire, doesn't belong ANYWHERE near the internet, let alone You Tube........ Come on, who drinks Manasheigetz anyway???

You mean satire? What is it satirizing? How dumb beis yaakov girls are and that they don't take anything seriously?

I just think is obvious that it's just going for shock vaule to promote their radio show. 30,000 hits says it worked.

If it were completely off base, no one would find it offensive....
I think this is too close for comfort for many people...

I see.

I'm still not sure how it's satire.

This has weighted on me all weekend. I'm not surprised no one responded. What is the protocol or policy for things such as this? Who did this Rabbi "hear" this from? And why did he not investigate himself prior to passing judgement? Would this not be considered LH unless witnessed first hand?


Clarification: I liked the second man not because of what he said but because he discovered the truth for himself.

I'm not letting this go.

Does a VP of a corporation need to personally witness inappropriate behavior in the workplace in order to send a memo to employees? Does he need to personally assess your work performance in order to sign off on your pay increase recommended by your direct supervisor? Does a judge need to personally witness a crime in order to convict? Does a father need to personally see the child talk back to her mother before he can discipline her? Do you insist on personally visiting every state in the Union before accepting that they exist? Do you believe that man walked on the moon? Do you refrain from passing judgment on all the anecdotes and personal stories related on h.com on the grounds that you did not witness those episodes yourself?

just watched that M&S video. wow. i don't like rap to begin with, but i saw nothing talented in that video. the girls do have voices, i'll grant that. but there was nothing there in terms of content (does rap usually have it, anyway?), or their "acting".

I appreciate the response. And although I understand what you're saying, I don't feel it's the same thing. A company is not a nation; it doesn't lead or influence a nation of people. it's a business owned by someone. A family is the same thing. A judge may not witness the crime but he witnesses evidence to such. This includes images or recordings. He doesn't just take the word of others that crime happened. I don't have to visit every state of the union to know they exist because it's already been done. There are maps; there is indisputable proof. I'm not so certain men have walked on the moon. And, yes, I attempt to refrain from passing judgement, even here on h.com, unless I have proof.

I'm sorry but this is the one of the biggest reasons I left Christianity. It, for the most part and with rare exception, is a religion of sheep blindly following someone who, for the most part, blindly followed someone else without ever bothering to discover the truth for themself. This is the very foundation of brainwashing and how wars begin.

I don't think the subject matters. Either one thinks one can trust what those around him say, or not. I think that you are applying one standard to religious institutions and a very different standard to all other institutions. If a rabbi/priest/president of the united states trusts the judgment of those close to him, then he is entitled to making a decision on that basis.

You are asked to trust their presentation of the facts AND their reactions to the facts. Your choice as an individual is to trust or not to trust.

I totally disagree with that and think it's no more than an excuse to not discover the truth for oneself. And, yes, I am applying a different standard to religious institutions from business and personal. Business and personal influence a circle of employees or relatives. Religions influences nations.

Edited per your edit:



A rabbi/priest/president should look at evidence if available before passing thier own judgement. This isn't about entitlements. This is about discovering the truth for oneself. You may be asked to trust but if that ultimate decision is yours you'd better hope that you've exhausted all avenues to discover the truth prior to passing judgement if possible because in the end it's you, not your advisors or those whom you've been asked to trust, that will be responsible.

Should George W. have gone to the Iraqi chemical plants himself to inspect the evidence? If you really think about it, very close to 100% of all your knowledge about the world, all your decisions, all your ideas, and all your beliefs and actions are directly or indirectly based on what other people say.
You trust research findings published in journals the editors of which have never been to the lab. You read books based on what other people recommend for you.

Anyway, I think you have a trust issue. The distrust not unfounded. George W. lied to you. The rabbis that sign off on bans without reading books have been known to lay eggs and ruin reputations. Research findings have been fabricated. People lie and misrepresent the truth to suit their needs. What else is new. Sometimes you trust and you get it right, sometimes you trust and you get it wrong. But thinking that you can "discover truth for yourself" is mostly following an illusion.

Moshi, I understand what you're saying but feel it's not appliable in this instance. The truth was readily available in this case. I don't base my beliefs or actions on what other people say. What people say and proof of what they say are two entirely different things. What I'm saying is that leaders who influence many owe it to others to discover the truth prior to any action. Some research I trust; others, not. Same with books.



I absolutely have a trust issue and will be the first to admit it. Too many people lie and too many others willingly live it. Again, I see what you're saying and would even agree with you to a certain point; however, in this instance it's not applicable. I'm talking about discovering the truth to the best of one's ability. In this case it was right in front of him.

I understand. But. Let's say the clip contained actual pornography- Miriam and Shoshana exploring each other on camera, would you still say the same thing? The rabbi shouldn't rely on what other horrified viewers have said, but should have watched the clip from beginning to end for himself?

Absolutely not. He should've only watched it until he verified the allegations, then shut it off immediately. He then had what he needed. I think his address would've been much more effective had he been speaking from his own heart by witnessing first hand than from what he'd heard from others. Anyone's would.

Keep in mind that he probably doesn't listen to women singing to begin with. Never mind two stupid gals acting stupid on camera as well.

ETA: and another point. If I'd tell my husband that I watched a film that was utterly stupid and that he shouldn't watch it, he'd believe me. Because he knows me. If I'd tell a friend of mine that she shouldn't allow her children to read this or that book because it's not age appropriate, she'd believe me because she knows me and trusts my opinion. He heard from someone he trusts about this uh, don't even know what to call it.

I don't think generally acting stupid is against halacha.

Don't remember 'em cause you wannaaaaaaaah.

Yeah men's voices.

Ahavati, of course it watched it himself. He just can't admit it in front of the rabbim. But everyone that reads between the lines understands what he meant by "I heard from people." It's classic lingo.

It's BS.

Who are these rabbim and how come they are out of the loop on this lingo?

Moshi, see Ahavati read between the lines. "Classic lingo" is classic lingo for BS.

Are you really arguing about the "vaad hainternet" which doesn't even really exist and the self appointed "Internet Rabbi" who decided to ban this video???

No.

True.

Scary:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4144963226114885372

I think he's spot-on.

Ditto.

I think both their videos have the effect of giving M&S more attention than they deserve. We can't fight off or refute every bit of darkness that's out there on the internet. How many people heard of/watched M&S only BECAUSE of the "rebuttal" videos?

I just think it's scary that he's hitting himself. That must hurt.

Watch the Hannukah Dance (kol isha)

Is the horrendous singing on purpose?

Stay tuned: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpdKa4O4z8A
WARNING: Illicit Arm Showing