Responsible Gun Ownership Saves Lives
Re: “Six Murdered in Terror Shooting in Israel” (www.JewishPress.com): The terrorists who killed six people in Israel on September 8 were killed by a policeman and a civilian with a gun. No one in Israel is calling for gun control, as occurs in the U.S. every time there’s a mass shooting. The unfortunate attack in Israel shows that level-headed, responsible civilians could cut down on casualties in mass shootings.
With all the mass shootings in schools we’ve seen in recent years, isn’t it time teachers and principals are allowed to carry firearms? Anybody can be trained to handle a firearm properly. A strict policy of no guns only helps criminals; they’ll get guns regardless of what the law says. It’s the law-abiding citizens who suffer from not being allowed to protect themselves.
Of course, some discretion would be in order as to who should or should not be allowed to carry a weapon. But loosening the gun laws so people in historically vulnerable positions can carry a gun would go a long way in saving lives.
Josh Greenberger
Brooklyn, N.Y.
Standing For Israel – All of It – Is Standing for Truth
The editorial of the August 15 edition of The Jewish Press (“In the Face of Western Anti-Israel Challenges Trump Administration Sounds the Right Note”) reminded readers of the carpet-bombing of Dresden by combined U.S. and British fighter planes during WWII, resulting in the deaths of approximately 25,000 Germans, most of whom were not army generals, but rather civilians. That’s the way World War II was fought. The editorial quotes American Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee’s response to British Prime Minister Starmer’s pronouncement about recognizing a Palestinian state: “So Israel is expected to surrender to Hamas and feed them even though Israeli hostages are being starved. Did Britain surrender to Nazis and drop food to them? Ever hear of Dresden, PM Starmer? That wasn’t food you dropped.”
It is not in the best interest of Israel’s military strategy to feed the enemy. Israel’s only obligation is to open corridors of escape from the war zone for the mass evacuation of Gazan refugees into Sinai. From there, the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) can take over, performing its stated purpose to aid people who are forced to leave areas of armed conflict and to offer long-term solutions such as resettlement and integration into third countries. Simultaneously, the United Nations needs to immediately send emissaries into Gaza to meet with and to ascertain the treatment of Israeli hostages.
The August 8 edition of The Jewish Press reported on the visit to Ariel of House Speaker Mike Johnson along with U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, U.S.-Israel Education Association founder Heather Johnston, as well as several other Republican Representatives. According to a readout provided by the Ariel Municipality, Speaker Johnson declared: “The Bible teaches that the Hills of Judea and Samaria were promised to the Jewish people and belong to you by right…The world may not see it that way, but we do.” The article then quoted Marc Zell, chairman of the Republicans Overseas Israel branch, who commented on this visit of American politicians to Ariel: “Today’s visit…is a clear expression of President Trump’s unwavering support for Israel, and recognition that Jewish presence in Judea and Samaria is…an expression of the Jewish people’s historical and legal right to their land.”
Adding to this list of American politicians who recognize the Jewish Biblical claim to the Holy Land is the response of Rep. Elyse Stefanik to Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen’s question during the appointment hearings for her nomination as ambassador to the U.N. He asked whether she agreed with those religious Zionist members of Knesset who proclaim that “Israel has a Biblical right to the entire West Bank.” Stefanik did not hesitate with her one-word reply: “Yes.”
Bravo to The Jewish Press for echoing these thoughts in that same editorial, as you responded to those countries which intend to recognize a Palestinian state: “Of course, one has to wonder what the recognizing countries are thinking other than desiring to deny the Jewish state the ability to pursue its manifest destiny, both in the Biblical sense and its success in overcoming any number of Arab attempts at policide.”
We need to repeatedly publicize our Biblical claim to all of Eretz Yisrael and to settle all territory which becomes liberated from our aggressive “neighbors.” Your choice of the phrase “manifest destiny” is spot on.
When peace finally returns to Ukraine, does anyone believe that President Putin would agree to give back any of the areas of Ukraine that Russia has occupied? He will claim that the lands are historically Russia’s and are vital to Russia’s security.
How much more so in Israel, where liberated lands were given to us by the G-d of creation, as recorded in the Bible, and liberated through G-d’s blessings, and whose transfers are even supported by international law regarding the defeat of invading armies.
As former American Ambassador to Israel David Friedman reminds us in his book, One Jewish State: “They (Israelis) can and should rely first on the biblical grant of territory as the basis for their title to the Holy Land. The best response to all the anti-Zionists is that they should lodge their complaints with G-d, not the Jews.”
David Ferster
Great Neck, N.Y.
These Must Be the End Times
Re: Rabbi Yitzchak Sprung’s “Now Is the Time to Prepare for the Gathering Storm” (August 15): Having recently written regarding the foibles of today’s media, I found this piece was a very relevant and poignant segue to the discussion regarding the slander of Israel and Jews by this biased and dishonest compendium of activists, not journalists.
From alleged bombing of hospitals, to the killing of so-called journalists who are actually Hamas operatives, to the starvation libel being played out in the news today, Israel has no respite from the ceaseless attacks regarding its actions and moral right to self-defense.
Making matters worse is the insistence by countries such as France, England, Australia, Canada, and others that a Palestinian state should be recognized. These fools and other like-minded countries and organizations are either stupid, or deliberately malevolent to Israel and Jews. They all fail to comprehend the basic premise that the Arabs are not interested in a state, which could have happened long ago on multiple occasions, even in 1948. Their primary goal is the destruction of Israel, not the inception of Palestinian statehood.
The global community, rather than pressuring Hamas to release all the hostages, instead squeezes Israel about the horrific conditions of the Gazans, conditions which are solely the responsibility of Hamas which attacks Israel through the practice of forcing Gazans to be human shields. They know that the world will willingly protest on their behalf, bereft of any care for Israeli victims of Hamas’ barbarism. And the media jumps right on the bandwagon.
Rabbi Sprung is so on-point that we cannot relent and must remain stalwart. Central to that end is a strong bond and love for our Jewish brothers and sisters, as well as tefillah and the study of Torah. I firmly believe we are experiencing the Chevlei Mashiach (birth pangs of Mashiach), may he come speedily in our times with the least pain and suffering.
George Weiss
Via E-mail
The Prayer Conundrum: How To Face Jerusalem?
A recent interview in The Jewish Press with Rabbi Yosef Weisenfeld quotes his book, Derech Ha’Ir, which argues that Jews in New York should pray facing northeast toward Jerusalem (“Which Way to Pray? A Discussion With Rabbi Yosef Weisenfeld, Author Of The New Book Derech Ha’Ir,” July 25). The justification? “Flights from New York to Israel fly northeast over the Canadian coastline simply because that is the straight line to Israel.” This line and the conclusion built on it contain a significant misunderstanding of both geography and halachic orientation.
- The Mountain Analogy: Orientation ≠ Efficient Path
Imagine you’re east of Jerusalem, but there’s a mountain between you and the city. Travelers might walk around the mountain – say, to the right (north) – to avoid a steep and long climb and reduce the distance. But they wouldn’t say, “I’m now facing right instead of Jerusalem for my prayers.” They would still orient themselves toward Jerusalem, even if the path bends around the mountain.
That’s what’s being missed here. The “mountain” in this case is Earth’s curvature. When planes fly from New York to Israel, they arc north over the Atlantic along a “Great Circle” route, which is the shortest path over a sphere. But that doesn’t change the direction of Israel – it just changes the shape of the path.
Just as you wouldn’t change your orientation away from Jerusalem because of a mountain – saying, “Face left, since you’ll need to walk left around it” – you also don’t reorient your prayers just because the route curves. You face the destination – not the detour.
- “Straight Line” Doesn’t Mean Constant Direction
The article says flights fly northeast because that’s the “straight line” to Israel. But that’s only true in a geodesic sense – meaning it’s the shortest path on the surface of a sphere. That path is “straight” mathematically, but not in terms of compass direction. In fact, along the Great Circle path from NYC to Jerusalem, the initial bearing is northeast (~54°). The flight climbs to ~57° N latitude (near southern Greenland,) then it curves east, and finally southeast into Israel. The bearing is constantly changing. It is not a constant “northeast” path, nor does it reflect the true direction of Jerusalem.
- It’s More Southbound Than Northbound
From New York (40.7° N) to the peak of the arc (57.1° N) is 16.4° of latitude northbound. From that peak down to Jerusalem (31.8° N) is 25.3° of latitude southbound, so 39% of the latitude change is heading north, and 61% is heading south. Even if you follow the Great Circle route, you spend more time heading southeast than northeast. So why define the “direction to Jerusalem” based on the initial leg? Rabbi Weisenfeld is trying to have it both ways. Map the path on the Great Circle, but use orientation because of the initial part of the path. Let’s face Jerusalem – not Greenland.
The next two are for math folks:
- Geodesics Are Not Directionally Constant
On the surface of a sphere, the shortest path between two points is an arc of a great circle. This path, while globally minimizing, does not preserve compass direction along its length. That is, the bearing (or azimuth) of the path changes continuously, unless the path lies along the equator or a meridian. In the case of New York to Jerusalem, the initial bearing is approximately 54°, i.e., northeast. However, as the Great Circle path progresses, the bearing shifts from east to southeast.
The terminal bearing into Israel is approximately 123°, clearly southeast. Thus, while the path begins northeast, the destination is not northeast of the origin in any fixed or meaningful directional sense.
- Latitude Trajectory: Majority Southbound
More formally, we can consider the trajectory in latitude:
- New York: 40.7° N
- Maximum latitude on the path: 57.1° N & Jerusalem: 31.8° N
- The flight thus travels 16.4° northward, then 25.3° southward
Thus, ~39% of the total latitude change is northbound, and ~61% is southbound. This further undermines any claim that the net orientation of the path is northeast. The dominant trend is southeast.
More concisely, the essential confusion here is between the direction to a point (a vector) and the shape of the minimal path to that point (a curve). The former determines orientation; the latter determines distance traveled. From a mathematical perspective, prayer orientation is a function of the vector from the observer to the destination, not the integral of the travel path. That vector, from New York to Jerusalem, points east-southeast, not northeast.
The statement that “flights fly northeast because that is the straight line to Israel” is misleading. The flight path is geodesically straight – in that it lies on a great circle – but it is not directionally straight. It begins northeast, curves over the North Atlantic, and concludes southeast. Therefore, using the initial segment of a geodesic to determine prayer orientation is a category error. The correct orientation from New York to Jerusalem is based on the vector pointing toward the destination, which lies, unequivocally, to the east-southeast.
Seth Haberman
Via E-mail
Rabbi Yosef Weisenfeld responds:
I very much enjoyed this well-written response. The writer’s mistake is that, like most people, he understands that the straight line is the one which does not change direction, and therefore a straight line from New York to Yerushalayim must face slightly southeast. However, despite the fact that at first thought this idea seems true and even obvious, a careful look at a globe will quickly demonstrate that it is not true at all.
In the following pictures, I have placed a tower on a globe, directly on Yerushalayim. The first picture looks east past New York; we can see that the tower is located to our left. The second picture looks northeast past New York; we can see that the tower is directly in front of us, past the eastern coast of Canada. Thus, “Flights from New York to Israel fly northeast over the Canadian coastline simply because that is the straight line to Israel.” It is true that the flightpath will be first northeast, then east, and then southeast, but the flightpath will be straight, as we can see there is no need to turn right or left.
The idea that a path which changes direction can be straight (and that a path which does not change direction can be curved) is quite counterintuitive. Derech Ha’Ir explains at length how and why this is, and has many more pictures and experiments to clarify this topic.
The Prayer Conundrum: How To Face Jerusalem?
A recent interview in The Jewish Press with Rabbi Yosef Weisenfeld quotes his book, Derech Ha’Ir, which argues that Jews in New York should pray facing northeast toward Jerusalem (“Which Way To Pray? A Discussion With Rabbi Yosef Weisenfeld, Author Of The New Book Derech Ha’Ir,” July 25). The justification? “Flights from New York to Israel fly northeast over the Canadian coastline simply because that is the straight line to Israel.” This line and the conclusion built on it contain a significant misunderstanding of both geography and halachic orientation.
- The Mountain Analogy: Orientation ≠ Efficient Path
Imagine you’re east of Jerusalem, but there’s a mountain between you and the city. Travelers might walk around the mountain – say, to the right (north) – to avoid a steep and long climb and reduce the distance. But they wouldn’t say, “I’m now facing right instead of Jerusalem for my prayers.” They would still orient themselves toward Jerusalem, even if the path bends around the mountain.
That’s what’s being missed here. The “mountain” in this case is Earth’s curvature. When planes fly from New York to Israel, they arc north over the Atlantic along a “Great Circle” route, which is the shortest path over a sphere. But that doesn’t change the direction of Israel – it just changes the shape of the path.
Just as you wouldn’t change your orientation away from Jerusalem because of a mountain – saying, “Face left, since you’ll need to walk left around it” – you also don’t reorient your prayers just because the route curves. You face the destination – not the detour.
- “Straight Line” Doesn’t Mean Constant Direction
The article says flights fly northeast because that’s the “straight line” to Israel. But that’s only true in a geodesic sense – meaning it’s the shortest path on the surface of a sphere. That path is “straight” mathematically, but not in terms of compass direction. In fact, along the Great Circle path from NYC to Jerusalem, the initial bearing is northeast (~54°). The flight climbs to ~57° N latitude (near southern Greenland,) then it curves east, and finally southeast into Israel. The bearing is constantly changing. It is not a constant “northeast” path, nor does it reflect the true direction of Jerusalem.
- It’s More Southbound Than Northbound
From New York (40.7° N) to the peak of the arc (57.1° N) is 16.4° of latitude northbound. From that peak down to Jerusalem (31.8° N) is 25.3° of latitude southbound, so 39% of the latitude change is heading north, and 61% is heading south. Even if you follow the Great Circle route, you spend more time heading southeast than northeast. So why define the “direction to Jerusalem” based on the initial leg? Rabbi Weisenfeld is trying to have it both ways. Map the path on the Great Circle, but use orientation because of the initial part of the path. Let’s face Jerusalem – not Greenland.
The next two are for math folks:
- Geodesics Are Not Directionally Constant
On the surface of a sphere, the shortest path between two points is an arc of a great circle. This path, while globally minimizing, does not preserve compass direction along its length. That is, the bearing (or azimuth) of the path changes continuously, unless the path lies along the equator or a meridian. In the case of New York to Jerusalem, the initial bearing is approximately 54°, i.e., northeast. However, as the Great Circle path progresses, the bearing shifts from east to southeast.
The terminal bearing into Israel is approximately 123°, clearly southeast. Thus, while the path begins northeast, the destination is not northeast of the origin in any fixed or meaningful directional sense.
- Latitude Trajectory: Majority Southbound
More formally, we can consider the trajectory in latitude:
- New York: 40.7° N
- Maximum latitude on the path: 57.1° N & Jerusalem: 31.8° N
- The flight thus travels 16.4° northward, then 25.3° southward
Thus, ~39% of the total latitude change is northbound, and ~61% is southbound. This further undermines any claim that the net orientation of the path is northeast. The dominant trend is southeast.
More concisely, the essential confusion here is between the direction to a point (a vector) and the shape of the minimal path to that point (a curve). The former determines orientation; the latter determines distance traveled. From a mathematical perspective, prayer orientation is a function of the vector from the observer to the destination, not the integral of the travel path. That vector, from New York to Jerusalem, points east-southeast, not northeast.
The statement that “flights fly northeast because that is the straight line to Israel” is misleading. The flight path is geodesically straight – in that it lies on a great circle – but it is not directionally straight. It begins northeast, curves over the North Atlantic, and concludes southeast. Therefore, using the initial segment of a geodesic to determine prayer orientation is a category error. The correct orientation from New York to Jerusalem is based on the vector pointing toward the destination, which lies, unequivocally, to the east-southeast.
Seth Haberman
Via E-mail
Rabbi Yosef Weisenfeld responds:
I very much enjoyed this well-written response. The writer’s mistake is that, like most people, he understands that the straight line is the one which does not change direction, and therefore a straight line from New York to Yerushalayim must face slightly southeast. However, despite the fact that at first thought this idea seems true and even obvious, a careful look at a globe will quickly demonstrate that it is not true at all.
In the following pictures, I have placed a tower on a globe, directly on Yerushalayim. The first picture looks east past New York; we can see that the tower is located to our left. The second picture looks northeast past New York; we can see that the tower is directly in front of us, past the eastern coast of Canada. Thus, “Flights from New York to Israel fly northeast over the Canadian coastline simply because that is the straight line to Israel.” It is true that the flightpath will be first northeast, then east, and then southeast, but the flightpath will be straight, as we can see there is no need to turn right or left.
The idea that a path which changes direction can be straight (and that a path which does not change direction can be curved) is quite counterintuitive. Derech Ha’Ir explains at length how and why this is, and has many more pictures and experiments to clarify this topic.