250x300_01 . Buy School Clothing Square New . VocalReferences jpg 250x250_1 .

Sep 19, 2006

FDA or IDF?

The FDA has an interesting rule it supposedly follows. That is, if a product says it contains 100% of something, it really has a 2% leeway and only has to have a minimum of 98% to be considered truthful. Any less than that and it is called false labelling. I did a quick search to see if this rule is true but could not locate it. It is a rule that is quoted often, and I always assumed it was true, and for arguments sake let's say it is accurate.

Who cares?

Dan Halutz, the Chief of Staff of the Israel Defense Forces, today made an interesting announcement. He said that "ALL (emphasis mine) troops would be home in time for Rosh Hashana.

Has the IDF now adopted the FDA policy? Does "all" only mean "most"? Will the abducted soldiers also be home by Rosh Hashana?

13 comments:

  1. have we ever gotten abducted soldiers back?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Rafi: Excellent point!

    whatsinaname: Yes. Numerous times over the years...sometimes live soldiers (1948, 1973) and sometimes dead soldiers (2 years ago...the soldiers abducted from Har Dov with the drug dealing slimeball Elchanon Tennenbaum)

    ReplyDelete
  3. good question.. the soldiers abducted in 2000 we got back. Then again we got them back dead. Tenenbaum we got back but he was nto a soldier (depending on which reports you believe he might have been Mossad).
    We got abducted people back, such as Sabina and Entebbe.

    Just regular abducted soldiers, I cannot remember getting any back alive, then again there thankfully have not been too many abducted soldiers... the 3 from Sultan Yaakob, Ron Arad (those 4 are still missing), the 3 in 2000 that were returned dead, 3 now.
    Just remembered, Nachshon Wachsman was killed in a failed attempt to free him.

    According to Wikipedia, "Over the last 30 years, Israel has released about 7,000 prisoners to secure freedom for 19 Israelis and to retrieve the bodies of eight others. A number of diplomatic efforts have been made to secure the release of Israeli IDF personnel following their capture by enemy forces" but I do not know if they were soldiers or civilians abducted.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Jameel - we should not be quick to judge Tenenbaum. It looks bad, but let's not forget that the IDF accused the 3 soldiers in 2000 of having been involved in a drug deal as well. The video from Lebanon proved that it was not true and just an attempt by the Israeli government to divest some of its responibility...
    Nobody knows what tenenbaum was really up to...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Rafi: In the film released the other week (including the segment featuring Ron Arad and the kidnapping of the soldiers at Har Dov), Channel 10 TV negotiated with Tennenbaum for an exlcusive interview.

    The Lebanon-only version of the film that Israel was supposedly going to get, also included parts of the Elchonon Tennenbaum story. Tennebaum, wanting to keep his part of the story, totally quiet, made it a condition in return for an exclusive interview to Channel 10, that no part of the film concerning Tennebaum would be aired. Channel 10 agreed.

    What Tennenbaum didn't know, is that Channel 10 purchased the international version of the film, which didn't have the Tennebaum segment in it to begin with. (So from their perspecive, they got an exclusive with Tennebaum, for nothing...)

    Tennebaum obviously has much to hide...if he was so scared about the video clip being aired in Israel that he gave a free exclusive interview to Channel 10, which is by the way, the first and only interview Tennebaum has given to the media since his release.

    Only certain less than reputable websites claimed that the soldiers were involved with a drug deal..and the parents have filed libel suits against those websites.

    If Tennebaum were really innocent, he would have done so as well.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Jameel - I agree, it looked bad and still does. I was not aware of that regarding the interviews and the international version, etc.. Where can one see the channel 10 interview with Tenenbaum?
    But still, even in the video itself, Adi Avitans father mentioned that the IDF had accused the soldiers of having been involved in a drug deal..

    I am just saying, suggesting it is a drug deal is merely speculation, that has already been proven wrong once. It might be that, it might be something else...

    One thing is sure, after Ariel Sharon paid such a high price from israels coffers for Tenenbaums release, he should have cleared up what really happened...

    ReplyDelete
  7. Interesting connection. I worked in Kashrus previously and indeed the 2% rule is legit.
    Fat-free isn't fat-free
    and non-dairy is not always non-dairy!

    ReplyDelete
  8. how does something that's not "non-dairy" and yet still have dairy in it still get a hechsher, or do they not?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Totally off topic answer:
    Usually, for example, a 'non-dairy' or 'lactose-free' coffee creamer will contain sodium caseinate, which is a milk derivative. That why we even for non-Jews who have alergies or lastose issues, that "PAREVE label is so important.

    ReplyDelete
  10. rafi/jameel - i have no idea whether tennenbaum is a sleaze or totally innocent. If he is sleaze, well, maybe he is hiding something. If not, there is a perfectly rational reason as to why he didnt want to see himself humiliated on international television. being tied up, forced to say and do all kinds of nasty things, possibly torture.....
    it's understandable why an innocent person wouldnt want the world to see him in such a position.
    im not saying tennenbaum is innocent. im saying his request from channel 10 proves nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  11. That 2% FDA rule is not true. 100% mean 100%, and it's easy to verify that. The 2% rumor was created by Kashrus fear mongers who picked a number slightly above batul bishishim to prevent people from relying on the labels, as is done by more knowledgable Poskim

    ReplyDelete
  12. The 2% rule is both true and not true. It came about as an urban legend because while 100% of the ingrediants must be listed, for ingrediants which have less than 2% can be named by ulterior names ie: beetele's blood = red dye #...

    so that is how it came about. I think.

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...