Talk:Hebrew National

message: The article needs to explain why these nuts sell hotdogs in packages of 7, when every hot dog bun manufacturer on the face of the earth sells buns in packages of 8!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.237.251.85 (talk) 06:13, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: MAKE THAT SIX.  They are now sold in packages of ONLY SIX.  6 hot dogs per package.  Amazing, isn't it?  I guess they drop one frank every 8-10 years. 98.194.39.86 (talk) 08:05, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  SEVEN hotdogs per package??? 

message: it says the Abadis OK'd the use of Hebrew National, this contradicts their own webpage in which they explicitly say IT IS NOT OKAY
http://kashrut.org/forum/viewpost.asp?mid=44626&highlight=Hebrew%20national  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.193.61.243 (talk) 10:44, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abadi reference 

message: So what kosher certification board/organization would Orthodox Jews take as completely valid? - MSTCrow 22:21, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kosher Standards 

message: This company is currently running advertisements in the U.S. (A&E channel) which use cute graphics to depict the front half of a cow as "kosher" and the back half of a cow as "not kosher", then saying there are "no ifs ands or butts about it".  I am ignorant of Judaism, but I've never heard of anything like this.  Could somebody explain what they're getting at, and whether the ads are honest about it? — special:contribs/204.186.59.182 16:43, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Shechita#Removal — special:contribs/70.107.0.34 06:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  more like Nikkur#Regional practices — Arlo James Barnes 02:18, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Butts??? 

message: According to many personal communications from relatives and an unpublished history by my uncle Joseph Krainin, Hebrew National was founded by Theodore "Teddie" and Julius Krainin,in 1902. Some history is included in the book   "To Gershn" by Geoff Sifrin,  Vignette Press. Johannesburg, 1995.)
   My grandmother, Dora Shifrin Krainin, ran the first retail outlet, in Harlem, and many other outlets were run by Shifrin relatives in the New York area.The stores were supplied by the manufacture of kosher delicatessen products in a building on East Broadway.The success of the company enabled the immigration of many Shifrins from Belarus.
   The company went bankrupt during the depression and was bought out.
Jmkrainin (talk) 15:49, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hebrew National: History 

message: Rabbi abadi and son have not aproved eating of Hebrew national or non glatt meat, atleast acourding to The younger Abadi
http://kashrut.org/forum/viewpost.asp?mid=8302&highlight=Hebrew%20national  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.241.193 (talk) 09:55, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rabbi Abadi 

message: The paragraph echoing the allegations in Wallace v ConAgra was removed. It was relevant when the case was ongoing, but the plaintiffs case appears to have been based on a hypothetical potential for harm and abandoned. The plaintiffs appear to have shown that some beef that went into some hot dogs wasn't properly supervised for the purpose of Kosher inspection. The case was moved from state court to federal court because it involved parties in different states. The district court found it required the court to decide a religious question that the 1st amendment prohibits from being decided by the courts and dismissed the case with prejudice, preventing it from being revived. The appellate court decided that broad constitutional grounds weren't required, and dismissed the federal case and returned it to state court.  ( the plaintiffs failed to show they were harmed, only that they might have been, if they had bought a product that had been defective then they could have been harmed by overpaying for it, but federal law requires actual harm and without being able to show anyone harmed by a product (e.g. defective in a way that demonstrated it wasn't Kosher) the case couldn't be brought in federal court. The federal court returned it to state court which might reach a different conclusion under recent state law that might permit the claim. The 8th circuit's decision went into considerable detail on the likelihood that claims for potential, not actual, harm would probably be unconstitutional. With the district court's 1st amendment dismissal set aside only because it wasn't required, a federal appeal of the 8th circuit's decision could only lead to a Pyrrhic victory. The Minnesota case may have been abandoned because the same issues would have been raised and the 8th circuit's reasoning would have been persuasive. See https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-ca8-13-01485/pdf/USCOURTS-ca8-13-01485-0.pdf
   The paragraph was removed only because it presented a somewhat expansive overview of an argument that wasn't actually substantiated at trial, and was abandoned. That the claim couldn't be pursued in court could have been added to the material, but since the basis of the original text appears not to be substantiated, and the claim abandoned the entire paragraph both lacks substantiation now and will not be substantiated in the future. If the claim is revived the paragraph can always be updated and added back. PolychromePlatypus 14:30, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove paragraph re: Melvin Wallace v. ConAgra 

message: Why 'national'? Were the initial aspirations at market access that wide, or is this an example of Hebrews#Use in Zionism? Arlo James Barnes 02:37, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  National 

message: There's an expression "as Kosher as Hebrew National." At present I haven't searched for a citation, let alone a good one. VeHaMayVin YaVin. Pi314m (talk) 01:24, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Kosher as Hebrew National