Thursday, October 8, 2009

Jewish Billionaire sues Prominent US Rabbi


Arutz Sheva

(IsraelNN.com) Energy industrialist and billionaire Guma Aguiar has filed a suit in the Jerusalem Rabbinical Court against prominent U.S. Rabbi Leib Tropper claiming that he misallocated funds intended for institutions and poor people in Israel. Rabbi Tropper's American attorney, Glenn Waldman, told Israel National News that his client categorically denies the charges. [...]

64 comments :

  1. this sounds lke the beginging of the end of the Tropper era. Even if the claim is not successful in court, the mere allegations will cast a large stain over Tropper. I dont remember another great rabbi of the caliber that Tropper deems himself to be, having such a case brought against him like this!

    ReplyDelete
  2. DT,

    Before this starts, I beg of you not to allow this to become a hotzaat SHEKER and libel.

    If you allow comments that denigrate him, you must allow comments that defend, even it involves stating some facts about who the plaintiff is.

    moasim lessimcha

    ReplyDelete
  3. RONI said...

    DT,

    Before this starts, I beg of you not to allow this to become a hotzaat SHEKER and libel.

    If you allow comments that denigrate him, you must allow comments that defend, even it involves stating some facts about who the plaintiff is.
    ===========
    Roni as appreciation of your efforts to keep the dialogue straight - I'll give you veto power on comments on this thread that you feel are inappropriate.

    ReplyDelete
  4. quite ironical that Rabbi Tropper Shlita files his complaint with the "goyshe" police and Mr Aguiar uses the channel of a Jewish Beis Din!!

    I dito Aaron above as well!

    ReplyDelete
  5. this article and the one published on UOJ

    http://theunorthodoxjew.blogspot.com/2009/10/leib-tropper-delusional-sociopath.html?#please_link_back_to_jrants.com

    really demand some serious sole searching from Rabbi Tropper. Roni wont be able to brush this under the table,real answers will be needed here to reinstate RT public image. When this gets into the hebrew written press and the rabbis affiliated with EJF will see it then ....

    ReplyDelete
  6. I was always wondering what some of the Rabbis who travelled to all the EJF confrences have to do with the EJF, i have some answers now, the picture of that email in the article is a piece of compelling evidence

    ReplyDelete
  7. I await the result of the B"D.

    In my personal opinion this is a terrible day for the Jewish world. I see no good end to this. If the allegations are true it can further cause dissent and division within the greater Torah community.

    If they are not, then a Rabbi has been libeled and the very existence of these allegations will cause dissent and division in the greater Torah community.

    The fact that Arutz Sheva, a Religious Zionist news source carried this and not say JPost, I think shows that the poison is already doing its work.

    ReplyDelete
  8. If Tropper does not care for the Badatz beit din why would he care for this bet din. I will go out of a limb and say that Tropper will refuse the hazmana to go to this bet-din.

    The fun will start when the case goes to civil court as it surely will and then we all can see who got money from Tropper and how much. I am sure some rabbis would be embarrassed...

    ReplyDelete
  9. The hareidi website B'hadrei Hareidim published a statement later that day from sources close to Rabbi Auerbach saying, "The ad is an outright lie. There is no one named Epstein who is close to the rabbi. We don't know such a man, and the ad is completely fabricated."

    Aguiar's Israel attorney Eitan Gabay says that he followed the money trail behind the ad and found that it leads to Rabbi Tropper's Eternal Jewish Family organization, which promotes strict standards for Jewish conversions "without compromise."

    Rabbi Tropper categorically denied having anything to do with the ad, stating simply, "It's not me."

    Tropper forging letters ? who would ever think of it ?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Guma is a real Tzadik and strong man of faith. After was taken for a ride by "orthodox" rabbi he still has emuna and faith in Judaism.

    Other people who were taken for a ride ny rabbis (molestation and other abuse) left Judaism all together

    ReplyDelete
  11. Actually a civil suit would probably not avail the accuser very much. You see in the US a donor has no right to dictate or stipulate what a charitable organization(such as any of the one R' Tropper runs) does with said donations. As long as R' Tropper's books check out that the funds were used within the parameters of the organization's mission statement it is pretty much going to go no where in a criminal sense. In a civil sense, depending on whether it is a jury trial, that could be a different story, as well juries have been known to do stupid things in civil suits, where it is not so much about truth as it is about emotion.

    If the accuser uses a governmental B"D here in Israel, or one that is organized by one of R' Troppers rabbis, ect, considering this is definitely a case of Mishpat, R' Tropper would have a very hard time explaining his refusal to participate.

    It becomes a quite complicated piece of halacha when discussing the where and which B"D, it appears though that unless R' Tropper can claim some counter damage, that decision is pretty much up to the accuser.

    Personally I think this being handled in a B"D would be the best, as it would be the least likely to turn into a circus.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Roni with comments by DTOctober 9, 2009 at 1:37 AM

    Dt,

    Lots of these comments are not to be accepted and should be removed. However, once they are here, and they were here for a while, I believe that it is only fair to state who the plaintiff is and what really went through before this started.

    If you think you are not allow to keep these defenses then remove the ENTIRE thread.
    [DT - we have disagreed about this point before and I don't think it is relevant. You have not demonstrated that the previous history is relevant to these charges. I also don't see any purpose is removing this thread.]

    The plaintiff has no credibility in general, and in particular in this case. As he was refused by Rav Tropper to convert his gentile wife, [...][DT The preceding section that I deleted is well known to our readers. Your assertion also has not been demonstrated. My impression from speaking with him is that he is acting according to what he genuinely believes the facts to be and is not doing this as harrassment]

    As a result of that the plaintiff separated from the man whom he gave lots of money for a period of time (which shows that man had trusted him in the past).[DT that is definitely true and the plaintiff agrees that he once had a high degree of trust in R' Tropper - but he is claiming that trust was betrayed]

    The story itself does not have credibility: do you mean to say that he only found out about the lack of receipt YEARS after? It is obvious that this call only came to the fore once the man was refused the conversion for his wife [...] [DT again this is pure speculation on your part - he doesn't need R' Tropper's services since he has his own rabbinical authority. I don't see that it concerns him that it is not in accord with your standards.]

    [DT - bottom line you have conjectured a psychological motivation which I don't think is true nor relevant to the charges. In fact his claims should be readily validated or rejected by the record.]


    [DT - in sum - you think that if you can show that there is bad blood between the two men that this vindicates R' Tropper and therefore you need to repeat why you think there is bad blood. I disagree and say it is a simple matter of whether certain sums were designated to be given to specific recipients and whether that was in fact was done. The few negative comments to this thread are pretty mild and I don't think it makes a significant differences whether they are removed or not. I am willing to remove them - but not the thread itself.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Let's be honest, R' Tropper and EJF could disappear tomorrow and Klal Yisrael would roll right along as though nothing happened. He really is not what is at the heart of this thread and why it is important, at least in my mind.

    The reason being it does not matter who is telling the truth, the Plaintiff or the Defendant. This has the ability to further divide the Torah world.

    The Chareidi and Religious Zionist movement has always been a tenuous relationship. Since the R' Shach and R' Yosef dispute, the Ashkenazi and Sephardi relationship has been tenuous at best.

    Here we have someone accused of misappropriating funds based along those divisions. It really does not matter where the the truth lies. Between here and the end of this thing, there is a minefield of dangers to these already tenuous relationships, and based on the lists in the article most of the biggest Rabbinic names are involved.

    To me the greater concern is whether the damage can be mitigated.

    ReplyDelete
  14. BTW

    If, as Chadarei Chareidim seems to indicate that R' Auerbach has no problems with the Plaintiff or his wife's conversion, then frankly that argument fails as he is a great enough Gadol to know.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "http://theunorthodoxjew.blogspot.com/2009/10/leib-tropper-delusional-sociopath.html?#please_link_back_to_jrants.com

    really demand some serious sole searching from Rabbi Tropper".

    Roni: Nothing that UOJ or FM write by itself can demand serious soul search!

    In fact, anyone who uses these as sources for anything, should himself search his soul why he sank so low that he is mekabel smut from people who hate with a passion observant jews and mock our giants like the Arizal and other of our Baaley MAssora.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "If they are not, then a Rabbi has been libeled..."


    Roni: And then, will all the bloggers and their commentators say "ashamnooh", we sinned and brought so much hate against observant jews?

    From the past it seems that it will not happen.

    It is about time that bloggers and commentators should self introspection how much damage they did to people by speaking ill of them and maligning individuals and whole segments of klal yisroel.

    On a tangent, I would also add two things in general: a) Bloggers like our respected host, attempt to bridge and communicate to a segment of haredi population to try give them another perspective in different areas. Some of them, do not realize that so much of what they do only drives away the opportunity to have any healthy dialogue. SO much a priori assumptions filled with lashon horah that it only vindicates the pre existing perspective that the haredi has, that they are never going to remove the preconceived notion against us any way,

    b)which leads to an area where I myself feel strongly with the blog owner that perhaps some in that community are entangled in a web in issues like Molestation etc. But, when some of those (I'm NOT referring to the owner of this blog) who attempts to bridge carries with him so much of lashon horoh it is impossible that the important message have any weight to cause the necessary change in that community.

    ReplyDelete
  17. As a result of that the plaintiff separated from the man whom he gave lots of money for a period of time (which shows that man had trusted him in the past).[DT that is definitely true and the plaintiff agrees that he once had a high degree of trust in R' Tropper - but he is claiming that trust was betrayed]

    Roni: So, he himself, not a stupid person (apparently) had trust in him, did not suspect him for a long period of time that he "betrayed" him! And even now, he cannot make even an allegation that he betrayed before the time that he had a fallout with them for *other issues*. So now, after (the fake conversion, and) after the fallout and disagreement with his uncle where Rav Tropper supposedly thinks the uncle is right, so all of sudden the nephew fights back, and you think that he has "credibility" in and of itself, without demonstrating *anything* but his words!, even though he is a mtozi mechazakah! of an observant jew! but I am not allowed to offer part of the history to show the lack of the credibility f the man without "demonstrating" it!? "Yetzivo bearoh vegiyrah bishmey shemaya"?!

    Lekukeh almah: and look at the video produced by *him* (it is in thelink of chadrey charedim), the sequence of events is: that he is a fallout with his uncle! and after that he goes after the Rabbi who sides with his uncle! So according to hisown words about the sequence of events, he has no credibility without demonstrating any evidence!

    to be continued...

    ReplyDelete
  18. [DT - in sum - you think that if you can show that there is bad blood between the two men that this vindicates R' Tropper and therefore you need to repeat why you think there is bad blood. I disagree and say it is a simple matter of whether certain sums were designated to be given to specific recipients and whether that was in fact was done. The few negative comments to this thread are pretty mild and I don't think it makes a significant differences whether they are removed or not. I am willing to remove them - but not the thread itself.

    Roni: Dt, I am very surprised and very upset that you make this and many similar statements! Yes, it is a matter whether certain sums were designated to be given to certain recipients and whether in fact this was done! But the question is on what basis do you take this to be the fact? Just because he said so? and yes, to make this charge based on his assertions, (to be motzi someone mechazakah) gives us the right to question that person who is making this charge, whether he is credible or not, whether the sequence of events show a pattern that he is out to take vengeance at the Rabbi who sided with the uncle and with him!

    So, my assertions about him relate very much as to whether or not the plaintiff's allegations carry any weight at this time! My assertions about bad blood relate the issue more than your assertion that the plaintiff says so and so about the person!

    ReplyDelete
  19. In addition to all the above: I fail to see the zeal with which blogs, including yours in accepting loshon horoh as factual without any independent basis whatsoever.

    If you are frummer yid, on what basis and halachik permission does one have to allow writing allegations without any independent proof to defame an individual?

    Is hilchos loshon horah less important than hilchos of other abuses?

    Then, you guys want to understand, why the other side do not want to listen to you, even when you are actually right (like in the cases of molestation), because, they (rightfully) see how this medium and vehicle is used to degrade observant jews in general.

    so many comments here that are just written off the cuff carry so much poison. Where is the basis for such a heter?

    gut kvittel and moadmim lessimchah

    ReplyDelete
  20. another link of discussion about him and how he is perceived.

    http://www.bhol.co.il/forum/topic.asp?whichpage=2&topic_id=2699124&forum_id=771

    But in the other one, in the last one there is a video about himself.

    ReplyDelete
  21. This is the link about the man himself (see there a lot about the man the wife and his own narrating of events, how he had a fall out with the uncle and the charge about the rabbi comes after that. In any event: the charge against the Rabbi actaully happened after fallout with uncle and Rabbi takes the uncle's side).

    http://docu.nana10.co.il/Article/?ArticleId=665573&sid=186

    ReplyDelete
  22. Recipients and PublicityOctober 9, 2009 at 7:15 AM

    I don't know, but something tells me that the sharks are circling or is it the vultures?

    No amount of spinmeistering and lawyering on this blog can alleviate the severity and seriousness of this blow. Just the Emails alone are very damning for the trails they open up and the questions they unleash.

    It is surprising that anyone remotely conncted with this would want to engage in any sort of arguments or defenses when this matter is headed major litigation in various courts and batei din in Israel and America.

    For anyone accustomed to stealth it is devastating and crippling to be faced with the exposure of original documents and the willingness of an opponent to be open and frank.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Recipients and PublicityOctober 9, 2009 at 7:37 AM

    No matter how much the thread is censored or argued about, the real story is the story itself that is such a blow. It is typical of someone in denial that he imagines that the "problem: is from obviously minor unrelated things when the real problem is staring you in the face, it's in the article to which this post is just a link, so that when you read the entire article the shocking dimensions of the alleged events are in that story that the journalist wrote and not what this or that poster may chime in about in a thread of lesser comments.

    ReplyDelete
  24. "The fact that Arutz Sheva, a Religious Zionist news source carried this and not say JPost, I think shows that the poison is already doing its work".

    A good point for bloggers to realize what this actually causes. And at the same time it may be perhaps time for Arutz sheva and their choshuve people to reflect on whether or not it is proper to align themselves with a person like the present plaintiff and take his position and fight his war against his opponent (and perhaps also for exchange of some matanot etc.) ...

    and think for a second: what do some of the population in the haredi world think of those who align themselves with such individuals? See what they think when this individual showed up with his haredi partner in the tishen yesterday (without notifying the Rebbes themselves about their guest) , of the admurim. See their reaction here http://www.bhol.co.il/forum/topic.asp?cat_id=4&topic_id=2699038&forum_id=771

    ReplyDelete
  25. "Guma is a real Tzadik and strong man of faith. After was taken for a ride by "orthodox" rabbi"


    Roni: How do you this to be true? Maybe he is lying"



    " he still has emuna and faith in Judaism".


    Roni: From do you get this? See the film that is done by his side and see his passion is: about himself! See the purchase of Beitar Soccer game. See the dances with...Is that faith and emunah in judaism? ...

    ReplyDelete
  26. Dt,

    Lots of these comments are not to be accepted and should be removed. However, once they are here, and they were here for a while, I believe that it is only fair to state who the plaintiff is and what really went through before this started.

    If you think you are not allow to keep these defenses then remove the ENTIRE thread.
    [DT - we have disagreed about this point before and I don't think it is relevant. You have not demonstrated that the previous history is relevant to these charges. I also don't see any purpose is removing this thread.]

    Roni: With all due respect, so far, we do not have noting in front us but an allegation that does not have any shred of evidence that there is any truth to the allegation. Yet, you are ready to have a discussion on this thread, while not having nothing but an allegation, from someone who is himself a very shady character.

    Why should I have the onus to demonstrate how the previous history (which happens to coincide with the sequence of events) relate to these charges anymore than you or anyone has to demonstrate that the charges have any validity?

    The plaintiff has no credibility in general, and in particular in this case. As he was refused by Rav Tropper to convert his gentile wife, [...][DT The preceding section that I deleted is well known to our readers. Your assertion also has not been demonstrated. My impression from speaking with him is that he is acting according to what he genuinely believes the facts to be and is not doing this as harrassment]

    Roni: With all due respect, I fail to understand you: "speaking with him..." who is the "him"? If it is the plaintiff, I am surprised that you would take his word to have credibility on it's own to remove someone else from hischazakah? After all "hamotzi mechaveroy alav harayah"! Also: Why is his "assertion" at face value more "demonstrated" than my assertion about him? After all, my assertion about him is corrborated by MANY people's assertion about him! At the very least, if you see the video that he has about himself (it is in the chadrey charedim link that i refer to in another post) you see that the fellow himself does not keep hilchot of tzniut (dancing with...)..., and his "assertions" do not need to be demonstrated but my assertions to defend someone's chazakah needs to be demonstrated?!? "yatziva bearah, vegiyorah bishmey shmayo"?!
    This in addition, to the very shady character on his own right. He recently was charged for owning and using drugs!

    ReplyDelete
  27. The story itself does not have credibility: do you mean to say that he only found out about the lack of receipt YEARS after? It is obvious that this call only came to the fore once the man was refused the conversion for his wife [...] [DT again this is pure speculation on your part - he doesn't need R' Tropper's services since he has his own rabbinical authority. I don't see that it concerns him that it is not in accord with your standards.]

    Roni: Again, the plaintiff's "speculation" (for you it should be only "speculation" because Halacha states that to be motzi mechazakah one needs a *raya* PROOF) is good for you have a discussion about it; but at the very best a "koloh deloh passik" not only by his sonim, (and ask this in the offices of the Chief Rabbinate and ask even the freinds of Rabbi Bomzer who are honest, they will tell you, that...was not worth anything; ...., and you tell me that I am not entitled to make this assertion? He does not need R' Tropper's services? But he knows in his heart that ... by different Rabbis (like Rav Eisenstein etc.) And tell me: which *halachik standard* ...etc. ?

    is unbelaviable: that you give standing for someone to be motzi mecheZkas kashrut on the mere fact that he "asserted" that he is not doing as vengeance for Rt alignment to his uncle and to his previous refusal ... and not doing as "harassment", but I"m not allowed tooffer a plausible and more logical picture of the events as they appear from the events themselves (not only by the assertions of a party) lehachzik adam becheskas kashrut ?

    ReplyDelete
  28. "...our giants like the Arizal and other of our Baaley MAssora."

    How is the Arizal a Baal Mesora? He didn't have a mesorah for his approach, he initiated it!

    ReplyDelete
  29. Off topic said...

    "...our giants like the Arizal and other of our Baaley MAssora."

    How is the Arizal a Baal Mesora? He didn't have a mesorah for his approach, he initiated it!
    ==============
    baal mesora does not mean possessing traditions from Sinai it refers to those who words are transmitted to future generations and are viewed as authoritative.
    This seems to be the Rambam's view that Chazal created much of the mesora and didn't just mechanically transmit it.
    There a number of other sources such as the Netziv which present such an understanding.

    An example would be a zakein mamere who in fact possesses a mesorah from Sinai - but his colleagues on the Sanhedrin prefer a new sevora. The true baal mesorah are the members of the Sanhedrin because their view is transmitted as authoritative to future generations while the zekein mamre's view is rejected.

    Of course there are many things that are a mesora from Sinai. Rambam says that a sign of this is that is no disputes concerning the halacha.

    In sum, baal mesorah has two meaning - 1) transmits that which was received on Sinai 2) creates halacha or hashkofa which will be transmitted to future generations

    ReplyDelete
  30. "If, as Chadarei Chareidim seems to indicate that R' Auerbach has no problems with the Plaintiff"

    Who seems to indicate? The plaintiff's camp putting up a propaganda that R' Aurbach has no problems, becomes a fact? It means that in reality R' Ayrbach said there is no problems?

    It is like assertions here: that the plaintiff is certainly that is so happened because he said! He is certainly right that .. a good ... because he said!

    Look at the video and see for yourself if there are problems! They are much closer to raise eyebrows that any assertions.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Roni: Nothing that UOJ or FM write by itself can demand serious soul search!


    Aaron said:

    since you have answered like this, then I will rely on those Rabonim that hold that what i am about to say does not constitue lashon hara for many reasons; this information is for each person to check himself and not beleive this at face value.

    I only brought the article in UOJ after i had corroborated some of the major facts with neutral friends of mine in Monsey, some of these things are very well known in town and anyone can find them out, so they do require soul searching on behalf of RT.

    ReplyDelete
  32. But the owner of this blog claims that we are not here discussing things that a poster comes and claims "it is known in my town"; he claims that for me to raise concern regarding the credibility of the person making up the story I must "demonstrate" it. Even after certain things are corroborated by letter by rabbonim he would say that it is not enough for him. So, I should take you at face value and say that based on your say "it is known in my town" he needs soul searching. MAybe you are right, but the people I asked about said that those who say these things are his enemies and that Rt is supported by great Rabbis like Rav REuven Feinstein and they think of him as a honest and good individual.

    ReplyDelete
  33. So a "Baal Mesorah" is someone who makes something up that catches on? Interesting definition.

    ReplyDelete
  34. What is shayachus for why Guma wants to know what happened to his money ? even if the reason is that Tropper refused to share his toys with Guma, Guma still has the right to know what happened to his money.

    It is funny that Tropper allege that Arutz Sheva gets presents from Guma while from the email it looks that Tropper paid or promised to pay all the haredi rabbis

    ReplyDelete
  35. Roni Said to look at
    http://www.bhol.co.il/forum/topic.asp?cat_id=4&topic_id=2699038&forum_id=771

    So what is your taana that he went to see Madonna in concert in the Yarkon park ?

    If he went to see Madonna the Mother of God it would be a problem but he went to see Madonna Ciccone, the mother of Rocco and Lourdes which I do not think it is a big issue (ask your local rav)

    ReplyDelete
  36. Roni said:
    MAybe you are right, but the people I asked about said that those who say these things are his enemies and that Rt is supported by great Rabbis like Rav REuven Feinstein

    Aaron said;
    You are not answering to the point, Rav R.Feinstein does not live in monsey, i was talking about residents of monsey! Furthermore Rav R. Feinstein besdies making public appearances together with RT, has not written any letter to fully support his actions, or back the EJF. Just because he appears with him in public does not mean anything. Shimon Peres appeared on chol hamoed together with Rav Elyashiv, does that mean that Rav Elyashiv supports all his actions! I have heard to the contrary from very reliable sources that Rav Reuven Feinstein does NOT fully suppot all the EJFs actions. The only way this can be disporoved is if he would come out with a letter fully backing him, like has been discussed many many times on this blog. This seems to be a very sensitive issue though.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Aaron (and DT)

    This is highly repetitive. And the comparison to Rav Elyashiv and Shimon PEres is utterly ridiculous. They meet on ad hoc purpose, a visit of the PErsident to a Rabbi on the festival of Sukkof and Rav ELyashiv is not part of the comittee of the presidency; Rav REuven is the PResident of the Halachik committee of EJF!

    ReplyDelete
  38. MT,And I have the right to demand of you and allege of you that you stole from me 1,000,000$ and you have to tell me where is that money!

    ReplyDelete
  39. To be clear, the accusation of theft is inappropriate.

    The Plaintiff made donations to a Charity run by R' Tropper.

    There was some sort of understanding between R' Tropper and the Plaintiff as to where that money was supposed to go.

    The Plaintiff now claims that the money never arrived at those destinations.

    In general, according to US law, where these donations took place, a donor generally has no ability to mandate the allocation of monies recieved by a charity. Typically the charities do, abide by a donor's wishes in order to continue to secure donations. However, in most cases they are not legally bound by those wishes, and may use the monies as they see fit, in keeping with the organizations registered(even a synagogue needs to do this) purpose and mission statement.

    I am no lawyer, so depending on local laws I cannot tell for sure, but as someone who as worked with and run non-profits, from Boy Scouts to Synagogues for just over 10yrs, that is the wording of federal laws.

    So I am fairly certain that R' Tropper is clear as far as criminality is concerned. A B"D however, may not see things in the same light, but that is up to the Dayyanim.

    However, referring to this as a theft is both simply wrong, as possibly a motzei shem ra.

    ReplyDelete
  40. "The Plaintiff made donations to a Charity run by R' Tropper.

    There was some sort of understanding between R' Tropper and the Plaintiff as to where that money was supposed to go".


    WE actually do not know even this to be true, for all we heard is the accusation by the plaintiff (who has no credibility).

    ReplyDelete
  41. roni said...

    "The Plaintiff made donations to a Charity run by R' Tropper.

    There was some sort of understanding between R' Tropper and the Plaintiff as to where that money was supposed to go".


    WE actually do not know even this to be true, for all we heard is the accusation by the plaintiff (who has no credibility).
    =================
    Are you saying that R' Tropper categorically denies that he received the money?

    Are you also saying that R' Tropper claims that he has no credibility or is this just your assertion?

    I am not aware of any evidence produced to support either of the above assertions

    ReplyDelete
  42. "I am not aware of any evidence produced to support either of the above assertions",

    And I'm not aware of any "evidence produced" for any allegation; yet you are mefalfel here as if there is any evidence for any of assertions discussed on this blog (and state here that "he received the money" as if is it true that he received "the money" from the plaintiff's own money).

    Regarding my assertion that he has no credibility on this matter. Until I see any evidence, he is muchzek liar in anything connected to malign Rt until he produces some kind of evidence as he seeks vengeance for a) Rt refusing to convert his non jewish wife, 2) the Rabbi siding with the uncle in his quarrel with him.

    ReplyDelete
  43. roni said...

    Regarding my assertion that he has no credibility on this matter. Until I see any evidence, he is muchzek liar in anything connected to malign Rt until he produces some kind of evidence as he seeks vengeance for a) Rt refusing to convert his non jewish wife, 2) the Rabbi siding with the uncle in his quarrel with him.
    =====================
    In other words you are conjecturing a psychological motivation to cause pain to R' Tropper as to why he would file a claim in court even though the allegations might be false.

    But it makes no sense to file charges against someone if there was no evidence.

    In my conversation with him, he did not mention any animosity towards R' Tropper because of the two reasons that you mentioned but he did mention being upset with R' Tropper for the misuse of his money.

    Neither of your allegations have relevance in court regarding the misuse of money. It is not reasonable that a smart businessman would go to court if he didn't have some evidence.

    So on the commonsense level - it is reasonable to assume that the plaintiff has what he views as credible evidence. R' Tropper will be ill served if he relies on the psychological defense you propose

    ReplyDelete
  44. 1) Obviously, r' Tropper is going to be equipped with the factual realities showing that his allegations are false.

    2) and obviously, any person who makes a false claim is not going to say that he is doing it for any reasons other than the "truth", I'm surprised that you mention your conversations with him and his omissions of mentioning the two things I state, as a proof of anything; obviously he would not say this to you, as this would show his real intentions and lack of credibility,

    3) In his self centered video you see that the sequence of events are clear that first he relates about the fallout with his uncle and then makes mention about the rabbi. Why would the rabbi event be a central part of the video about his great accomplishments anyway?

    4) Why did it take him so long to look for improprieties and "misuse" of money, and a for a long period of time, that some money went through him to Rt he did not discover any improprieties?

    ...

    6) And al pi halacha, a- a person has no neemanoos to take out a person from his cheskas kashrut by making a tviat mamon, ..., c- especially a person who is soneh in general d- especially in monies connected to areas where the sinoh originates (which even an "ed" would be passul),e- and many achronim hold
    that a soneh gamur is passul leeydoot

    ReplyDelete
  45. Again you haven't established that he is a soneh - which is the foundation of your defense.

    The bottom line is there is really no justification for this type of conjecture when the beis din will clarify what actually happened.

    At this point - you are correct in saying that R' Tropper is to be presumed innocent of wrong - but at the same time so is the plaintiff.

    ReplyDelete
  46. "you haven't established that he is a soneh - which is the foundation of your defense". (just to reiterate: This is not the *only* foundation of this defense, or is not the only accurate wording for this definition; it is a combination of "soneh" and an interest to validate his status of a jew of status ...

    And so too, has the plaintiff not established ANYTHING! as you end off saying "that R' Tropper is to be presumed innocent of wrong ...",

    so on that basis it is not right to discuss anything about something of this nature.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Recipients and PublicityOctober 13, 2009 at 3:02 AM

    Poster Roni's typing, diction and syntax, as well as his manners and respect for decorum, have nearly miraculously improved almost overnight. It would therefore be safe to assume that there are a team of "Roni" typers defending Rabbi Tropper at all costs that venture on to this blog and that now the "Roni" who is calm and more lawyerly has taken over and writes and responds as the other hysterical ranting "Roni" should always have done and as he was politely requested to do so dozens of times, but who venemously refused as he would launch into his vicious ad hominen tirades and notoriously glaring red herring smokescreen distraction arguments.

    By the way Roni/Tropper, now that you have officially asked poster mekubal for his forgiveness does that also mean that you seek forgiveness for mocking him when he proved that your English anti-Bomzer letter was a forgery? because when mekubal spoke to Rabbi Nochum Eisenstein personally he was informed by Rav Eisenstein that he (Rav Eisenstein) knew NOTHING about an English letter against Bomzer and that he exclaimed how things could be done with PHOTO-SHOP. The Hebrew original has still not been forwarded to Rabbi Eidensohn/da'as torah after repeated requests.

    After all, in this post, uncle Tom's nephew asserts that Rabbi Tropper had repeatedly tricked him by sending forged "thank you letters" from rabbonim who were later found to have never received anything from Rabbi Tropper even though he allegedly had the audacity to send the nephew forged "thank you" letters from great letters.

    This just therefore shows and affirms the contention that Rabbi Tropper is fully capable of forging letters and signatures (PHOTO-SHOP makes it so easy) in order to achive any goals, be it fooling uncle Toms' nephew into believinbg his donations reached their goal, or painting Rabbi Bomzer in the worst possible light to gain points over him, with the justification being that it is somehow "muttar" to do things against such people since Rabbi Tropper deems them to be beyond the pale using this or that so-called krumme and dangerous "Halachic reasoning" to attain his goals.

    It is neither mature nor credible when Roni/TRopper caricaraturizes uncle Tom's nephew by demeaning him all the time. After all, this is the very person who Rabbi Tropper says in his posted letter in this article that he "envies" the nephew for his ability to be a ba'al tzedaka.

    It is the height of hypocrisy, inhumanity and a total lack of kovod habriyos to denigrate people who have unstintingly and unquestioningly given you tens of millions of dollars that now you/Roni/Tropper resort yet again to your/Roni's/Tropper's ad hominem and red herring attacks against the nephew without ever owning up to many of the gaping faults with Rabbi Tropper's onw behavior that he is now going to be summoned to exlplain in both Beis Din and in secular courts in the USA and Israel with serious investigations as to what the heck went on and what happened that could well conclude with Rabbi Tropper spending many years behind bars, so that your/Roni's/Tropper's constant cruel jibes and ruthless stabs at anyone Rabbi Tropper hates only make your/Roni's/Tropper's situation and end status a million times worse.

    Wake up and smell the coffee!

    ReplyDelete
  48. I've been around the Tropper family for quite some time. Staying at the Citadel when on business is nice, but hardly worth accusations of stealing millions.

    Visiting this family's home in Monsey, you'd see that it's no millionaire's palace, nor do they live the lifestyle of such. They live modestly in a small home that's so jam packed with sepharim, it's amazing that they can fit a shabbos table in there, and Rabbi Tropper drives around in a cheap small economy car.

    Our family has always known him to be a very generous man, going out of his way to help any Jew. What's unfair is the one sided postings of such gossip, and knowing R' Troppers view on such postings and gossip blog sites, I doubt it's something he would stoop to respond to.

    This is exactly what is holding us back from meriting Moshiach.

    ReplyDelete
  49. MT,And I have the right to demand of you and allege of you that you stole from me 1,000,000$ and you have to tell me where is that money!

    Tropper,

    I am sure that when he gave you the money he did not give it to you in suitcase filed with unmarked bills, he probably used a check or wire transfer. I am sure Guma's people are going to subpoena the bank records of your non profit organization and to follow the money trail.

    When they see large amounts being transferred to another non-profit organizations they will subpoena their bank record as well. So when you go down you will take them with you.

    The likely outcome is that the IRS which already suspicious of the way Orthodox charities operate is going pay close attention.

    ReplyDelete

  50. Regarding my assertion that he has no credibility on this matter. Until I see any evidence, he is muchzek liar in anything connected to malign Rt until he produces some kind of evidence as he seeks vengeance for a) Rt refusing to convert his non jewish wife, 2) the Rabbi siding with the uncle in his quarrel with him.


    First you have to establish that he has a history of lying regarding R' Tropper. I don't see that.

    In this instance there is obviously a misunderstanding of some sort. Which has lead those who dislike R' Tropper to suggest that he has acted maliciously, and it has lead Roni to suggest that the Plaintiff has acted maliciously.

    Their has been the attempted slander of the Plaintiff and his wife, which R' Auerbach rejects as Chadarei Chareidim reports here:
    http://www.bhol.co.il/news_read.asp?id=9900&cat_id=3

    The time line is also believable. The report obviously shows emails from 2007.

    The Plaintiff moved to Israel in 2008. He finds out that people didn't get the money. And starts trying to contact the person responsible.

    In September of 2008 he gets hit with the Bomzer letter, which you were kind enough to post here.

    In January 2009 he files suit...

    I don't see all of this supposed time you are talking about.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Aguiar and R' Tropper were once very close. The relationship fell apart because Aguiar is ticked that despite the money he offered him, R' Tropper wouldn't perform the conversion on his wife, who had no intention ... Hello?!?!?! She ...

    All was fine until blogs came out about her obvious ... (which he had a team of lawyers threaten the site owner to remove)... then the Israeli papers came out with articles about it as well.

    In Mr. Aguiar's mind, the ... is all R' Tropper's fault and he's out to make him pay. All he cares about is destroying R' Troppers reputation, and it's a shame that Torah Jews are allowing it to happen. This lashon hora shouldn't be permitted, and it sickens me to read about it here.

    Iy"H, this should only strengthen R' Troppers credibility as an honest man who can't be bought.

    Posted today: http://www.ladaat.net/article.php?do=viewarticle&articleid=6100

    [DT is this Rachel - Rachel Weistein - publicity director for EJF?]

    ReplyDelete
  52. DT is this Rachel - Rachel Weistein - publicity director for EJF?]
    =============================================
    The poster A/Rachel just posted the same comments under different names in VIN and other blogs



    http://www.vosizneias.com/39512/2009/10/08/jerusalem-jewish-billionaire-vs-monsey-rabbi-tropper-lands-in-rabbinical-court#comments

    ReplyDelete
  53. No - Not the same Rachel and nowhere near Monsey, NY... but, yes... I have said the same things in other blogs.

    ReplyDelete
  54. RAP,

    1) You have not changed your essential way one bit. Your venom and maliciousness that existed in the past exist right now in this post. And so are the lies and hotzoaat shem rah.

    2) RAP and all of you: Let it clear to you, that I have asked forgiveness only to *him* and to *you*. He has changed a bit in his talk, backtracked his harsh language towards Rav Tropper and acknowledged some of the positive things that R' Tropper does and acknowledged a bit the problems that do exist with the opponents of Rav Tropper (the problems in gerut in general and some about his legal opponents). His stance is one that carries some restraint from the previous stance. A stance that typifies teshuva and repentance. That position deserves teshuva in my part for those things that were personally hurtful towards him.

    3) However, let it be clear to others (lest they misread it due to your misinterpreting what I meant with my apology to him):

    In no way did I backtrack from any of the substantive points that I made earlier. and i'll constantly fight for these points when they are challenged or they are falsely stated.
    to be continued...

    ReplyDelete
  55. "2) RAP and all of you: Let it clear to you, that I have asked forgiveness only to *him* and to *you*"

    There was a typo: It must be read "...to *him* and NOT to *you*"

    ReplyDelete
  56. " The time line is also believable. The report obviously shows emails from 2007".

    Roni: After the time of the refused conversion.

    And most importantly: these emails show NOTHING without his assertions. Off course they had been handling transfer of money to tzedakah and benefactors. But: 1) none of the emails state *anything* independently, *WHOSE MONEY* was supposed to be transferred. 2) that the people with whom they agreed upon to transfer money did not receive money, 3) and not a word from him at that time!

    Mekubal:" The Plaintiff moved to Israel in 2008. He finds out that people didn't get the money'.

    Roni: *WHO SAYS*? do you have any proof or any shred of proof that he actuall y found something at time?
    Mekubal:" And starts trying to contact the person responsible".

    Roni: Who says? WHEN? Even according to his allegations, "By early 2009, however, he began to suspect that some of the funds he entrusted Rabbi Tropper were not delivered to designated Rabbis"! so, from the gift that happened on December of 2007 until 2009 he could not find the time to "suspect" and try to contact him or others responsibly?

    In September of 20Mekubal:"08 he gets hit with the Bomzer letter, which you were kind enough to post here".

    Roni: Please, please, he knew about the fact that the ... was not accepted right from the beginning! (in 2007).

    Mekubal:"In January 2009 he files suit..."

    Roni: Exactly the time when the uncle's fall out with him became acute and he was left with a small percentage of what he thought he is entitled to; and was removed from the foundation! and Rav Tropper sides with his uncle, NOW it's payback time! and *only in 2009* he strikes back by making ... allegations against Rav Tropper!

    ReplyDelete
  57. continued 2
    Let's go to them now:
    1) I will not seek any forgiveness for anything connected to the letter that repudiated Rabbi Bomzer and his conversion practices which merited his conversions eithe not to accepted at all or at best to require serious evaluation of each of his cases. . And never will I accept anyone's "proof" that this forgery when I know for a fact that this was written by those who signed the letter. And I know for a fact that I spoke with Rav Eisenstein who stated non equivocally about the truthfullness of the letter and that he and all others who signed the letter are the actually those who signed the letter. In fact, I would ask anyone to ask forgiveness for using false tactics to divert the truthfulness about the letter and for adopting sheker ways. But we turned a page. But whenever you or anyone will come back with this false statement that that letter was forged I'll fight tooth and nail that the claimants are LYING or are swept in an ocean of lies that they cannot see the truth. It will be clear I do not bend from the truth; I do not make a livelihood by making false ceremonies and taking corrupted money from them. I lived B"h until now without taking corrupted and shmootz money and I pray to G-d that He should not put in nisyonoss to take money that corrupts your whole being and makes you sell your yiddishkeyt down the river.

    2) Your next "proof" that the letter was forged by the assertion of a ... that Rt forged "thank you letters" is laughable! For "arvah arvah tzarich"! The one who strats off halachkally without any credibility is the assertionsof someone who ... and is a soneh of the Rabbi and all his assertions attacking the rabbi lack any shred of credibility. Talk about "krumme" reasoning!

    It is the height of the hypocrisy to make the false malicious slanderous allegations against an innocent man using the credentials of a person who is riled with ... and! It is the height of indecency to defame a person by the allegations of a person who is driven with an ...! It is the height of insanity to railroad an individual of improprieties based on the allegations of a person who uses ....

    It is actually the height of inhumanity to accuse a person who was HEROIC not to cave in to demands of the evil instinct who leads many to prey, by telling them, that since someone was instrumental in giving him millions of dollars that they therefore must sell themselves to serve these donors to their wish to ...! Rabbi Tropper deserves the highest metal and the title of Tzadik for that that he refused to convert someone ...! ...

    ReplyDelete
  58. Monsey,

    And I'm sure that when I gave you the 1,000,000 I also used a check and wire transfer. And I am also going to subpoena your bank records and find the money trail.

    the question is: what will the court say at the *end* (...), will he say that you owe me a trillion dollars or that that I slandered you that you own me a trillion dollars?

    ReplyDelete
  59. Roni wrote: " Regarding my assertion that he has no credibility on this matter. Until I see any evidence, he is muchzek ... in anything connected to malign Rt until he produces some kind of evidence as he seeks vengeance for a) Rt refusing to convert his wife, 2) the Rabbi siding with the uncle in his quarrel with him".

    Mekubal writes: "First you have to establish that he has a history of lying regarding R' Tropper. I don't see that'.

    Roni: Please listen attentively!*I* do not need to establish anything; I am making these claims in this context to defend someone against allegations made by someone who makes assertions to be motzi someone from his chazakah without any independent basis for his claims. I'm, and so is anyone, entitled to say that this fellow's charges are baseless, especially since the person has a koloh deloh possik against him on all these matters, and especially that in this case itself he has an axe to grind as is the voice of people in the street as seen in the comments of chadrey charedim about him..

    As to your factual statements:


    "Their has been the attempted slander ... which R' Auerbach rejects as Chadarei Chareidim reports here:
    http://www.bhol.co.il/news_read.asp?id=9900&cat_id=3"

    I attempted to go this link and did not succeed. But, I saw that originally. "Rav Aurbach" did NOT reject as there is no written statement by *himself* that he rejects it! It is all HEARSAY! Just as the liasion took him to other REbbe's without telling them about who the person really is, so too, it was regarding Rav Aurbach. You know what: Let us see, if he can *now* have an audience with Rav Aurbach! Interesting, that in the attempt to regain his image in the haredi world, his liaison, did not take to the Gedolim with whom he had contact in the *past* and instead took him to new Rebbes and in some cases did not succeed to make the connection (notice that by the Belzer Rebbe he was sitting a bit far and they could not make a close connection with him and the Rebbe). Why didn't he go to be mevaker HaRav Aurbach in this regel? We all know the answer!
    to be cotinued

    ReplyDelete
  60. By the Belzer Rebbe shows him sitting the Chachamei D'Belze. I have a close personal friend who is the Shamash of the Admur of Belze. I went with him to Meron this past Lag B'Omer. What I saw then was even with such a connection, I may be able to ride up in the car with the Admur, but when it comes to the Tish, I was a few rows back from where the Plaintiff sat. You have to be seriously connected to be able to score a seat that close. Only people closer are the Admur's immediate family.

    Roni please don't confuse me with RaP. If you read my posts thoroughly you will see that I am saying that both sides are currently making what are tantamount to baseless claims, where no actual evidence has yet been produced.

    If both sides were smart they would figure out a way to work it out and part ways. Next best step would be a Din Torah as that would be less of a circus.

    As far as how the Uncle plays into this... I know the uncle caused the plaintiff serious financial distress. Last I checked he was trying to sell that beautiful Rova Apartment which overlooks the Kotel.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Monsey,
    And I'm sure that when I gave you the 1,000,000 I also used a check and wire transfer. And I am also going to subpoena your bank records and find the money trail.

    Tropper,

    If you read the article, there are photos of the emails your secretary the lovely ms Shain sent to Guma.

    Do you imply that the emails are forged ? that Guma forged the emails from the lovely Ms Shain ? So you did not tell him you will transfer money to the 36 rabbis ? and you did not tell him you will pay other rabbis from another list? So the lovely Ms. Shain forged the email or just sent them as April's fool joke

    ReplyDelete
  62. monsey,

    the email do not say *anything* about whe details conditions of whatever was suppose dto happene, whose money it was suppose dto come from; if there were other conditions , what and happened after. IT contains NOTHING; theonly thing left is an an accsation by the plaintiff! that is it!

    ReplyDelete
  63. Mekubal,
    1) Facts: Plaintiff did not have personal contact with Gedolim who knew from the past; attempts by the Pr machine tried new customes who do not yet know about him,

    2) We are not discussing uncle per se; we showing that plaintiff started his baseless accusations at Rabbi after he sided with uncle. You assertions that uncle causes distress to nephew only reinforces that point! (and regarding truth over who caused financial distress over whom is obviously part of their conflict,

    3) One assertion is not baseless, no matter how much people and this blog will try to cover up: the plaintiff is married ...

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.