Monday, June 11, 2012

ORA: A Child is a Tool against a Parent

Guest Post: Larry Silverstein. It should not be surprising that Rabbi Jeremy Stern and ORA would openly complain about demonstrators, such as himself, having to travel from New York or Pennsylvania to Silver Spring to demonstrate against Aharon - while completely disregarding that ORA is demanding that the child have to travel from Pennsylvania to Silver Spring every time the child is to spend time with Aharon.  See http://www.daattorah.blogspot.com/2012/06/oras-inconsistencies-regarding-aharon.html

ORA frequently acts in complete disregard of, or directly contrary to, the best interests of the children in ORA's cases - such as supporting several child abductors, and trying to prevent children from spending time with their fathers. 

For ORA, a child is just a lowly tool to be used against a parent.  ORA is encouraging and assisting Tamar in using the child of which she and Aharon are parents as a mere tool against Aharon.  What is in the child's best interests is subordinated to using the child as a tool against the other parent for any purpose Tamar and ORA choose.  

And these are not unsupported accusations.  ORA itself openly boasts to the media that it is using the child as a tool against Aharon, such as pressuring Aharon's relatives to stop making it possible for the child to see Aharon.

"ORA has tried to get Friedman’s relatives to agree to stop helping him ferry his 4-year-old daughter between her parents’ homes for her semi-monthly visitation with Friedman. But they have not agreed," the Forward reported, citing Rabbi Stern. http://blogs.forward.com/sisterhood-blog/152345/congressman-pressed-on-agunah-issue/

Rabbi Jeremy Stern has said that ORA considers it appropriate to demonstrate against Aharon's relatives for the supposed sin of enabling the child to spend time with Aharon, and has already done so.  Rabbi Stern called up Aharon's relatives on the day they picked up the child -  threatening them for making it possible for the child to spend time with Aharon.  And Rabbi Stern can only know which relative to threaten, because Tamar tells him.   (Aharon lets Tamar know in advance who is coming to pick up the child so that the child will know.)

Tamar also organized a large demonstration at her house in front of the child against the child's aunt, uncle, and three young cousins, when they came to pick up the child - and refused to let them pick up the child before subjecting them to additional harassment by her lawyer and rabbi. 

Note that under the current parenting schedule, it is sometimes impossible for Aharon to pick up the child for the weekend before Shabbos, and the only way the child can be with him on scheduled weekends is if Aharon's relatives do the driving.  [The parenting schedule generally has Aharon picking up the child from Tamar's house on Thursdays at 5 (although sometimes the pickup time is not until Friday afternoon or Erev Yom Tov), but given that Aharon has a full-time job in Washington DC and Tamar unilaterally relocated the child to Pennsylvania, Aharon is often not able to leave work early enough on Thursday to pick up the child before the child's bedtime (note that Aharon leaves work early each Friday (except in the summer), so he can't always leave early on Thursdays as well) nor generally leave work early enough on Friday to pick the child up before Shabbos,  Tamar vehemently objected to the schedule, arguing that the child should not miss school on Fridays and should not be allowed to travel to Silver Spring for most of the child's time with Aharon.]     

17 comments :

  1. But its ok to use a get as a tool, a weapon against tamar ?.
    The fact is its been 4 years that he refuses to let his wife free.
    How does he think that she will go along happily with what he wants ?
    If someone kept me chained up I would also strike back.
    You think he wants better custody rights. Well then why did his brother say that if she would move back to silver springs for a year and give him joint custody , then he will THINK about it.

    I have an idea. Why don't they pick an arbitrator to decide all their disagreements with him giving her a get in payment of her legally binding herself to the arbitrators decision.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2012/03/agunah-facebook-mediationr-martin.html

      Delete
    2. Arbitration is useless. Tamar has proven to be dishonest with a violated signed agreement on her part, false witnesses in secular court . Along with the terror tactics and lies and misinformation spread by ora and the likes of you! This is why she does not have a get because she is a MOREDES!

      How foolish is her behavior? If she doesn’t wake up and realize she will lose her chance to move on with her life, she is not getting any younger.

      Delete
  2. nobody is using a get as a tool. he is following halacha. a woman says maus alai is not entitled to a get. she is entitled to sit until she turns grey. if u don't like the rules of the religin its really too bad. you can play by the rules or quit the game and go somewhere else

    ReplyDelete
  3. tamar has refused mediation - 'i'm winning so why should i talk - so why do u think she would agree to arbitration

    ReplyDelete
  4. He is using the get as a tool to change the judges decision.
    I'm saying he should give the get at the start if arbitration , otherwise why should she agree to it.
    Their is a fourth section of Shulchan Aruch called Derech Eretz , the great rule don't do to others ect., middos aren't written in the Torah because they precede it, if you keep it without middos your like Bilam ect...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually it's called choshen mishpat. According to that chelek, based on the actions of ora and tamar, aharon would be entitled to hefty compensation. But then again ora goes according to which halachos they decide to keep or fits their agenda.

      Its ironic that you preach derech eretz while countless times on this blog you have spread misinformation and straight out lies.

      Delete
  5. Funny you should talk about middos when defending a women who took a child hundred of miles away from her father without notifying him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. lets not beat around the bush! its called child abduction!

      Delete
  6. I THINK U MEAN FIFTH SECTION
    ORACH CHAIM
    YOEEH DAUH
    CHOSHEN MISHPAT
    EVEN EZER

    PARDON MY SPELLING ON THE TRANSLITERATION

    DECHEK ERETETZ - WHO TOOK THE CHLD AWAY AND NOW IS CRYING GET
    SO SHE DOESNT HOLD FROM THE 5TH CHELEK EITHER -
    AS THE GEMARA SAYS TASHAV AD SHTALBIN.
    THE ONLY WONDER HERE IS THAT AHARON HASN'T REMARRIED YET ON RAV STERNBACHS TESHUVAH - I GUESS HE HOLDS FROM THE DERECH ERETZ CHALEK

    ReplyDelete
  7. Um... Yes there are four sections of the Shulhan Arukh:
    1) Orach Chaim
    2) Yoreh Deah
    3) Choshen Mishpat
    4) Even Haezer

    Now some jokingly claim to have found a fifth section(usually common sense). Witticisms only work when you have the facts you are basing them on correct.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Actually I was trying to keep the facts out of the picture and focus on 2 complaints. One he's refusing to give a get. Two he dosnt like the custody situation. So as a test and solution I offered this arrangement, he gives a get in return of her signing over all legal control to an arbitrator to decide their gripes.

    If you want to get into the facts and who is a rasha . Then from what I know ,he was emotionally abusive to her and neglectful to their daughter . So it was a mitzva to leave and to fight for custody.
    Since Emes ,Rick ect. who don't know anyone involved claims otherwise I am trying to offer a solution without getting into the facts. One can't complain that he's being fought on visitation if he's keeping his wife an agunah. It's elementary people don't work that way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you want to get into the facts and who is a rasha . Then from what I know ,he was emotionally abusive to her and neglectful to their daughter . So it was a mitzva to leave and to fight for custody.
      Since Emes ,Rick ect. who don't know anyone involved claims otherwise I am trying to offer a solution without getting into the facts.


      The problem is that you are claiming this as fact, but there is no way to verify anything that you are saying. You claim inside information without stating either who you really are or who your source is. So how are we supposed to believe your facts? That is a logical fallacy.

      Delete
    2. 'THEN WHAT I KNOW HE WAS EMOTIONALLY ABUSIVE' WHY IS THAT NOT PLAIN SIMPLE LOSHON HARA. WHO ARE U AND WHAT DO U KNOW? AND WHAT IS EMOMOTIONALLY ABUSIVE MEAN? IF SHE SAYS MAUS ALAI AND LE'HALLACH SHE IS JUST PLAIN STUCK - MOST PEOPLE WOULD CLASSIFY THAT AS EMOTIOALLY ABUSIVE. AND IN SUCH A CASE THE HALLACHA CLEARLY STATES THAT IT IS JUST TOO BAD AND GROUNDS FOE KOFIN. SO BESIDES LOSHON HARA WHAT DID YOUR COMMENT ACCOMPLISH??? FYI - SHE CLAIMED IN COURT - CHECK THE COURT RECORD- THAT HE WAS NEGLECTFUL TO THEIR DAUGHTER. THE ONLY EXAMPLE GIVEN WAS THAT HE LEFT THE APARTMENT TO GO DAVEN MINCHA. HER BROTHER IN LAW TESTIFIED THAT HE DIDN'Y KNOW HOW TO TREAT CHIDREN - HIS EXAMPLE, HE GAVE HIS NEPHEWS TOO MUCH CANDY.

      Delete
    3. Again with the false accusations. You have shown nothing to back up what you are saying. Trying to attack rick, Rabbi tzadok and myself will not take away the fact that in previous comments you have spread misinformation and straight out lies. While in my comments I have given proofs to my statements which anyone can verify (i.e. court documents). Again what you have proven so far and what you continue to prove is that either you are a liar or tamar lied to the courts which is perjury. Either way, you are continuing to show everyone here why Tamar and her family are unfit to care for this child.

      Delete
  9. "I have an idea. Why don't they pick an arbitrator to decide all their disagreements"

    avf again provides insight into why Tamar doesn't have a get.

    If Tamar decided that she wanted out of the marriage, and wanted to take the child to Pennsylvania, she should have gone to an arbitrator, such as a beis din, to hear both side and to rule on whether Tamar could take the child. Instead, Tamar just took the child and delayed adjudication, perhaps on the advice of her lawyer so that the unilateral relocation would be treated as fait accompli.

    The parties lived in Silver Spring during their time together. The issue to be decided isn't whether Tamar should allow the child to return. First, Tamar must allow the child to return. Then, if Tamar wants to relocate the child, the burden would be on Tamar to prove that she can do so.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ABSOLUTELY! ISN'T IT IRONIC THAT ORA, WHO INSISTS ON AN "UNCONDITIONAL GET", SUPPORTS TAMAR WHO CREATED THE FIRST CONDITION, NAMELY, SHE WILL NOT RETURN TO SILVER SPRING.THE REST OF THE STORY IS JUST COMMENTARY.

      Delete

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