YNET The National Fraud Unit recommended that Haifa's
Chief Rabbi, Rabbi Shlomo Shlush
be prosecuted for offences related to bribery, fraud, breach of trust,
misuse of a public position and transgression of the Law Forbidding
Kosher Fraud.[...]
The rabbi insists that he was the one who was subjected to extortion.[...]
In 2010, the attorney general ordered the government to investigate
the rabbi, prompting numerous investigations of both Shlush himself and
his aides. Though investigators found that the rabbi was receiving
bribes and threatening businesses with loss of their Kosher certificate
for reasons unrelated to religious law, no indictments were filed.
Eddie, James, Michael Tzaddok, Pitputim, Hirurim et al. This man's Gittin you recognize but not Rabbi gestetner and rabbi Abraham's. Kol haposel be'mumo posel. Unbelievable this alma de'shikra.
ReplyDeleteHow low yiddishkeit has fallen.
"Eddie, Js, Ml Tzaddok, Pitputim, Hirurim et al. This man's Gittin you recognize but not Rabbi gestetner...!"
DeleteI never heard of this man. Now a few years back, one of R' Elyashiv's in -laws, eg a husband of hsi granddaughter, had a position as Dayan on some regional Beis Din (Rabbanut).
The Rabbi was from the Kook family, but from the haredi side, ie he followed R Elyashiv. Rabbi Kook had messed up scores of divorces, gittin etc, and had created a huge disaster. But there was no outcry because he was married into the right family.
So the issue is not the Rabbanut per se, but there can be wrongdoings everywhere.
BTW, did miss the posts about De Haan, who was official spokesman for the Eda?
Michael tzaddok I have confused nothing. Why don't you ask the daughter of a SOuth Afican dayan who had the misfortune of marrying a very influential police commissioner's son how rabbi amar went and nullified a rabbanut beit din's ruling in favor of her and forced a retrial becuase of this boy's father's influence. you must be kidding. the rabbanut is poison.
ReplyDelete'A city rabbi'. really - he is the chief rabbi of israel's third city. would be equivalent of the chief rabbi of chicago (if there was one) taking bribes. pathetic - michael tzaddok.
ReplyDeleteYou don't seem to understand that a city Rabbi is separate from Rabbinut.
Delete" never heard of this man. Now a few years back, one of R' Elyashiv's in -laws, eg a husband of hsi granddaughter, had a position as Dayan on some regional Beis Din (Rabbanut).
ReplyDeleteThe Rabbi was from the Kook family, but from the haredi side, ie he followed R Elyashiv. Rabbi Kook had messed up scores of divorces, gittin etc, and had created a huge disaster. But there was no outcry because he was married into the right family.
So the issue is not the Rabbanut per se, but there can be wrongdoings everywhere."
Let us assume your alllegations for which you supplied absolutely no proof are indeed correct. You have proved that someone who in the chareidi world was incompetent and could not be employed in a proper bais din unaffiliated with the secular israeli government found a home in the rabbanut which is where he belongs. Thanks for the tip off. much appreciated. thanks for helping me prove my point.
Stan,
Deleteyou hold a very outdated and unrealistic view of the Rabbanut in Israel.
For the past 10 or more years it was dominated by the Haredi world and guided by haredi Daas Torah. It may have been Zionistic in the days of R Herzog and R Goren ztzl, but the Dayanim have ben a majority of Ashkenazi and Sephardic Haredim, with only a small number of MO/Z dayanim.
So your arguments are nto really about RZ world, but of the intrusion and control by Shas and Degel in the courts.
Now, I am not saying that as soon as one becomes RZ and wears a knitted kippa, then one is honest and infallible, and neither the reverse.
My position on the Avraham BD was based on R Tauber's comments, and he is not MO.
These posts all seem to be a Lashon Harah... I'm not sure the Heter to post them.
ReplyDeleteEddie what exactly did Rabbi tauber say that was so credible in your eyes? he did not explain where any halocho was violated, he just engaged in a false personal attack.
ReplyDeleteStan, I will only answer by a moshul.
DeleteA Rav I knew , who was giving horaah to his student Rabbis before they go their communities, was asked "how do we know which authority to follow?" His answer was that we do it in a similar way in which we find a good doctor - ie someone we know and trust will give a recommendation, and that is how we might to choose a good doctor. Now this is a common way in which we decide which authority to go by.
I am not acquainted with any of the bloggers on this forum, and there are a variety of opinions. However, I am acquainted with people very close to R Tauber, and they consider him an authority.
That is a very reasonable point. You have your free choice, and u can choose by R Gestetner, but I do not know who or what you are, and you are not a part of my world.
I'm not sure why Daas Torah posted this (or many of the other posts on this blog). We shouldn't be second-guessing the courts, the rabbanut, botei din, or anyone else. I think that we need to focus solely on whom we MAY rely.
ReplyDeleteBut all that said, I think that the readers of this blog should be showing more sensitivity and kavod for one another, especially during the Sefira.
Eddie you are not even relying on hearsay evidence. The letter R Tauber put out only disqualifies himself. All it very falsely claimed was that Rabbi Abraham was senile. I spent almost a day with him writing a Get there for someone. He fasts the day he writes a Get. I thought he was perfectly lucid. Yet R Tauber who has no mental training falsely disparaged him this way because he could not find a single halocho in hilchos gittin and in choshen mishpot to disparage him with. Eddie frankly you have no argument. Fortunately I am not part of your world where false inuendo rules. I am part of the sane rational world where facts are the only factor, not acquaintances who seem to rely on corruption. I have already shown the type of organization that your MO Rabbi supports - one that supports pre-marital sex.
ReplyDelete@ Stan
Delete"I have already shown the type of organization that your MO Rabbi supports - one that supports pre-marital sex."
And by your logic, then your Eda Rabbis support sodomy and homosexuality, since R' Zonnenfeld, founder and Gadol of the Eda, appoitned as his representative, the gay-menuval, Mr DeHaan.
Dehaan's lowly activities are issur d'orauita, with onesh mavet.
Pre-marital is only issur d'rabbanan, according to rashi. There is onesh and no karet for this particular issur.
However, these are all ad hominem arguments, dear stanley . Oh, I forgot to mention R' Blau's quickie covnersion of the german super-model, who he then married.
Btw Stan,
Deletethe letter did not claim that he is senile, it just made joke of the value of the seiruv from your favoured BD.
Next, your entire argument on this post is meaningless. A haredi Rav up north is alleged to have had some financial misconduct. Why should we thus decide to follow the BD in Monsey?
Are you aware of a "Dayan" Zalman Cohen, who was part of R' Elyashiv's BD? The guy was a convicted rapist, who was released early due to pressure from RSYE, only to then get involved in and arrested for a child sex scandal. That is much more serious than a few dollars going here or there.
I think Yehuda Z. the reason is poshut - to show how low the dor with all its chumrahs has fallen. False claims have been made against the only 2 botei din in America whose dayonim don't take money by those from the rabbanut. then ridiculous claims are made by Michael tzaddok that the chief rabbi has nothing to do with the rabbanut. the coverup continues. the reason why there is sinah is because there is corruption. clean up the corruption and the sinah will go away.
ReplyDeleteStan, if the dayanim don't take money , that is a good thing.
DeleteI never accused them of accepting bribes.
No Eddie my argument is not meaningless. it is not some rabbi up north. it is a chief rabbi of israel's third largest city. it is a rabanut appointee. furthermore what about the alleged corruption of r bakshi doron Eddie? is he also some irrelevant rabbi?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.jpost.com/National-News/State-indicts-former-chief-rabbi-Bakshi-Doron
any corruption is sickening Eddie. however it is you who is claiming that the only botei din in america who take no money are the only corrupt ones? i think that sitting in london you know not what you are talking about?
Stan, before you are motzi shem ra, please show me a a citation where i said that G+ A batei din are corrupt?
DeleteI never accused them of being corrupt financially. I said that it would not be my BD of choice; and then mayeb it might be if I was in a difficult situation and was afraid of a pro-feminist BD. My other argument was that I rely more on R Tauber because I have a chain of connection to him than I do on Stan, because I do not know you.
I never said that Gestetner is corrupt - maybe he is one of the hidden 36, who knows?
Eddie even if your usual unsubstantiated claims about de haan being a gay are true, have you any proof that r yosef chaim knew about it and covered it up. yet your MO NY godol can easily access the web and see that the organization he supports supports pre marital sex? stop irrelevant comparisons of aples and oranges purely to obfuscate eddie.
ReplyDeleteStan, I think this discussion is going way off course.
DeleteDe Haan was a well known fegele, he wrote that the only reason he went to the Kotel was to pick up arab boys (some things never change). The claim is widely known and is not controversial.
R Y H Sonennfeld knew of this, and said that he is only responsible for De Haans acts from his shoulders up. Now either R Sonnenfeld was very liberal, more so than NK/Brisk/Satmar would give him credit, or he was willing to pander halacha and Torah ethics if it suited his political ends.
Eddie,
DeletePlease provide references to substantiate your 'well known' allegations against DH and RYHS.
eddie we got it a long time ago. you have zero proof of any wrong doing about the botei din of rav gestetner or rav abraham only hearsay narishkeit from a competitor who charges a lot of money k'neged the shulchan oruch because he has no other qualifications and charges much more than his s'char betailoh which can actually be found in shulchan oruch.
ReplyDeleteuntil such time as you bring some rational arguments from halocho and not hearsay nonsense i will not bother to respond to your baseless motzi sheym ra against either dayan gestetner or abraham.
"Oh, I forgot to mention R' Blau's quickie covnersion of the german super-model, who he then married".
ReplyDeleteignoring the fact that she turned out to be not only super frum but a super kanoi, was r blau not very vocifirously condemned by his community Eddie? So what is your point Eddie? the required condemnation and ostrasism took place. what more do you want? your arguments are so pathetic Eddie its pathetic!
And this behavior Eddie? how do you explain it?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.haaretz.com/news/despite-ban-ex-chief-rabbi-lau-still-taking-fees-for-weddings-1.203244
How do I explain this behaviour? I explain it as follows:
Deletebribes blind the eyes of the tzaddikim.
If someone has a small profile, they cannot get away with this kind of backhander. When they become famous, it is an extra yetzer hara. Read Mesillas Yesharim about what is says on how we bribe rabbanim.
I have a story about a Rav I have known since he was young, and gradually became more and more famous. He used to give very good drashas, but now he only talks about himself and exposes his own ego, because he has become something of a celebrity. That is the risk of becoming a great or famous scholar.
or this:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/rabbi-lau-is-unworthy-1.219228
R Lau had 2 rebbes - Rav Shach and the Lubavitcher rebbe.
DeleteYou do realize why Haaretz is attacking him right? The so called "Amar" law is probably going to be passed which will allow an Israeli Chief Rabbi to serve multiple terms(like their city counterparts).
DeleteYesh Atid, HaBayit Yehudi, and numerous liberals want a liberal Ashkenazi chief Rabbi, and they are just not realizing that Rav Ovadia won't support them. Meanwhile Rav Lau, who is staunchly Chareidi, has made his intention to run for the post well known.
They don't fear him as President of Israel, they fear him as a life-time Chief Rabbi of Israel.
Stan, all you are showing is that Rabbis, like anyone else, are corruptible, ie can be potentially corrupted, with enough gelt. And this is true, but it is also a truism. And I am saying yes, it happens, but no sector is immune to this. Perhaps, Stan, the small area where we agree is that each of our sector is also corruptible!
ReplyDeleteIf you ask Chassidim about their own sector, they will deny; also misnagdim; MO, yea, tehy will claim they are the only honest people because they went to University, etc etc. BUt you are correct, no sector is immune.
I have yet to see rav nissim kareltiz's bais din acxcused of taking bribnes. likewise i have yet to see rav gestetner or rav abraham taking bribes.
ReplyDeleteyou are inventing facts by claiming that meir lau is chareidi. he says the tefilla for the medinah. he is very far from chareidi.
furthermore you and your mate michael tzaddok who swear by the rabbanut are frankly swearing by corruption as my posts clearly indicate and prove so stop obfuscating - bottom line the rabbanut is/was run by corrupt leaders. yet michaekl tzaddok had the chutspah to quote the rabbanut for claiming that rav gestetner and rav abraham cannot be relied upon regarding gittin.
so in conclusion this shows how the rabbanut cannot be trusted nor relied upon for anything. r' lau, r' bakshi-doron, the chief rabbi of haifa, r metzger and even r shlomo amar where i know personally a case where he intervened completely inappropriately and uprooted a rabbanut bais din's ruling in a divorce to curry favor with a senior police commissioner sums up the rabbanut - therby allowing the commissioner's son not to give a get for many, many years and there was no arko'oys involved. That some of these people are chareidi is irrelevant - they are employed by the rabbanut and the rabbanut cannot be relied upon for anything - kashrus, giyur, gittin, semicha etc.
yet michaekl tzaddok had the chutspah to quote the rabbanut for claiming that rav gestetner and rav abraham cannot be relied upon regarding gittin.
DeleteActually I quoted Rav Shlomo Amar, who is in all things the mouth piece for Rav Ovadia Yosef.
Oh and it wasn't just Gittin. It was B"D in general. And it wasn't just that he couldn't be relied upon, it was that anyone who so much as sat with him was also possul dayyanut.
even r shlomo amar where i know personally a case
DeleteBut you have offered no proof other than your word, which to date hasn't been worth much.
where he intervened completely inappropriately and uprooted a rabbanut bais din's ruling in a divorce to curry favor with a senior police commissioner sums up the rabbanut - therby allowing the commissioner's son not to give a get for many, many years and there was no arko'oys involved.
This differs from what Rav Gestetner does how?
That some of these people are chareidi is irrelevant - they are employed by the rabbanut and the rabbanut cannot be relied upon for anything - kashrus, giyur, gittin, semicha etc.
Kashrut- with Rabbinut has it's own problems because of secular legislation.
Giyur- There are a lot of people that would argue with you there, and you would have a serious uphill battle trying to claim that their current position is below the standard set by the Shulhan Arukh.
Gittin- Again, you would have to prove your cause. No one of any credibility has said this, at least not concretely.
Semikha- This is where you really lose me. Even Rav Halberstam ZTzUK"L required his students to get Semikha from Rabbinut before he would grant them. Rabbinut does not vouch for the character of it's Semikha recipients, and never has. They must have a recomendation from Rosh Yeshiva where they have learned for at least five years. What they offer is blind testing at a certain universal level. So in a certain sense their Semikha alone never amounted to much. Their Semikha, with a person's history in a certain Yeshiva on the other hand, amounts to the reputation of that Yeshiva, since it is that Yeshiva that sponsored them for Semikha.
"R Lau had 2 rebbes - Rav Shach and the Lubavitcher rebbe" - that is a stira minei u'bei. makes no sense.
ReplyDeleteit makes now sense? it is a fact,
Deleteregarding bribes, and misappropriation of money, there was a controversy when a MO/zionist Rabbi called Pines made Aliyah to Israel with money from some charitable organisation - to invest in setting up some zionist MOssadot. Now, R' SOnnenfeld wanted that money from him for the Eda. Pines refused, because the money was designated for somewhere else. R Sonnenfeld used all forms of blackmail and finally Cherem because Pines would not steal money from a donor to give to the Eda.
So it shows that the Eda is corrupt, and will attempt to steal other people's money to subsidise their pro-gay, pro arab entity.
Now your arguments abotu various members of the Rabbanut are not really consistent. Amar is answerable to R Ovadia, and shas is not the best example of financial honesty. Metger was a puppet appointed by R Elyashiv's Degel party - despite many unpleasant rumours about Metger being a crook and pervert.
The rabbanut has been taken over by Haredi parties, and corruption is possible in high places. The only honest contenders for Chief Rav are Rav Ariel shlita, who was blocked by Degel last time round, and Rav Stav.
Eddie's argument is that because the chareidim have taken over the rabbanut it is now corrupt. This may be the case. I think it was corrupt all along. So why are these the guys to decide if rabbi gestetner and abraham are following halocho or not michael tzadok?
ReplyDeleteEddie's BS on de haan is irrelevant. Even if true, he was being used for the benefit of the yishuv by r yosef chaim in secular matters on the basis of eis la'asos l'Hashem. he was not appointed a mechanech or a dayan. so i am totally bewildered by what Eddie wishes to prove with toal irrelevancies.
Stan your claims are a bag of contradictions. You say that these rabbis are slaves to their "zionist paymasters" however then you call it "bribery" when Rav Lau ignores what his "zionist paymasters" say and charges a fee for performing weddings.
DeleteLikewise the imposition of term limits on office of Chief Rabbi was established in 1980 because Rav Ovadia Yosef(admittedly in keeping with his character) didn't care what the government wanted, and his popularity would have meant his continued tenure.
Again Edward my arguments are consistent. Regardless of to whom they are affiliated, the Rabbanut seems to attract unsavory and dishonest leaders. Your claims against R Yosef Chaim are baseless unless you bring documentary proof. It was well known that he took no money for himself and lived in poverty.
ReplyDeletebottom line is that the rabbanut cannot attract honest rabbis and hence claims by Michael Tzaddok that they should be relied upon for gittin etc and especially to decide which botei din in chutz lo'oeretz are totally preposterous. Once agin Michael Tzaddok has been exposed. his claims that the chief rabbi of haifa has nothing to do with rabbanut are his own invention.
Stanly, a few points:
DeleteYou seem to be oblivious to anything that goes agasint your position, whether in particular or general.
I pointed out several irregualrities against the founders of the Eda. These are well known, and it shows either your poor grasp of history, or more likely your state of denial. For Eidah, gneva is not gneva when it suits them and homosexuality is not homosexuality when it suits them (as you yourself said " he was being used for the benefit of the yishuv by r yosef chaim in secular matters on the basis of eis la'asos"). Thus the epithet that you use on this forum is more appropriate to your own arguments.
(Also recall the geula mikve or gay bath ans R Nuchem called it, another major source of cash for the Eida. However, they did not close it down, but suggested putting someoe on guard on fridays. What filth!)
Next, I suspect that Stan is some kind of avatar for R Gestetner, just like Broyde's invention of Goldwasser. Uses the same kind of praises for R Gestetner (may he be well).
The rabbanut is something where the leadership is elected by political parties, and the dominant Shas and Degel thus controlled it. I don't always follow the RABBANUT. fyi, as far as I am concerned R Ariel is my Rav, and he has written many seforim and Teshuvos. Most of the RZ world consider him as the Gadol Hador, whereas the MO look at R Aharon Lichtenstein. So whether the position goes to R Lau, I still consider R Ariel to be the senior authority.
In pricniple I agree with one statement you make- that Rababnut cannot dictate which Batei Din in Chul have valid geirut or gittin. But the same goes for any authority, whether it is Bnei Brak or R gestetner. But what you are saying is that only Gestetner can decide what is valid, throughout all of the USA, and probably the rest of the world. that is a ridiculous statement to make , and that is why a respectable gaon such as R tauber's opinion must be listened to.
Edward as you said it, Mezger was a puppet. Which shows you what the chareidim think of the rabbanut!
ReplyDeleteYeah it means that they want to circumvent the laws regarding Chief Rabbi term limits, and thus seek to circumvent it by means of mouth piece chief Rabbis.
DeleteActually Eddie you make claims about the integirty of rav Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld and this is the very first I ever heard of it. Doesn't mean it never happened but just because you claim it happened also does not mean it did happen. You have brought zero proof, and hence until you bring proof I cannot and will not take it as credible.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore your claims that r Tauber is a gaon are just laughable - his bais din is accepted in NYC as being a very bribable bais din, and because you live in London means that your claims carry even less weight. What he wrote about Rav Abraham was not only baseless but motzi sheym ra. Again I told you already that until you explain how halachically r tauber was allowed to make an entirely false and baseless attack on dayan abraham I cannot correspond with you on this matter. Not a single halachic source was quoted in that attack. purely personal Eddie. that says a lot about the friends you keep, frankly.
Stanley,
Deletethere was a Rav called Pines, he had a big controversy with the old Yishuv. R Pines was appointed by the British Lord Montefiore fund to set up some agricultrual and vocational schools to help the poor in Eretz Yisrael learn some trades and come off dependency on Halukkah. I shan't go into the controversy about the schools since it is irrelevant here. the point is that the money was Montefiore money, hence, it cannot be misappropriated to fund the old yishuv without consent of the funders. That is gneva. Or do you have a heter for misappropriating money if it is to support a haredi institution? Ie haredi theft is kosher....
please explain to me why it is ridiculous to insist that a bais din follows halocho. all the other charedi botei din in the US charge way above the s'char betaloh of the dayonim and I think the recent scandal surrounding Broyde, the cover ups by r Willig of his mate Boruch lanner and the general breach of halocho of the BDA don't leave too many other alternatives besides rav gestetner and rav abraham. so Eddie get with the program and with the fine print called halocho!
ReplyDeleteEddie's arguments are getting more and more ridiculous and irrelevant by the day. if there was corruption back then it is reprehensible but ultimately irrelevant to today. Get with the program Eddie. explain the personal attack of rabbi tauber on rav abraham and how an attack that does not include a single halachik violation but is a personal attack is muttar al pi halocho Eddie. Answer this already. Its obvious you can't. so cut the BS about Tauber being a goan because some unnamed friends of yours have him in their back pocket. Enough of your revisionist history Eddie. We are not interested. Explain Tauber's remarks and explain R Angel's support of an organization hell bent on increasing pre-marital sex. Just stick to what is relevant Eddie.
ReplyDeleteStan, are you aware of the halacha against setting up a competitor Beth Din on the turf of an established BD? Are you aware of the punishment, for the upstart BD, which is potentially the death penalty?
DeleteStan, you are making accusations , and false ones, against R Angel. Angel is not permitting pre marital sex. And the organisation isnt , as far as I have seen trying to increase it. However, you have not responded to my previous request on whether you agree with reporting cases of child abuse to the Police. So please do so.
This posting has absolutely nothing to do with child abuse and i will not answer it because it does not belong here and furthermore i told you it is a machlokes haposkim - proper poskim.
ReplyDeleteRegarding your ridiculous accusations, exactly who are you accusing of starting a competitor bais Din Eddie? There are many botei din in Monsey I know of at least 4 or 5.
Furthermore Eddie there are no botei din which are kovuah in Monsey so provide a source for the fact that someone who opens a bais din is breaking any halocho in Monsey Eddie. Most importantly you haven't answered two serious charges against Tauber: how he takes more than his s'char betaloh and how he could make a personal non halachic attack on rabbi abraham. Lastly if all the botei din are violating halocho by charging more than the dayonim's schar betailoh even in a place where there would be a bais din kovuah violating halocho I have no odubt that it would be muttar to open another bais din which actually conforms with halocho. So Eddie stick with the program and answer the serious concerns about Tauber's behavior.
Lastly regarding rabbi angel thou protest too much. he openly supports an organization which believes in pre-marital sex. Sorry Eddie you can't change the facts.
Furthermore Eddie there are no botei din which are kovuah in Monsey so provide a source for the fact that someone who opens a bais din is breaking any halocho in Monsey Eddie.
DeleteStan is correct here. According to Rav Moshe Feinstein there is no Beit Din Kavua in the US.
This may be a foreign concept to you Eddie, being that you come from England. However, because of how the US was founded, there is no B"D kavua.
Most importantly you haven't answered two serious charges against Tauber: how he takes more than his s'char betaloh
I don't know Rav Tauber, however, this one is an easy enough question to answer. Pitchei Teshuva 9:10 says that one may charge a fee so long as it is done after the litigation.
Also see the Hokhmat Shlomo on Siman 9 of Hoshen Mishapt(S"K 1 I believe) where he says(at the end), "For this reason it has become the custom in our times that Dayanim take wages to give judgments, and only one in a thousand is careful not to do so. It is on the strength of the fact that in our times, most Dayanim lack authority to force litigants to come before them. For this reason the Dayanim are allowed to take wages. This, in my humble opinion, is the reason for the prevalent custom.
There is also the Shvus Yaakov 1:142 who states that today, there is no one capable of providing rulings that reflect the true intent of the Torah. Therefore, every verdict that is handed down can be equated to compromise. Dayanim are permitted to accept wages for settling disputes through compromise.
There is also the Netivot HaMishpat Chiddushim S"K 9, most especially the Urim V'Tumim there that writes, when a community has appointed Dayanim who serve in that capacity on a permanent basis, they are allowed to take wages for judging, even if they have no steady work. It is permitted, even if the time that they spend judging is not at the expense of any attempt to make a livelihood. They are allowed to take wages
precisely because they are permanent appointees. Because of their obligation to judge all the disputes that arise in the community, they are prevented from engaging in alternative activities that would provide them a livelihood. Therefore,
it is considered as if everyone sees that they have no work. The wages they take are regarded as compensation for idleness from other work that they could have done to bring in a livelihood.
While I agree in principle that one should not take wages for Rabbanut, and most especially Dayyanut, that doesn't mean that those who do, don't have on what to rely.
"stanApril 26, 2013 at 2:29 AM
DeleteThis posting has absolutely nothing to do with child abuse and i will not answer it because it does not belong here and furthermore i told you it is a machlokes haposkim - proper poskim. "
------------
Yes, stanley, you bring all your own irrelevant questions as you see fit, but ignore the ones I ask you.
So you imply that some of your "real" poskim would forbid reporting, is that correct?
Stan@
Delete"Lastly regarding rabbi angel thou protest too much. he openly supports an organization which believes in pre-marital sex. Sorry Eddie you can't change the facts."
The organisation believes in equality, and for those in unusual situations, it wants to give them access to taharah.
However, the Aidah, which was foudned by R Sonnenfeld ztl, and had leaders who you always quote, including, Brisker Rov, satmar rov etc, supports gay maasei sdom. Thsi is not confined to dehaan, who they aided and abutted in his pursuit of gay pickups at the Kotel, whom R Sonnenfeld, chief opponent of the liberal R Kook, gave a hesped to, calling him a tzaddik. This gay sickness continues int eh gaybath mikve in geula, which they did not shut down, since it was a significant source of tainted money for them. Now, you can accuse R Angel all you like, but since when has halacha permitted the money gained through znut? I know you are very liberal towards acts of gaiety, since this is your way of rebelling agasint the Torah of Moses. Why are you not attacking the Aidah?
You have not proven they may take more than there schar betailo. Secondly the nesivos is referring to a case where they have been appointed by the community which you yourself admitted is not the case in New York so you are misunderstanding the nesivos. A community fund paying dayonim is very diffrent from them charging per hour and drawing the matter out.
ReplyDeleteWhile obviously the opinion of the Shvus yaakov about compromise is valid, it is far from the only acceptable opinion. In fact the concept of peshoro is being used by these botei din to make any ruling that suits them thereby making the bais din process in the US so lacking credibility resulting in many people just going unfortunately to arko'oys. So Michael tzaddok you are just opening another can of worms.
Even if Michael tzadok were right charging per hour is more than likely ossur and even some of the botei din that chargr do not do so per hour.
Actually a Beit Din can be appointed by the community, and not have the din of a B"D Kavua. For example the Crown Heights Beit Din established by the Lubavitcher Rebbe, would, for their community have a din of a community established B"D, but would not have the Din of a B"D Kavua that must be accepted by all Jews living in the City. The Lubavitcher Rebbe wrote a Teshuva on this.
DeleteLikewise it is conseivable that Rav Gestetner's B"D would be considered a B"D appointed by the community for his Berditchiver Chassidm, but again not a B"D Kavua.
If you read the halakha, and the sources I gave you, you will see that schar beallo only applies for asking for payment before rendering judgement(at least according to some weighty opinions).
Stan if I thought you really wanted to have an honest discussion of the halakha and the relevant sources I would continue with this. However, it appears from your many statmenents that you simply want to discredit every B"D except for one. So I see no point in continuing.
Actually the Aida today is very far from perfect. On this and this alone you are right - today the Aida is mainly a money making business and although it does still have some erliche dayonim they do so set policy there and i condemn corruption.
ReplyDeletei do however think that it is very, very serious that this blog allows someone like Eddie to post against a godol reb Yosef Chaim without providing a singlr shred of evidence and once agin highlights the lack of consistency in the censorship that has occurred very frequently on this blog. Unless Eddie supplies proof against reb yosef chaim, it behooves you to remove his posts and take a minyan DT to go to his kever and ask for mechillah because everyone knows that reb yosef chaim lived in poverty.
But again this is all utterly irrelevant to the underlying discussion about your claims, not mine, that r tauber is a gaon and follows halocho. Eddie I asked you 2 questions about tauber which you repeatedly fail to answer for one reason: because you cannot. now answer the questions eddie and stop with the histroic vitriol against reb yosef chaim. i believe you ahve something personal given the way you are posting.
Stan,
Deletea few of points.
It is not disputed that deHaan was gay. It is also not disputed that he was the Nagid of the Eidah.
http://www.nkusa.org/Historical_Documents/YDeHaan.cfm
Now, you claimed previosuly that they allowed his gayness becasue it was "eis l'asos". There is no eis la'asos for gilui arayos, and certainly not this one.
Your argumentation for the Gadlus of r YHZ betrays your self contradiction. You claim to be a rational man. You also claim to criticise illegal behaviour, regardles of where it comes from. Yet when it comes to the chanifah - the flattery, of the gay menuval, by a g-dol, you claim that it is an attack on the godol, because by definition a gadol can do no wrong, or to put it more bluntly, one your gedolim can do no wrong, but ours always do.
One last point- again, if on the rare occasion we do agree that is good. Please G-d we should do it more often.
Eddie you insinuated very serious charges of being chayav misah against rav gestetner and rav abraham for having botei din in Monsey which even r michael tzaddok wrote were baseless and showed your ignorance of basic halocho. Now you owe them an apology Edward.
ReplyDeletealso please explain in London how there are at least three botei din, united synagogues, federation and kedassiah (assuming it still exists). and there there are botei din kovuah. are they also chayav mkisah according to you. eddie it is clear your friends defending r tauber are providing you with one liners making you look not very informed.
by the way i condemn the mikvohs of the aida. i am not an aida guy either or satmar as you previously laughably accused me previously.
by the way edward do the sefardim ahve their own bais din in london? are they also chayav misah? what about lo sisgo'dedu?
My point was that theoretically setting up a competitor BD on an established BD's turf could be chayav mitah. I am not saying that this is the case with the A+G BD. However, it could be that this is the position of R' Tauber, somewhat watered down.
DeleteIn England, the authority to setup a shul is only with the agreement of the Chief Rabbi - under British Law, since officially, the country is supposed to follow another religion (i forget which one).
Now the BD kavua would be the United Synagogue, and the others came later - Federation and Adas, plus a sephardic one.
The sephardic is least problematic, since it caters to a different kehilla, since sephardim of the current population, came more recently (although we had spanish and Portuguese for many centuries here).
The problem exists, for the Feds and the adath, especially when they get very arrogant towards the US. In the case of the London Eruv , the other batei din were attacking the LBD. However, they should be careful, since technically, they could be chayev mita. This is because they are disputing a psak din by the established BD - which is a very serious halachic problem, and shows a degree of arrogance.
Lo Tisgodedu is perhaps mor relevant to Ashkenazim, since each time they move from once city to another , or get one mystical revelation, they create a new sect or hassidic dynasty. And each time a Rosh Yeshiva creates some hiddushim, suddenly anyone who has older minhagim is an apikores for not accepting the new ways, eg in Brisk.
Unity wasn't the greatest trait of galus ashkenas.
Eddie there are legitimate opinions who hold you should not call the police in the case of child molestation. While I feel they are wrong since it is a psik raisha they will do it again, because you disagree means nothing, except you are entitled to your opinions. they may well be wrong but every human being is wrong, because to err is human. i understand the severity of the issue and you can feel strongly about the matter but then feel strongly about other matters such as pre-marital sex and the corruption of the BDA.
ReplyDeleteStanley, you have just fallen into an entrapment I set up for you, well done!
DeleteYou previously attacked R Hershel Shachter (shlita) very viciously for his comments on reporting, i.e. that reporting should be filtered thru a panel of experts. You called him immoral, and argued that this shows his depravity.
However, you are no saying that both reporting and not reporting are legitimate opinions! In other words, you are prejudiced and make false allegations agasint RHS , even when you know his position is "correct" - (according to your own skewed view of things).
Thus, you protesteth too much dear stanley. You make baseless allegations, as a springboard for your anti-ORA crusade.
So, you should write to R Hershel, with your Hebrew name, and ask him for mechilla for publicly vilifying him.
Git Shabbes.
Eddie, you have no proof that he was not chozer bitshuva from his gay ways. Please provide evidence that he was gay after returning to yiddishkeit.
ReplyDeleteAgainj i reiterate that r yosef chaim may have felt that given the matzav the frum yidden were in he had no choice but to use him. this does in no way mean he approved his prior behavior. Eddie you are the one not being rational. You also have not brought any proof that r yosef chaim was involved in financial corruption as you so allege.
yet you continue to obfuscate and avoid regarding r tauber. I am waiting for the answers you are not off the hook.
Stan, dont put words into my keyboard. I didnt say RYHS accepted financial bribes, I said he accepted a gay nogid. Dehaan's middle name was lo k'darka. He himself confessed to picking up arab boys at the Kotel - of all places! How sick you can you get stanley, that brigns a whole new meaning to the sheretz in the mivke - although the geula mikve rivals that. OK, I do confess that my own RZ community had a sicko called Moti Elon, who was made "rosh yeshiva" of HaKotel - the hesder yeshiva. So like you, stan, i do not believe in infallibility.
DeleteIf, on the other hand the Eida did get any finance form de Haan's actitivities, it could be suspect. But the whoel point, which you are in denial of, is that one of the major arguments against Zionism was the injunction to keep far away from a rosha. Now, whether Dehaan did partial teshiva, he was still chayav for mishkav zachar. Perhaps the bullet he took was his kapara, but he was still homo whilst eh was alive and in the aida.
Eddie clearly hasn't also heard of teshuva.
ReplyDeleteYisroel Yaakov Fisher, (1928–2003), was a leading posek, Av Beit Din of the Edah HaChareidis and rabbi of the Zichron Moshe neighbourhood in Jerusalem.
He was born in Jerusalem in 1928 to Rabbi Aharon Fisher, a prominent member of the Perushim community. He was named after the political activist Jacob Israël de Haan who had been assassinated four years earlier. As a teenager he studied in the Etz Chaim Yeshiva and became a close student of Rabbi Isser Zalman Meltzer. He was later married to the daughter of Rabbi Zelig Wallis and they settled in Batei Horodno area of Jerusalem.
In 1961 was appointed as a moreh tzedek and two year later, in 1963, he was invited to serve as rabbi of the Great Synagogue of Zikhron Moshe. In 1974 he was made a member of the Badatz of the Edah HaChareidis. In 1996 he was appointed Av Beit Din of the Edah HaChareidis.
He died in 2003 and is buried on Har HaMenuchot.
So according to Eddie one of the previous gedolim was named after a menuva. Obvioously Eddie you just spew filth. I protest.
what kind of nonsense you are writing stan, perhaps you drunk your havdalah wine on empty stomach.
DeleteHere is your logic:
Somene was named after dehaan.
That someone was a RABAD in the Eida.
Therefore, it is impossible that the person he was named after to be gay....
What kind of idiotic reasoning is that Stanley, really? You amuse me with your combination of intelligence and foolishness.
Let me put it to you this way. The TORAH And Chazal point out that Yishmael was a wild ass and a rosha.
However, there is a prominent Tanna called Rabbi Yishmael. Does that mean that Yishmael is magically a tzaddik?
Another example, is Alexander the great. Thsi was also a menuval, but because he respected Shimon Hatzadik , we were foreced to do a deal with him, and many Jews were named Alexander. That doesn't mean he was not gay - which is what he was famous for.
I have read somewhere that even this accomadation with Alexander and his Greekness led to the Hellenisation of Israel in the time of Hannukah.
Actually Eddie I do not believe in infallibility, except of the Pope. For instance, I believe that the gedolim who were legitimate who initially agreed to the first get law never thought through the consequences of women being encouraged to go to arko'oys and stop appearing in bais din whcih is exactly what happened, encouraged by the second get law which zwiebel et al at the corrupt Agudah did nothing until it was too late to protest. even now phone the Agudah to help you when a woman is in arko'oys and they won't.
ReplyDeleteHowever you made some serious allegations against r yosef chaim sonnenfeld who did not chase money and lived an impoverished existence of which there is no debate about. I am sure he also made mistakes, as did every godol. But until you bring proper rational proof that r yosef chaim sinned, I am not going to believe you. Especially given your previous claims and refusal to admit you are wrong such as your refusal to condemn r angel for supporting an organiztion that is in favor of pre marital sex and stop spinning Eddie, the readers here are mainly way too smart. you have spoinned it enough.
Also I still await your answers to r tauber's totally sickening behavior as well as an apology to r abraham and r gestetner for insinuating they are chayav misah and explain why the 2nd and 3rd botei din in London are not chayav misah as well as the sefardi bais din if it exists.
Stan, here is an academic review about DeHaan's lo k'darka ways.
Deletehttp://www.ched.uq.edu.au/?page=39747&pid=0
I cannot condemn R Angel unless he agrees with violating halacha, which is not what you have shown, Yo are saying that activities of that organisation support sbm, even so, it is not clear, if that is correct. I did not spend much time on the website, but it seemd that bdieved, they want those who are in non halachic situations to be given access to mikve, in order to lessen their burden of sin. That is not the same as saying they can sin freely l'chatchila.
You are alleging that R Tauber takes a financial compensation beyond what halacha permits him to. However, in general terms, I think you are mistaken.
DeleteThe issue is what is the financial compensation based on or how is it measured? He acts as a religious Judge. Thus his secular equivalent could be what a lawyer or circuit judge earns. He could easily claim what a Manhattan lawyer would ear, which is a very significant amount. You cannot force him to take the equivalent of a bus driver or a guy who stacks the shelves in a supermarket. Or perhaps it is the what he might earn in the diamond business on 47th street?
I am not advocating one figure or another, but remember, R Yisrael of Rizhin would sit on a golden chair, and was very extravagant.
As for the London batei din, as I have already said, technically they are on very risky ground. If they limit their influence to a closed community, eg in Stamford Hill and Golders Green, then perhaps they can be excused. however, when they try to takeover the areas of the established BD, they are in big trouble , especially when they claim that the LBD is treif etc.
Regarding deHaan see wikipedia article
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Isra%C3%ABl_de_Haan
Eddie is so ignorant of basic halocho it is no longer funny. first through insinuation he accuses rav abraham and rav gestetner of being chayav missah. when he is shown up and even asked to apologize he doesn't.
ReplyDeleteNow he comes up with the baloney "He acts as a religious Judge. Thus his secular equivalent could be what a lawyer or circuit judge earns. He could easily claim what a Manhattan lawyer would ear, which is a very significant amount. You cannot force him to take the equivalent of a bus driver or a guy who stacks the shelves in a supermarket." the halocho says the exact opposite of what eddie claims. Even if someone were fully qualified as a lawyer he could only charge his schar betaloh if he actually had work which he was giving up in order to do the dayyonus. If he does not have the work at the time he cannot charge the s'char betailoh. Not some fake claim he is equivalent, equivalent to what eddie. No such halocho exists Eddie, your friends are feeding you these one liners to defend tauber are either ignorant or think that all the readers of this blog are ignorant. Eddie stop inventing an new-fangled nonsense with no basis in halocho. Tauber is not qualified for anything and hence cannot charge more than at most $30 an hour which is what a rebbe in a yeshiva gets.
After you are exposed for a completely false insinuation of chiyuv missah you then try and defend what goes on in London. Why would the same bych sevorahs not apply in Monsey even if there were btei din kovuah there.
As for equality Eddie, no such sevorah exisits in yiddishkeit. A yisroel is not a levi, a levi not a cohen and a cohen not a cohen godol and a woman is not a man in halocho. With extra respinsibilities come additional privileges and bad luck i that doesn't fit your world outlook. That organization which R marc angel gave his support to supports pre marital sex and stop spinning it because you can't change the acts. Enough Eddie.
As for your baseless claims aginst RYCZ you have still not proved that de haan didn't do teshuva and was engaging in immoral acts at the time. And your false financial claims against him are motzi sheym ra until you bring some proof.
Stan, firstly let me apologize.
DeleteIn the dehann case, there was no allegation against the Eida or RYCZ. In the Pines case, there was potential misconduct, which was the financial blackmail of r Pines, to misappropriate funds from the Montefiore charity, to their own Halukka. Sicne Pines refused to cough up the money, he was put in Herem. Also , he was trying to build a school for poor Jews to save them from Christian missionaries. In reward for this, he was accused of aiding the missionaries!
Regarding chayav misa, I said it is potential not actual. Since you rely on RMF that there is no BD kavua in USA, then the situation is different to UK. Still, I am not defending what goes on in UK, I already said that the competitor Batei Din in London could technically be at liable, hence they must be very careful not to interfere in the LBD's jurisdiction. However they often do, and this seems to me to be a violation of halacha. So you are attacking the exact opposite of what i wrote.
Re: schar betaloh, I have only your allegations agasint R TAuber on their rates of financial compensation. If they are so expensive, why don't market forces drive them out of business?
Stan, you claim: "Even if someone were fully qualified as a lawyer he could only charge his schar betaloh if he actually had work which he was giving up in order to do the dayyonus. "
So this would make most Dayanim corrupt, since very few dayanim have other active professions. I don't know r Tauber's qualifications, but the point is that if he had become a lawyer rather than a Dayan, he could be earning $x.
How can someone be a dayan, and also run a full time business?
And Stan, do you know for sure that Tauber has no other work or business he can engage in? Perhaps he can be a successful lecturer and writer like his brother?
Finally, you have not responded to your duplicity on RHS. You vilified him for having what you admitted later is an authentic Torah position on reporting. Please explain your own double standards dear stanley.
The fact that most dayyionim are corrupt in the USA is something that is not much disputed except amongst the dayonim themselves. But RHS even made that allegation publicly a few years ago.
ReplyDeleteAll the dayonim are guilty of charging way above their s'char betaloh and that is why they hate rav gestetner so much - because he is a threat to their business model. The poiunt is he did not become a lawyer and you clearly are very ignorant of basic halochohs. Therefor i will no longer waste my time posting and rebutting you.
regarding RHS again not only did I address this so called issue but this again shows your total lack of understanding. RHS can't have it both ways - it is he who is gjuilty of dulicity. On the one hand in every situation bar one mesirah is so terrible but when it comes to false orders of protection, gonig to arko'oys for a divorce, RHS is always on the side of the woman even though by being in arko'oys, she is inevitably involved in mesirah. I am cleaqrly wasting precious time on you which I don't have.
well, you have not dealt with your obvious hypocrisy here -
Deleteyou attacked RHS to show how allegedly immoral he was, when his view on reporting was posted. Now you backtrack, and say that since u disagree with his ORA stance, therefore his legitimate views on reporting are ipso facto illegitimate.
This is the kind of nonsense that Stan comes up with. OK good, no need for you to come up with more nonsense and false allegations.
As for Michael Tzaddok's invented allegations:
ReplyDeleteeven r shlomo amar where i know personally a case
But you have offered no proof other than your word, which to date hasn't been worth much. Eddie my word has been worth a heck of a lot more than yours. The fact that you are even posting again about gittin shows how you do not keep your word as you still post. You have repeatedly been exposed on this blog for inventing the truth e.g. supporting Oslo which you alleged rav shach supported and denied that it was your ethnic cause that were the perpetrators. You were basically pushed off this sight by public opinion because they were so outraged at your lack of honesty.
"where he intervened completely inappropriately and uprooted a rabbanut bais din's ruling in a divorce to curry favor with a senior police commissioner sums up the rabbanut - therby allowing the commissioner's son not to give a get for many, many years and there was no arko'oys involved."
This differs from what Rav Gestetner does how?
Yes it does. In the cases rav gestetner gets involved in the woman is almost inevitibly someone who is either in arko'oys (e.g. Weiss) or fails to listen to a bais din (Tamar Epstein).
While the standard of the rabbanut may be high, being tested by those who distort halochoh are not people whom one can rely on for anything.
e.g. supporting Oslo which you alleged rav shach supported and denied that it was your ethnic cause that were the perpetrators. You were basically pushed off this sight by public opinion because they were so outraged at your lack of honesty.
DeleteYou keep banging on about this. But in all honesty abstaining from a vote is not supporting any way you cut it. Even if they had voted against, the measure still would have passed.
The fact that you are even posting again about gittin shows how you do not keep your word as you still post.
Funnily enough this thread isn't about Gittin.
You were basically pushed off this sight by public opinion because they were so outraged at your lack of honesty.
Another great invention of Stan the man.
While the standard of the rabbanut may be high, being tested by those who distort halochoh are not people whom one can rely on for anything.
As written this sentence makes no sense.
But you have offered no proof other than your word, which to date hasn't been worth much. Eddie my word has been worth a heck of a lot more than yours.
DeleteOh and you still haven't offered proof, and you seem to be confused as to whom you are addressing.
Anyway if you have any proof, please pass it along, with a real name, so that I may talk to Rav Ovadia Yosef about. Currently he is planning on supporting Rav Amar for a second term, and should know if there are genuine problems(and who to address for follow up).
michael tzadok: I don't have permission of my friend to divulge his sister's information. if it were my sister i would divulge it but i gave you enough of a hint to investigate if you wish.
ReplyDeleteWhile the standard of the rabbanut may be high, being tested by those who distort halochoh are not people whom one can rely on for anything. of course it does. if ain yirah ain chochmah.
this post is about the corrupt rabbanut which is very relevant to gittin so stop obfuscating.
tzadok you said that you were not posting because it caused bittul torah. so posting about the rabanut doesn't cause bittul torah but about the rabbanut and gittin does.
According to the tzadok, the assault on Aharon Friedman was made up. His evidence - none whatsoever. Here are a few postings about the baal ha'chalomos.
http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2012/08/aharon-friedman-beaten-when-returning.html
YisSteinAugust 8, 2012 6:53 PM
Tzodok - Your incompetence and inability to verify any piece of information has now been verified to everybody. How about an apology to RDE.
I don't have permission of my friend to divulge his sister's information. if it were my sister i would divulge it but i gave you enough of a hint to investigate if you wish.
DeleteSorry Stan but I'm not going to take the word of anonymous internet troll over some very big Chareidi Rabbanim who speak for Rav Amar's character. When you are willing to offer solid proof we can talk. Otherwise, it seems to me that this is simply motzei shem ra, because he says some things that you don't like.
this post is about the corrupt rabbanut which is very relevant to gittin so stop obfuscating.
No this post is about allegations made against a city Rabbi. Once again you fail to understand how the system works. Each municipality has it's own Rabbinate, that is elected(or not as in the case of Jerusalem) according to the City's rules for the period of time set forth by they city's rules... It is totally disconnected from Rabbanut, as in the Israeli chief Rabbinate and it's subsidiaries.
it caused bittul torah. so posting about the rabanut doesn't cause bittul torah but about the rabbanut and gittin does.
What I meant was that arguing with mental midgets and internet trolls was bittul torah. If you would notice, I have had several guest posts since then. This may come as a surprise to you, but I don't need a troll to decide for me what my words mean or do not.
Eddie I never backtracked whatsoever. your ignorance in halochoh and lack of logic is only surpassed by your arrogance.
ReplyDelete"stanMarch 15, 2013 at 4:16 PM
DeleteOnce agsain this shows how unfit RHS is to be classified as a godol or posek or dayan, regardless of his alleged immense knowledge of Torah. ORA sides all the time with women who are guilty of mesirah and who go ahead and get their husbands arrested on trumped up charges and get put with the same criminals which in the case of child molestation he objects to but in the case of divorce he favors. He has got it totally the wrong way round."
_____________________________________
Stan, you are judging RHS as unfit because what he said about abuse is wrong - but it is no different from what your authorities said - it is to report the real molestors, and filter out the false trumped up charges.
Now you claim that ORA makes trumped up charges, or its clients do, but that has to belooked at on a case by case basis.
The post was on abuse and your recent confession of what your view si on abuse does not make RHS's sound wrong.
Now Eddie explain how the alleged gaon Tauber had a hetter to invent a false personal attack against rav abraham with no basis in halocho which was pure motzi sheym ra not befitting a yid let alone a dayan which you repeatedly do not answer. obviously you cannot.
ReplyDeleteStan, all you do is go around badmouthing anyone who is a competitor of your BD. I have already suspected that you are actually Mr Gestetner in disguise, or someone very close to him, on a marketing campaign.
Deleteif someone like tzaddok is in rav ovadia's inner circle in making decisions that affect klal yisroel then Heaven have mercy on us. if it were someone else who had a shred of credibility i would have contacted my friend in Israel and asked him for permission to divulge his sister's info.
ReplyDeleten o wonder the compalints around rav elyashiv's inner circle.
"e.g. supporting Oslo which you alleged rav shach supported and denied that it was your ethnic cause that were the perpetrators. You were basically pushed off this sight by public opinion because they were so outraged at your lack of honesty.
ReplyDeleteYou keep banging on about this. But in all honesty abstaining from a vote is not supporting any way you cut it. Even if they had voted against, the measure still would have passed."
Michael tzadok this is an utter lie and i will not ne euphemistic about it, it would not have passed. how dare you write such nonsense when so many people died as a result of abstaining for Volvos etc.
Are you seriously that bad at math?!?! Any way you cut it, it passed with a simple majority of votes in the Knesset. If those abstentions had been "no" votes, it would have passed by less, but it would have passed.
DeleteFrom Wikipedia:
In Israel, a strong debate over the accords took place; the left wing supported them, while the right wing opposed them. After a two-day discussion in the Knesset on the government proclamation in the issue of the accord and the exchange of the letters, on 23 September 1993, a vote of confidence was held in which 61 Knesset members voted for the decision, 50 voted against and 8 abstained.
It doesn't matter if it was 61 to 50(with 8 abstentions) or if it was 61 to 58. Either way, the majority voted for it, and it was going to pass.
I'm not sure why you see the need to make this an ethnic issue, and refuse to rise to that bait.
if there is anyone in the world who is as unfit as Eddie to comment on Gittin in Amewrica I would be very surprised. This guy is so clueless about halocho it is not funny.
ReplyDelete1) His claims that r gestetner and abraham are potentially chayav missah is pathetic. Eddie please spin it for us yet again.
2) His ignorance on what consistutes schar betailoh makes me wonder if has ever opened a choshen mishpot in his life.
3)"Now you claim that ORA makes trumped up charges, or its clients do, but that has to be looked at on a case by case basis. "
Eddie is not just ignorant about halocho but jutterly ignorant about legal practice in american matrimonial courts. in the vast majorit of divorces, false orders of protection are instituted against the husband as a matter of course. Everyone knows that but the consequences are horrifying including subsequent arrests for alleged breaches, husbands not even being allowed to retrieve their clothes from their houses, being prevented from seeing one's children for lengthly periods of time or being forced to have supervised visitation and the list goes on.
Eddie please go spew your utter ignorance elsewhere. As i told you I have no more time for it.
Now answer the basic question: how does tauber whom you allege is erlich have the right to make a false personal attack against another yid? he clearly could not highlight violations of shulchan oruch! that is the bottom line i am interested in from you?
Stan,
Deleteone of R Gestetner's letters write "All that prononounce excomunication upon someone not deserving of excomunication [there is included in this those who distribute a worthless seruv] they themselves are excomunicated. "
Since he has summarily placed Herem on many Gedolim in USA, perhaps a serious Hacham like R Tauber, considers these pronouncements of Gestetner to be worthless.
Remember, so far, I have only your word to go by, whereas I prefer to rely on known Gedolim, such as R Kamenetsky, R Tauber, R Shachter.
Since "stan" is not a known or reliable source, I cannot accept his rantings and ravings.
Eddie any point even slighly subtle is beyond you. The issue with HS was that he had different sets of standards for general mesirah if not a divorce and another standard for mesirah in a divorce/ marital strife situation which are entirely contradictory.
ReplyDeletechoose one or the other and stick by it. that was the issue Eddie.
"I have already suspected that you are actually Mr Gestetner in disguise, or someone very close to him, on a marketing campaign."
ReplyDeleteSince rav gestetner is the only dayan woth r abraham who does not make money off being a dayan, why would he need a marketing campaign?
"it caused bittul torah. so posting about the rabanut doesn't cause bittul torah but about the rabbanut and gittin does."
ReplyDeleteWhat I meant was that arguing with mental midgets and internet trolls was bittul torah. If you would notice, I have had several guest posts since then. This may come as a surprise to you, but I don't need a troll to decide for me what my words mean or do not.
I don't need a rashi on what you said. you said what you said and that was that you would not be posting about agunahs any longer. The brisker rov said that no one can be bigger in nistar than they are in nigleh and the bottom line is you have been shown to be very deficient in your understanding of nigleh on gittin on this blog. need i say more.
I have given you enough background on the case involving amar for you to dig deeper. frankly i do not trust you and neither do many of the other readers of this blog and i do not wish to hurt someone else's parnaossah. if you were really interested based on the info. i gave on this blog, there are not 50 botei din in south africa, you could dig into the matter yourself.
since you suspect me falsely of conduct that is what you would most likely do, namely try and discredit someone simply because i disagree with him, i will not even bother to respond to your allegations.
the very fact though that amar and metzger are happy to be associated with gittin where men are jailed and this produces a get meuseh and mamzeirim in klal yisroel means no further comments about their integrity or lack thereof are necessary. so as you can see, since amar is proud of being associated and head of a corrupt rabbanut, there is a raglaim le'dovor to his ethics. hence you need to apologize for claiming i am guilty of motzi sheym ra. he is the one who gave himself a bad name, not me.
be very deficient in your understanding of nigleh on gittin on this blog. need i say more.
DeleteNo I have been shown to hold views in line with Rav Ovadia Yosef, Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul, the Yaskil Avdei and the Ben Ish Chai(in other words sephardi gedolim). If you want to make the assertion that Sephardi Torah is deficient... well then this conversation will be over. Otherwise, all you have shown is that there is a difference of opinion regarding certain halakhot between Sephardim and Ashkenazim. Nothing new there.
since you suspect me falsely of conduct that is what you would most likely do, namely try and discredit someone simply because i disagree with him, i will not even bother to respond to your allegations.
I assume you mean willfully lying. I have given you the benefit of the doubt that you were mistaken about Shas' supposed support for the Oslo accords. I thought that maybe you had made a mistake. I admitted my mistake when it came to Rav Shach, but instead you continue with a blatant lie, hoping to discredit one of the greatest Sephardi Gedolim of all time. You have yet to admit your mistake. You continue to claim that Shas voted for/supported Oslo. However, it is clear that they abstained from the vote. You also falsely claimed in this thread that if they had not have abstained it would not have passed. However, there were 61 for, 50 against and 8 abstentions. Shas only had six seats. So even if they had all voted against, it would have only have been 61 to 56, and the measure still would have passed. Yet you continue with this falsehood in a blatant attempt at Motzei Shem Ra against a Gadol, and then you expect me(or anyone else) to believe that you have some hidden knowledge of Rav Amar interfering in a divorce? And now suddenly it isn't even a Rabbanut Beit Din(which is what you originally claimed) it is in South African B"D. So your story makes even less sense.
the very fact though that amar and metzger are happy to be associated with gittin where men are jailed and this produces a get meuseh and mamzeirim in klal yisroel
Unfortunately, the Gedolim do not agree with you. Rav Shternbuch has only gone so far as to say that it may be problematic. Nor have you been able to demonstrate from a single Rabbinut case that jailing the husband was done against halakha.
you could dig into the matter yourself.
And thus violate the laws of Lashon Hara and Motzei Shem Ra by believing such a ludicrous tale without any evidence?!?! No thank you troll.
he very fact though that amar and metzger are happy to be associated with gittin where men are jailed and this produces a get meuseh and mamzeirim in klal yisroel
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, the Gedolim do not agree with you. Rav Shternbuch has only gone so far as to say that it may be problematic. Nor have you been able to demonstrate from a single Rabbinut case that jailing the husband was done against halakha.
That is baloney. Even R shlomo fisher condemned the rabbanut's persecution of yisroel meir briskman calling the dayonim involved in the case as rshoim.
What about the jailing of yos dov meyerson when the oylom hatorah inisted on a second get following the first get as a result of it being a get meuseh because of briskman being jailed.
Again you are expecting me to simply take your word for any of this, or believe you. After you willfully lied in this very thread about Rav Ovadiah Yosef's involvement in the Oslo I accords.
DeleteBring actual proof from the Rabbinut cases(which you can find in Piskei Din) and written rebuttals by other known Gedolim. Otherwise I see no reason not to simply see this as another of your motzeh shem ra attacks.
eddie please explain to me what tauber has done to convince you he is a serious talmid chochom. if by lying against rav abraham and putting a false cherem on weiss is your idea of a serious talmid chochom, i think you should face the reality that your claims are ridiulous.
ReplyDeleteStan, I have said nothing about any Weiss, as I am unfamiliar with any such case.
DeleteNow let's make a partial list of some of the Rabbis you have so far posuled:
R Belsky
R Shachter
R Tauber
R Breitowitz
R Kamenetsky
R Yosef?
To me, the above are a pretty good sample of respectable Gedolim.
On the other hand, we have essentially someone called Stan, who is single handedly touting how great Gestetner is, when nobody else has even heard of him. And I have no idea who Stan is.
Now it may be true that Reb Dovid is also calling RHS wicked, but that does not really make the case much stronger. A generation ago, people were the saying that RYBS was wicked, and the source of all heresy in America. Today, even Reb Dovid is telling us how great the Rav was.
Also, you can call me an ignoramus all you like, that does not really mean much - the issue is whether R Kamenetsky, R Belsky, R Breitowitz all lack knowledge - which is a ridiculous statement to make.
is michael tzaddok not embarrassed by his blatant falsehood regarding rav sternbuch's position? how do you have the chutzpah to call yourself a rabbi?
ReplyDeletehttp://daattorah.blogspot.com/2012/07/myerson-get-rav-sternbuch-rav-karelitz.html
http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/100293790?access_key=key-1ia8ko01givi05fmiswx
Stan you need to get your facts straight. It was the Karelitz Beit Din that sent Meyerson to jail, and issued this letter concerning it in this letter from Oct 2010:
Deletehttp://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2012/05/aguna-wife-of-r-yosef-dov-meyerson.html
Apparenly Rav Shternbuch ruled and the Kareltiz B"D changed it's mind sometime in May of 2012. Which was nice of them.
However, the Beit Din HaGadol(you know Rav Shlomo Amar) over turned said decision and said that the original Beit Din exceeded the bounds of halakha. A ruling they made on the 9th of Tevet 5772(aka Jan 4 2012). Something you would have known if you had bothered to look the case up in Piskei Din, like I had initially said.
So please tell me again how Rav Shternbuch's position differs from Rabbanut? I said that Rav Shternbuch said, "it could be problematic" meaning to anyone who can read plain English, that potential for problems exist, but he has not condemned the practice on the whole.
You dig up one case of a local B"D using Kafiya k'neged hadin, and suddenly you think you have some sort of support. In reality Rav Shternbuch's teshuva only echoed what the Beit Din HaGadol had already written months earlier.
Here you are again presenting your half truths and falsifications.
Actually eddie this is a classic case of shooting the messenger when you can't shoot the message. just blog therabbis you have listed and you will find their behavior being very severely criticized. i will not go through the whole list but here are is an example or 2:
ReplyDeletehttp://yudelstake.blogspot.com/2013/03/bais-din.html
http://www.israel613.com/books/DINTORA_BELSKY_YSH-E.pdf
Was R Kamenetsky not severely denounced by others on this blof for how he behaved with regards to Aharon friedman refusing to even talk to him and hear his side of the story before issuing a fake siruv in appreciation or big $$$ from Tamar's late father?
Tauber's behavior with respect to both Weiss and his behaviot with respect to r abraham which despite me asking you ad nauseum to jsutfiy you still can't
R Ovadia is a massive talmid chochom but was denounced by rav shach for not listening and agrreeing to join the Labot gov't thereby leading to oslo despite all tzaddok claims otherwise. it is he who is justfiying r ovadia purely for ethnic considerations. in the end deri asked for mechilah.
So you can shoot the messenger namely stan as much as you like but you can;t change the facts.
Ad nauseum for tzaddok - if you are really interested in finding out the truth about r amar you have enough info. to work on.
Now Eddie I will ask you again: explain tauber's false accusations against r abraham.
R Ovadia is a massive talmid chochom but was denounced by rav shach for not listening and agrreeing to join the Labot gov't thereby leading to oslo despite all tzaddok claims otherwise. it is he who is justfiying r ovadia purely for ethnic considerations. in the end deri asked for mechilah.
DeleteStop lying about Rav Ovadia supporting Oslo. It simply is not true, and no matter how many times you say it, it will never be true. Why do you have to continually bring ethnicity into this? Ethnicity has nothing to do with it!!! You simply are falsifying information in an attempt to discredit, and it is sickening.
Stan, I am not shooting the messenger, although your message is laughable, a couple of blog pages.
DeleteSome of those who apparently critiqued Belsky, you attack yourself anyway, so how is their claim valid anyhow?
I have a question about R Elyashiv, BTW, since not all of his statements were adopted by his followers - kal v chomer the rest of the community. For example, his famous statement that no Jew should set foot in the Knesset. Now, if as many claim, R Elyashiv was posek hador, then his own Degel party, as well as all the other religious parties, and their friends who cry about Lapid, are all sinners?
You see UTJ or whatever it is called still sits in the Knesset. It also helps fund yeshivot. Thus all these people who claim R Elyashiv ztl was posek hador, are actually violating his halacha.
So, my point is, that with all these pronouncements, it is still pick-n-choose whichever halacha that suits us.
Stan - re: R Tauber's letter - he is responding to a question about the value of a seiruv from the Abraham BD. It is R Tauber's opinion that this should not be taken seriously. What exactly do you want me to explain about this?
DeleteI saw in some older posts you gratuitously insult R Bechhifer, and called him MR B, and basically told him to get lost. Now this was a gratuitous insult and motzi shem ra by Stan. It had no halachic basis. It also shows that I cannot rely on your value judgements, since you are sonneh yisrael.
rHS words on btei din in America:
ReplyDeletesee full interview at:
http://yudelstake.blogspot.com/2011/10/botei-dinim-toianim-these-days.html
Q: Are you saying there is a problem with the dayanim?
A: Of course. Do you think that all of the dayanim are honest? Many are acting like toanim; many of the toanim are acting like criminals. They make up their minds in advance that their side has to win. I don’t walk into a din Torah with the attitude that my side always has to win. If I think my side is wrong, I’ll pasken against them. The Rosh in the beginning of Perek Zeh Borer says that people think that their dayan always has to side with them. He has to explore their position; that’s true. But not to invent reasoning out of nowhere. Once we had a din Torah here. It was over real estate in California where they had invested a couple of million dollars. We asked them, “Do you want a din Torah, or would you rather have a peshara [compromise]?”We told them that a peshara is not a fifty-fifty split. It is whatever yoshor dictates. They agreed. The din of peshara in this case turned out to be one hundred percent in favor of one person. That was the peshara. They thanked us. They shook hands with us, shook hands with each other. That’s the way it should be. Regrettably, dayanim today don’t judge with yoshor.
Justa big pity he doesn't realize he is ;part and parcel of the problem with his feminst anti-torah views!
I've seen that interview, it shows he is - or tries hard to be yashar.
DeleteEddie's hypocrisy is breathtaking: See below
ReplyDelete"I saw in some older posts you gratuitously insult R Bechhifer, and called him MR B, and basically told him to get lost. Now this was a gratuitous insult and motzi shem ra by Stan."
Eddie's words:
"Stan, all you do is go around badmouthing anyone who is a competitor of your BD. I have already suspected that you are actually Mr Gestetner in disguise, or someone very close to him, on a marketing "
what is hypocritical about these 2 separate statements?/
Delete"Stan - re: R Tauber's letter - he is responding to a question about the value of a seiruv from the Abraham BD. It is R Tauber's opinion that this should not be taken seriously. What exactly do you want me to explain about this? "
ReplyDeleteEddie stop lying. I asked you to explain why he didn't provide a halachic explanation for his claiming the siruv is invalid. Or do you just not understand plain English? In contrast look at one of r gestetner's bittul siruvim where he gives many halachik reasons why the siruv is bunkum.
E bechofer holds views that are a complete violation of halocho. If you claim I insulted him and shouldn't have thats your right. however don't compare my behavior to that of an alleged dayan and gaon tauber who has to be scrupulous and seen to be scrupulous who was really oyver motzi sheym ra.
where is the alleged lie?
DeleteI claim you did insult r Bechhofer, but you have not shown any evidence that he violates halacha. Oh, don't bother with the blogs that you create and then use them as proof.
You claimed previously, stan, that you are a dayan - or that you deal with gittin on a daily basis. So now you contradict that - are you playing us stan?
Why are u asking me to provide a rationale for R Tauber's letter? I am not his secretary or spokesman. It is funny you accuse me of lying - what untruth have I said? I suggested that he gave his opinion in general. Even if this was not his primary motivation, that doesn't make me a liar, it just would mean my guess is not so accurate.
Shouting a million times that Rav Ovadia didn't support Oslo he only abstained is a case of you just protesting too much. He was guilty of not following the godol hador rav shach - that is the bottom line. You are onlly defending him because there have been so few gedolim of stature in the sefardi world in the last few hundred years. it is you who is bringing ethnicity into it. why did deri ask for mechila?
ReplyDelete. He was guilty of not following the godol hador rav shach - that is the bottom line.
DeleteHe had no need to follow another Gadol, as he was the Gadol HaDor.
You are onlly defending him because there have been so few gedolim of stature in the sefardi world in the last few hundred years.
WOW!!! Once again you insult Sephardim. There was in 1935 an entire Yeshiva of Sephardi Gedolim who the Chazon Ish wrote that he considered them to be greater then himself.
Why did Deri ask Mechila? It's called spin. Since the rumor has been spread by false folks like you that Shas somehow supported Oslo. So it is good PR to say sorry.
@Stan,
ReplyDeleteThere seem to be two primary corrupt motivations for the horrific anti-halachic divorce practices in Orthodoxy today - monetary corruption and feminism. I believe both these corruptions are evident in certain Chareidi circles, but typically monetary corruption is more evident by certain Chareidim. However American modern Orthodox divorce practice has been more infected by feminist motivations than by monetary motivations. The anti-Torah, anti-father, YU based ORA organization is a perfect example of this.
However, trying to contrast alleged Israeli religious Zionist feminism with alleged Chareidi anti-feminism is to a certain extent a fantasy.
The situation in Israel by the modern Orthodox seems quite different than in America - it would appear that the only Orthodox group anywhere aggressively expressing anti-feminist, pro-family viewpoints are certain Israeli religious zionists:
http://familism.org/english/
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/167579#.UX-_8Tct2Sp
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/167546#.UX-gXTct2Sp
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/162247#.UX-gYzct2So
As opposed to certain Israeli Chareidim who have been influenced by the Zohar and who seem to advocate the most extreme feminist positions that conflict with Chazal - see the book "Garden of Peace" by a Breslov rabbi.
In general Chareidim seem too docile to aggressively fight feminism. Instead they prefer to wait for moshiach to fix everything.
Also michael tzadok, Shas are 100% responsible for Oslo even if they had voted against it. This is because the Labor party only got to power and only had the authority to conduct those crazy negotiations because Shas failed to follow or frankly disobeyed the godol hador rav shach and voted in the labor govt in the first place so stop the revisionist history here.
ReplyDeleteStan, that is nonsense. You blame Oslo solely on Shas , but you are mistaken. For many years, r Shach held the land-for peace, anti-zionist, anti-settlement anti IDF line. The joke going around in haredi circles was that the RZ would not give an inch of land for peace, but would sell land for sheviit.
DeleteNow, for some reason R Shach did a U turn, when he realised that Arafat wasn't Snow white, and he forbade land given by miracle to be traded with terrorists. This was an embarrassment to all of his Haredi sheep who were towing his suicidal line for 20 years.
the interpretations are:
a) r Shach knew all along that it is nuts to give land to terrorists, but it was good political capital against people like r Shlomo Goren.
b) He really believed this crazy dream, but after being persuaded by people like Shlomo Goren, the Bostoner rebbe, the Gur rebbe, he changed his mind.
Now either of these explanations weaken the fantasy of the daas torah of Gedolim - it is not clear which is worse then the other.
This explains why STan is suffering from cognitive dissonance - since he cannto accept what a total disaster this policy was of r Shach, or the amount of sinna and motzei shem ra it resulted in agasint the mitnachlim.
Stan once again you lie. 61 MKs need to support a Governtment in order for it to be formed.
DeleteFrom the Knesset Webpage:
The coalition members were: Labor, Meretz, Shas (left the government on 14. September, 1993) and Yi'ud (joined the government on 9 January, 1995. The number of ministers when the government was formed - 17. The numer of MKs who supported the government when it was first formed - 62 coalition members and another five MKs from ouside the coalition. After Shas left and Yi'ud entered the number of ministers went up to 21, and the number of MKs who supported the government fell to 58 coalition members and another five MKs from outside the coalition.
So please notice that they had a total of 67 MKs supporting the government, so even without Shas' 6 seats, Labor still would have been able to form a government. Which is why when Shas left the government the day after Rabin announced the Oslo accords from DC, the government did not fall.
They abstained from the no confidence vote, and still Labor managed to get the 61 votes necessary for their government and thus the Oslo accords to continue.
So please stop with your lies already.
Also michael tzadok, Shas are 100% responsible for Oslo even if they had voted against it.
DeleteStan you are changing your tune. So far you have provided three(false) stories:
1) Shas voted for Oslo(a lie).
2) If Shas would have voted against instead of abstaining they it would have failed(a lie).
3) That Labor would not have formed a govt without Shas(a lie).
Some honesty would be nice. Also admitting when you are wrong would lend you some credibility.
"stan you need to get your facts straight. It was the Karelitz Beit Din that sent Meyerson to jail"
ReplyDeletethis is an utter lie tzaddok. This very bais din's position is that you cannot force a get and there was pashkevil put out which eddie complained about regarding this matter posted on this blog.
You are accusing the kareitz bais din of mesirah which is a despicable accusation. what power does the karelitz bais din have with the police anyway and why would they go to the police?
the very fact that you admit the municipal bais din of the rabbanut of jerusalem no less breaks halocho is bad enough and shows just how disqualified the rabbanut are.
in any case havings an appeals court in genral in halocho is bogus even if it overruled the lower court's nonsense. rav nissim's bais din makes mistakes and they corrected it but they certainly are not involved in mesirah.
the very fact that you admit the municipal bais din of the rabbanut of jerusalem no less breaks halocho is bad enough and shows just how disqualified the rabbanut are.
Deletein any case havings an appeals court in genral in halocho is bogus even if it overruled the lower court's nonsense. rav nissim's bais din makes mistakes and they corrected it but they certainly are not involved in mesirah.
There was no Jerusalem municipal Beit Din involved that I see. To my knowledge, lacking a city Rav, there is no Jerusalem municiple Beit Din.
The initial Karelitz Psak Din calling for Kefiya was demonstrated on this blog. It was on orders of that Beit Din that Meyerson was jailed.
http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2012/05/aguna-wife-of-r-yosef-dov-meyerson.html
Than in January of 2012 Beit Din HaGadol, overturned said decision as being against halakha. You can find the case and their reasoning is Piskei Din.
Then it would appear that the Karelitz Beit Din wrote to Rav Shternbuch to see if they had to abide by the Rabbanut's decision to overturn their original decision.
Rav Shternbuch's reply can be seen at the link you provided.
Then the Karelitz Beit Din put out their retraction.
You are simply inventing facts to suit your needs. Again it is sickening.
You are the one inventing facts here tzaddok. daas torah has a cxopy of the documentation and if he could repost it it would show a mesiras modoh with a complaint against a local rabbanut bais din with one abraham tzvi shainfeld and Eliyahu Abargel trying to force a get so once again tzaddok you know not what you are speaking about. Email the following and you will get the documentation. But to have the chutzpah to claim that r nissim's bais din was involved in mesirah shows how untrustworthy you are.
ReplyDeletesend an email with subject:1039 to pdf@sendfast.org and you will see for yourself how you are inventing tzadddok.
"here was no Jerusalem municipal Beit Din involved that I see. To my knowledge, lacking a city Rav, there is no Jerusalem municiple Beit Din."
what can isay. the best of your knowledge is pathetic! you have always relied on and continue to rely on chalomos.
Stan, the link provided above takes us to a letter of RNK's BD, and on that post you attacked R Karelitz.
DeleteShame on you stanley!
Stan,
DeleteYou are obfuscating. The original document is posted here for all to see:
http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2012/05/aguna-wife-of-r-yosef-dov-meyerson.html
With it are some of your thoughts on Rav Karelitz:
stanMay 23, 2012 at 3:41 PM
R Meyerson offered to go to the Bdatz Yerusholayim so letter is phony and irresponsible. She refused to go there but tovaih holech achar hanitvoh.
I presume Rav Nissim also relies on the psak of heter mechirah from the rabbanut and also uses electricity from jews on shabbos since the rabbanut never assured it and eats shwarmas at the tel aviv tachanah mercazit with a rabanut tel aviv hechsher.
The letter is a disgrace to the meory of the Chazon Ish who never held mo'us olai is mechayev a get.
lastly where is R Moshe Sternbuch in all this. He holds mo'us olai is mechayev a Get. So let him publicly procalim the Briskers are wrong.
So please stop lying now.
the letter from karelitz's bais din refers to a previous psak by the jerusalem "rabbinic" court. so how tzaddok can claim that the letter he keeps on referring to is in his favor and shpows that it is rav nissim karelitz's bais din which is guilty of mesirah when it shows the exact opposite is unbelievable. it is called revionist history.
ReplyDeleteStan let us once again look at your own initial comments:
DeletestanMay 23, 2012 at 3:41 PM
R Meyerson offered to go to the Bdatz Yerusholayim so letter is phony and irresponsible. She refused to go there but tovaih holech achar hanitvoh.
So you said that he they went to the Karelitz B"D and that this was their decision.
Instead now it would appear that you have actually read the letter that you attacked. So it appears the husband got the Beit Din that he wanted but not the result that he wanted. Unless you can provide a tik number for a Jerusalem municipal Beit Din. Oh wait there isn't one. There is only the Rabbanut Beit Din on King George because Jerusalem is lacking a Municiple Rav...
I presume Rav Nissim also relies on the psak of heter mechirah from the rabbanut and also uses electricity from jews on shabbos since the rabbanut never assured it and eats shwarmas at the tel aviv tachanah mercazit with a rabanut tel aviv hechsher.
You insult Rav Nissim.
The letter is a disgrace to the meory of the Chazon Ish who never held mo'us olai is mechayev a get.
You insult him some more. Apparently because his B"D supported the decision of whatever B"D they had gone to in Jerusalem(which is not clear from the letter). Read the letter it is clear that his Beit Din at least supported the decision.
lastly where is R Moshe Sternbuch in all this. He holds mo'us olai is mechayev a Get. So let him publicly procalim the Briskers are wrong.
Then you lie about Rav Shternbuch's position.
So then the Beit Din HaGadol overturned the decision of both.
Rav Karelitz wrote to Rav Shternbuch.
Rav Shternbuch responded that the initial decision was wrong.
Rav Karelitz then decided in May to retract his original decision.
Honestly Stan your comments here show that not only are you a liar, you are a troll that invents facts to suit his own needs.
so the tzadok accuses me of lying vis a vis the oslo accords. let's see if he is right or wrong yet again: I quote directly.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/127568#.UYBDu7WbMSk
"Deri led the Shas Party politically from 1984 until he was forced to resign in 1999 following his conviction on bribery charges. The MKs of Shas abstained in the first Oslo Accords vote in the Knesset in 1993, and voted against the Second Oslo Agreement in 1995.
However, this does not tell the full story. Shas joined with Meretz and Labor in 1992 to form the Rabin government that forged the Oslo Accords. Without the six Knesset seats of Shas, the 62-member government coalition would have fallen.
As Gideon Levy has written in Haaretz (Dec. 3, '07), "Deri's Shas was not a left-wing party, but it... refrained from undermining the first Oslo agreement."
Steven Bayme of the American Jewish Committee put it this way: "Deri was a key player in the Oslo Accords signed with the Palestinians."
Labor Newspaper: Labor/Deri for Oslo
But possibly most telling of all, the Labor Party's own Davar newspaper, now defunct, headlined its issue of September 19, 1993 - a week after the first Oslo Agreement was signed - as follows: "The Labor Government cooked up a deal to postpone the trial of Aryeh Deri in exchange for the support of Shas for the Oslo agreement."
In February 1997, when the hareidi-religious newspaper Yated Ne'eman uncovered the above report, the judicial organization B'Tzedek called for an investigation as to whether there were criminal aspects to the above understanding reached between the Rabin government and representatives of Aryeh Deri. The deal was apparently not implemented, however."
See pg 434 of the book "Israel" by Anita Shpaira where she asserts the same thing "the shas leadership supported oslo..."
see this post from http://972mag.com/legendary-shas-leader-returning-to-politics-promises-to-promote-peace/
"Under Yishai, Shas turned from the centrist party which supported the Oslo accord to an extreme rightwing movement, hostile to the peace process and second only to Avigdor Lieberman’s Israel Beitenu in its undemocratic initiatives."
And another:
http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/the-ultimate-in-audacity/2013/04/17/0/?print
"And let us not forget about the other haredi party that has been so insulted by its non-inclusion in the new government. Let us not forget how Shas supported the Oslo Accords, which brought us more than 1,500 murdered Jews. Let us not forget how Shas helped with the withdrawal from Hebron and the implementation of the Wye Agreement."
So please you protest too much tzaddok. The person entitled to an apology is me not you.
WOW!!! You are a (presumably) grown man, that has yet to come to understand that an OPINION piece, is OPINION and not FACT.
DeleteThe problem is that you have no FACTS to support your case. Just opinions and honestly opinions aren't worth much.
Notice not a single word from this tzadok about the corruption of the rabbanut including r bakshi doron being indicted, r meir lau's financial shenanigans, r shlomo goren being mattirt mazeirim, etc etc. Keep it up tzaddok. Not even the chionim consider the rabbanut anything more than a thuggish corrupt body. nobody takes you seriously tzadok.
ReplyDeleteStan,
DeleteIn defence of R Goren -
whilst he was still alive, I had already figured out that the attacks on him were baseless, and 2/3 of the major ones had already been disproven:
1) The Dakar submarine- it was claimed by his opponents that perhaps the marines were still alive and captured by Russia. Well, they found the wreckage under the sea, and the evidence of the bodies.
2) Land of Israel - various attacks, until, as noted, R Shach did a U turn at Oslo, and adopted the same position as R Goren on Eretz Yisrael and holding on to the land.
3) The so called Langer case. This took a bit longer, but he was accused of falsely nullifying a conversion, thus creating mamzerim (as you allege). Recently, however, Dayan Sherman , while not at EJF seminars, annulled thousands of conversions, with the blessing of R Elyashiv, thus creating perhaps hundreds of potential "mamzerim".
The problem, however, is that these converts had stronger credentials than the one Goren annulled. Thus the risk of mamzerut, created by Sherman, is greater than the ones created by Goren.
3/3.
r bakshi doron being indicted So what? The Government indicted him. They also indicted Rav Ovadia Yosef once upon a time for not ruling the way they wanted. They also indicted the authors and supporters of Torat HaMelech for saying opinions that they didn't agree with. Rav Doron was indicted for granting Semikha to people who deserved it(were able to pass the tests ect) but had not served the necessary years in a post high school Yeshiva in order to become a Rav or Dayyan according to the secular Govt.
DeleteI thought your ocmplaint against Rabbinut was that they did what their "Zionist Paymasters" told them and not what halakha says. But you then scream corruption when they do what halakha says. By the governmentally imposed standards that he opposed both the Baba Sali and Rav Mordechai Eliyahu had invalid semikhot both in Rabbinut and Dayyanut.
r meir lau's financial shenanigans
Charging for weddings... Once again why should he not be able to take Schar Betalla for a wedding? People don't need to be married by him, there are plenty of municiple Rabbanim that can do their wedding. But they want the extra honor of having him perform their wedding. So he decides to charge for his time. So what? Oh wait he isn't doing what his "Zionist Paymasters" tell him to do... Where is the corruption?
r shlomo goren being mattirt mazeirim Who said that this wasn't a problem? He is arguably why Rav Ovadia Yosef initially pushed so hard for term limits and standardization of the election process of Chief Rabbis. If he had not, you wouldn't have had just 10yrs of of Rav Goren, you would have had 21yrs of him. Until that point the Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi was only replaced upon death.
Not even the chionim consider the rabbanut anything more than a thuggish corrupt body.
Actually they Chilonim see the Rabbanut as run by overly strict Chareidim.
nobody takes you seriously tzadok.
Whatever you say troll.
So tzaddok after completely being disproved continues to rant and rave and claim that there was no Rabbanut Bais Din which led to to the arrest of Yosef Dov Meyerson. This is no longer a case of someone not knowing what he is talking about but someone who after being presented with indisputable evidence from the person arrested himself as to who caused his arrest.
ReplyDeleteHe then goes on and rants and raves that since I was against the letter of the bais din of r nissim karelitz somehow why am I quoting from it. Well tzaddok I have news for you so is the bais din of r nissim against that letter because they were forced to retract on their conclusions. That doesn't change the fact that they shamefully relied on the ruling of the corrupt rabbunut.
I have nothing more to say to you tzaddok. This is no longer nistar tzaddok where you can rely on your own chalomos. the evidence is overwelming. As they say from the horses mouth. He was not arrested because of r nissim's bais din whom you falsely accused of mechilah but because of the rabbanut and that's what he says and that is what the documentation says. You can insist otherwise but you change history. Now get real and offer the readers an apology. This is nigleh and as the Brisker rov said you can't be bigger in nistar than hyou are in nigleh
I even told you w ways on how to get hold of the documentation. Either from a pinkas bais din or from the blog owner.
bakshi doron being indicted So what? The Government indicted him. They also indicted Rav Ovadia Yosef once upon a time for not ruling the way they wanted. They also indicted the authors and supporters of Torat HaMelech for saying opinions that they didn't agree with. Rav Doron was indicted for granting Semikha to people who deserved it(were able to pass the tests ect) but had not served the necessary years in a post high school Yeshiva in order to become a Rav or Dayyan according to the secular Govt.
ReplyDeleteThat's what you say. Again without documentation or proof.
"r meir lau's financial shenanigans
ReplyDeleteCharging for weddings... Once again why should he not be able to take Schar Betalla for a wedding? People don't need to be married by him, there are plenty of municiple Rabbanim that can do their wedding. But they want the extra honor of having him perform their wedding. So he decides to charge for his time. So what? Oh wait he isn't doing what his "Zionist Paymasters" tell him to do... Where is the corruption?"
You must be kidding right! If the employer says not to do something and you violate it even if it is stupid you pretty much deserve to fired. Is this not a chilul Hashem violating what your employer tells you to do? Do you think he pays tax on the cash he receives?
This guy gets paid a full fat salary from his secular paymasters for 40 hours a week and is not allowed to take another job. So there is no s'char betaloh involved. While you have a bekius there seems to be a huge inability to apply the knowledge.
" shlomo goren being mattirt mazeirim Who said that this wasn't a problem? He is arguably why Rav Ovadia Yosef initially pushed so hard for term limits and standardization of the election process of Chief Rabbis."
ReplyDeleteSo basically you admit the rabbanut is corrupt and the savior is always rav ovadia. Please you are the one who is so full of ethnicity it is unbelievable.
You can still have a corrupt thug for 10 years who mattirs mamzeirim, who is indicted, who is a puppet and who bnrings disrepute by charging for weddings and if he takes kickbacks here who says he has any ne'emonus al pi halocho for not taking kickbacks elsewhere.
If r broyde was foreced to resign because of sockpupetting what r meir lau has done is a million times worse. carry on with your chalomos that the botei din of rav abraham and rav gestetner are no good because the heilige rabbanut and r amar;s secratary have said so. but the rabbanut whom for the last 10 years have all the chareidi dregs are great and the chilonim had no complaints about their behavior until 10 - 15 years ago.
tzaddok you live in an imaginary alternative universe that no one casn argue against.
Tzaddok claimed he wasn't posting on the agunah matter because it was bittul torah. when he started blogging about corruption on botei din he tried to claim this was different. now he is full back blogging on agunahs again. he has misrepresented yet again. he has also falsely accused the bais din of rav nissim karelitz of being involved in mesirah. Shame on you tzaddok.
ReplyDeletetzaddok so clearly does not understand the concept of s'char betailo it is not funny. Your employer says you get paid for 40 hours a week but may not take any remuneration from anyone else. So this is classic case of where there would be no s'char betailo because you are not giving up any of your time since you would not be able to charge for it anyway. Clueless.
ReplyDelete"Stan let us once again look at your own initial comments:
ReplyDeletestanMay 23, 2012 at 3:41 PM
R Meyerson offered to go to the Bdatz Yerusholayim so letter is phony and irresponsible. She refused to go there but tovaih holech achar hanitvoh.
So you said that he they went to the Karelitz B"D and that this was their decision."
Another chalom. Where did i say he went to the bais din of rav nissim karelitz. she went not him. it says clearly he would only go to the b'datz eida chareidis.
the only thin g that is true is that I sharply critisized the bais din of rav nissim karelitz for being influenced by a lot of pressure from bnei brak honchos to side with the wife without proper due diligence. But I never accused them of mesirah and the bottom line is they retracted and had egg over their face. But tzaddok never retracts. he carries on with his chalomos.
ReplyDeletetzaddok claims that the non responsibility of his ethnic party fro bringing the labor govt in place which has led to thousands of atrocities being perpetrated against innocent jews for some black Volvos is the truth and mine is opinion. he is certainly welcome to his opinion.
ReplyDeleteBut let's look at his track record on the matter. Initially he claimed that Shas voted against and the other chareidim for. Those were his claims. And he was shown to have been completely wrong. So let the reader decide if tzaddok is accurate and knows what he talks about.
Initially he claimed that Shas voted against and the other chareidim for. Those were his claims.
DeleteYou are correct. They were my claims. For which I documented my sources, and admitted my error. Something you have yet to do for any of your contradictory statements.
Eddie your taaynos on the contradiction in the annulment case I can't comment on because I don't know the facts. I do know that in the Goren case however both r moshe feinstein and r shlomo zalman came out vocifirecely against r shlomo goren. and then 2 rabbis were very PC and would never condemn the MO. RZ worlds so this is a serious issue. You would need to ask those involved in dayan sherman's camp to explain the apparent contradiction but I hear your point. However it in no way excuses the psak of r Goren.
ReplyDeleteStan, I also hear your point in general about bribes. I actually agree in principal, and certainly no dayan, whether I am closer to him than to say r Gestetner, should make money out of giving a favourable psak din. I am no there to judge the judges, so I can only - in case of doubt - go according to rov.
DeleteKashrut is also a similar issue, and the way it brings parnassa to a lot of people, is also a bribe.
"Unless you can provide a tik number for a Jerusalem municipal Beit Din. Oh wait there isn't one. There is only the Rabbanut Beit Din on King George because Jerusalem is lacking a Municiple Rav..." those are your words. here are mine
ReplyDelete"you are the one inventing facts here tzaddok. daas torah has a copy of the documentation and if he could repost it it would show a mesiras modoh with a complaint against a local rabbanut bais din with one abraham tzvi shainfeld and Eliyahu Abargel trying to force a get so once again tzaddok you know not what you are speaking about."
So according to tzaddok this is some other bais din not a rabanut bais din because he hasn't yet found the tik number and also the bais din can't exist since there is no chied rabbi even if it put meyerson in jail.
So let's understand the logic here. Meyerson a greatgrandson of the Brisker Rov who forbade all contact with haichal shlomo, according to tzaddok went to haichal shlomo to overturn the ruling of either rav nissim's bais din or some unknown but certainly not the rabbanut bais din when he could have gone to the b'datz bais din to overturn the ruling.
Pathetic and illogical tzaddok. Meyerson or someone on his behalf went to the rabbanut appeals court which al pi halocho should not exist to overturn a lower rabbanut court decision for the simple reason that just because the bdatz overturns a rabbanut decision would be irrelevant and still cause meyerson to be incarcerated in jail. So he had no choice but to go to this appeals court and only went there to prevent his re-arrest due to a lower court rabbanut decision. Otherwise it goes without saying he would have gone elsewhere.
Baal ha'chalomos.
You talk of ranting. That is 11 comments without ever explaining the apparent contradictions in statements that you made attacking the Karelitz Beit Din or proving... well anything.
DeleteFare thee well Troll.
I am allowed to attack a bais din that made a mistake, a terrible one at that. You have not admitted lying about claiming that this bnei brak bais din was oyver mesirah despite documents stating the exact opposite. You are obstinate in your sheker.
ReplyDeleteAccording to tzadok there is no such thing as electricity because he can't see the electrons moving just like he can't find the tik number of the rabbanut beth din which incarcerated yosef dov meyerson. pathetic and clueless.
ReplyDeleteexactly what contradicitions did i make attacking the karelitz bais din? please list them for us. you quoted ad nauseum from a letter of his claiming he was oyver mesirah. i read the letter and saw he said the exact opposite as does the documentation you can get hold of from meyerson saying the exact opposite of your allegations. get real tzadok and admit you have been "economic with the truth" yet again.
ReplyDelete"Initially he claimed that Shas voted against and the other chareidim for. Those were his claims.
ReplyDeleteYou are correct. They were my claims. For which I documented my sources,"
You did not document your sources because there are NO such sources. These are your inventions. Tzaddok economic with the truth yet again.
Because you are so defiant tzaddok I will wipe the floor with you.
Since michael tzaddok won't admit to readers of this blog that:
ReplyDelete1) Falsely accusing r nissim karelitz of mesirah was a mistake and owning up to it.
2) Denying that the rabanut was involved in the incarceration of meyerson when documents clearly indicate otherwise
3) Returning to blog on agunahs or fake ones when on his own blog he has a white flag claiming he was stopping
4) Not admitting that he had no documentation that supported his claims that Shas voted against Oslo
5) Having the chutzpah to denigrate rav gestetner and rav abraham when they are the only 2 dayonim in america not in it at all for the money and relying on the rabbanut some of whose most prominent members have been shown to either violate halocho or be suspected of illicit financial dealings:
I sincerely hope that he will stop blogging on the issue of botei din in general and agunahs in particular since he has shown that he cannot be relied upon on these matters at all.
I doubt that this will happen. he lives in a differnt world with a different reality from the rest of us.
Please answer for your comments Troll:
DeleteR Meyerson offered to go to the Bdatz Yerusholayim so letter is phony and irresponsible. She refused to go there but tovaih holech achar hanitvoh.
I presume Rav Nissim also relies on the psak of heter mechirah from the rabbanut and also uses electricity from jews on shabbos since the rabbanut never assured it and eats shwarmas at the tel aviv tachanah mercazit with a rabanut tel aviv hechsher.
The letter is a disgrace to the meory of the Chazon Ish who never held mo'us olai is mechayev a get.
lastly where is R Moshe Sternbuch in all this. He holds mo'us olai is mechayev a Get. So let him publicly procalim the Briskers are wrong.
1) Falsely accusing r nissim karelitz of mesirah was a mistake and owning up to it
DeleteMesirah? No. Mesirah is handing someone over to non-Jewish authorities. A Beit Din ordering punishment is not Mesirah.
However you are correct, the Karelitz Beit Din did not. HOWEVER once again your facts are wrong, no Rabbanut Beit Din ordered him imprisoned either.
After tracking down all of the sources it would appear to go like this:
1) The couple went to the Israeli National Rabbanut Beit Din(jerusalem does not have a municiple B"D at present). They ordered that the husband needed to give a get. However that was all. They did not order Kefiya.
2) The Karelitz B"D agreed.
http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2012/05/aguna-wife-of-r-yosef-dov-meyerson.html
3) The wife, not getting what she wanted turned to the Israeli Civil courts. The secular civil courts threatened to imprison Meyerson unless he gave the Get(but did not actually do it). A point that Stan, who claims to know all the facts neglected to mention.
4) Since the wife went to Arkaot without any sort of valid heter, in keeping with halakha the Rabbanut Beit Din changed it's ruling on Jan 4 2012.
5) Rav Moshe Sternbuch ruled that until the wife drop her case(presumably her secular court case) any Get given would be a Get Meusah.
6) The Karelitz Beit Din in May of 2012 wrote in agreement with once again Rabbanut and now Rav Shternbuch.
Thank you Stan for leading us all on a merry chase of false facts. All we have come to is that a secular court can't force a get, something we have known since the second Get law passed in NY.
"However you are correct, the Karelitz Beit Din did not. HOWEVER once again your facts are wrong, no Rabbanut Beit Din ordered him imprisoned either. "
ReplyDelete1)So tzadok changes his tune it wasn't the kmarelitz bais din that got him imprisoned.
2) "The wife, not getting what she wanted turned to the Israeli Civil courts. The secular civil courts threatened to imprison Meyerson unless he gave the Get(but did not actually do it)."
Rather strange that the documentation claims that he was imprisoned and that he was moser modoh. and wasn't even allowed kosher food.
3) The corrupt rabbanut forced him to give a get which everyone recognised as a false get including the appeals court of the corrupt rabaanut. But tzadok challenged me originally to provide a single case of the rabanut forcing a fake get which is what i have proved. and even if they didn;t technically put him in prison first in this case the rabanut conspired with secular authorities to keep him there until he gav e the get.
Tzadok please explain to us why this was a fake get but in all thew other cases of far less profile where a get is forced through imprisonment the forced get is valid. And don't tell me its because she went to the secular courts. because if a rosh yeshiva's daughter who was considered to come from a frum enough family went to arko'oys you can bet your bottom dollar or morrocan dinar that others have also gone to secular courts.
Bottom line is even if she first went to secular court for the imprisonment and you are correct, the rabanut were involved in forcing a get with the alternative of a lengthly prison saty.
Tzadok that is your holy rabanut but r gestetner is corrupt.
2) "The wife, not getting what she wanted turned to the Israeli Civil courts. The secular civil courts threatened to imprison Meyerson unless he gave the Get(but did not actually do it)."
DeleteRather strange that the documentation claims that he was imprisoned and that he was moser modoh. and wasn't even allowed kosher food.
None of the documentation so far presented on this blog has shown that he was actually imprisoned.
3) The corrupt rabbanut forced him to give a get which everyone recognised as a false get including the appeals court of the corrupt rabaanut. But tzadok challenged me originally to provide a single case of the rabanut forcing a fake get which is what i have proved. and even if they didn;t technically put him in prison first in this case the rabanut conspired with secular authorities to keep him there until he gav e the get.
A LIE
The Beit Din said he was Chayiv to give a Get and the Karelitz Beit Din agreed with their decision.
Unfortunately since tzadk continues to obfuscate and misrepresent and has only admitted to 1) below with no aplogy to the readers, I am forced to repost:
ReplyDeleteSince michael tzaddok won't admit to readers of this blog that:
1) Falsely accusing r nissim karelitz of mesirah was a mistake and owning up to it.
2) Denying that the rabanut was involved in the incarceration of meyerson when documents clearly indicate otherwise
3) Returning to blog on agunahs or fake ones when on his own blog he has a white flag claiming he was stopping
4) Not admitting that he had no documentation that supported his claims that Shas voted against Oslo
5) Having the chutzpah to denigrate rav gestetner and rav abraham when they are the only 2 dayonim in america not in it at all for the money and relying on the rabbanut some of whose most prominent members have been shown to either violate halocho or be suspected of illicit financial dealings:
I sincerely hope that he will stop blogging on the issue of botei din in general and agunahs in particular since he has shown that he cannot be relied upon on these matters at all.
I doubt that this will happen. he lives in a differnt world with a different reality from the rest of us.
Please explain and apologize for your previous comments regarding the Karelitz Beit Din and Rav Shternbuch's position:
DeletestanMay 23, 2012 at 3:41 PM
R Meyerson offered to go to the Bdatz Yerusholayim so letter is phony and irresponsible. She refused to go there but tovaih holech achar hanitvoh.
I presume Rav Nissim also relies on the psak of heter mechirah from the rabbanut and also uses electricity from jews on shabbos since the rabbanut never assured it and eats shwarmas at the tel aviv tachanah mercazit with a rabanut tel aviv hechsher.
The letter is a disgrace to the meory of the Chazon Ish who never held mo'us olai is mechayev a get.
lastly where is R Moshe Sternbuch in all this. He holds mo'us olai is mechayev a Get. So let him publicly procalim the Briskers are wrong.
Please explain why you keep changing the facts. Can you not read the documents posted on this blog?
Please answer for your comments Troll:
ReplyDeleteR Meyerson offered to go to the Bdatz Yerusholayim so letter is phony and irresponsible. She refused to go there but tovaih holech achar hanitvoh. 100% that is the halocho
I presume Rav Nissim also relies on the psak of heter mechirah from the rabbanut and also uses electricity from jews on shabbos since the rabbanut never assured it and eats shwarmas at the tel aviv tachanah mercazit with a rabanut tel aviv hechsher. Yes why rely on the psak of the israeli national rabbabut no less.
The letter is a disgrace to the meory of the Chazon Ish who never held mo'us olai is mechayev a get. Of course it is, it was retracted.
lastly where is R Moshe Sternbuch in all this. He holds mo'us olai is mechayev a Get. So let him publicly procalim the Briskers are wrong. he would not dare! but in other cases he has said you have to give a get for mo'us olai even if there should be no kefiah involved so what's your [problem tzadok.
did you find the tik numbner? but you still haven't seen atoms moving along.
"Rather strange that the documentation claims that he was imprisoned and that he was moser modoh. and wasn't even allowed kosher food.
ReplyDeleteNone of the documentation so far presented on this blog has shown that he was actually imprisoned."
"stan April 30, 2013 at 9:40 PM
You are the one inventing facts here tzaddok. daas torah has a cxopy of the documentation and if he could repost it it would show a mesiras modoh with a complaint against a local rabbanut bais din with one abraham tzvi shainfeld and Eliyahu Abargel trying to force a get so once again tzaddok you know not what you are speaking about. Email the following and you will get the documentation. But to have the chutzpah to claim that r nissim's bais din was involved in mesirah shows how untrustworthy you are."
send an email with subject:1039 to pdf@sendfast.org and you will see for yourself how you are inventing tzadddok. "
So if it doesn't appear on this blog that means it didn't happen? just like you couldn't find a tik number so it didn't happen? Or just like you can't see electrons moving so it doesn't happen?
Please tzadok I told you how to get hold of the documentation. You are no longer be'shogeg but be'meizid in posting inaccurate info. I don't control the blog but you can email daas torah as he has a copy as well.
Tzadok does this not remind you of your pathetic attempts to deny that Aharon Friedman was assaulted round tisha be'av. It's called revisionist history.