Thursday, July 18, 2013

Rav Belsky is speaking this Shabbos Nachamu Weekend - Business as usual

A Concerned Lakewood Parent writes:

Enablers and supporters of molesters, after the fact, try to go on as if nothing happened. It's the most effective tactic they have, and the most hurtful.

Rav Belsky's notorious letter makes him, arguably, the biggest supporter of molesters in recent history. Click here for letter
Most people would be shocked when they hear what he wrote/did.  Everyone would be disgusted if they learn he still stubbornly holds those positions.

Attached below please find a poster that will be hanging in every Shul in the mountains this Shabbos.
This seems to be a call for action.

Potential attendees would be mortified to learn, that aside from listening to an entertaining shiur, they are being used to stab many victims in the back.

Aside from bringing it to the attention of would be attendees, there are a number of organizations that might want to steer clear. The event is being sponsored by The Beren Foundation. It's being held in The Woodridge Shul. And if they have ANY credibility left, it's being organized by the OU.


  1. Every year my shul has a Tisha B'Av program featuring videos from the Chofetz Chayim foundation. I've always gone in the past (love that Paysach Krohn!) because some of the speeches were inspiration, the air conditioning was good and it killed time in an appropriate way.
    This year I looked at the line up of rabbonim on the advertising poster and thought: He's an enable, he's an enable, he's probably an enable, he'd enable if he got the chance...
    Am I getting too cynical?

    1. For what it's worth, I made the same calculation for the first time this year, as well.

  2. The Woodridge Shul?! They are such a "tei'arah group! They built themselves a beautiful Kehhilah! I believe they were just featured in a major magazine.

    They probably don't know what's going on. SOMEBODY SHOULD TELL THEM. It's unfair that the "in-towners" think they can USE the "locals" like this.

    BTW, looking at the poster, it seems this event is planned for Sunday morning. Not Shabbos, as your heading states.

  3. There is an email address on the poster. In case you have any questions for R' Belsky, you can always use the email to ask.

  4. concerned

    Who are you going to believe - your own eyes reading the sign or Daas Torah? The answer should be obvious.

  5. Why the sudden cconcen to pasel R Belsky? He was previously paselled by both the Bdatz and Rav Elyashiv for fake gittin and told by the latter to away from gittin? What about rhe fake siruvim eg ob meier kin? Communal Yiddishkeit has become a sick and tragic joke?

  6. Not so concernedJuly 18, 2013 at 5:48 PM

    Nebach on this 'concerned' Lakewooder parent who, by Daattorah's own admission, is controlled by the Kotlers as is the rest of that town. ,

  7. Also, to be fair this is a common tactic used by people who have gotten into trouble. Keep acting like it's business as usual, keep moving along and eventually, given our short attention spans nowadays (I blame sugary cereal myself) we'll forget the scandal happens and everything will go back to the way it was before.

    1. MGI - you are correct! And that is what we see time after time.
      These crises are being managed by professional PR folk who know about weathering bad news. Stay low for a while. Issue a press release (sometimes). And then, move forward, as if nothing happened.

      And you know what? It works!

      Who are the Good Guys these days?

  8. Mr. Eidensohn;

    You are a mevaze tamid chacham and you have no chailek in olam haba. It is now clear why you were thrown out of boro park and had to run to monsey.


    1. Mr StandUp - you have a lot of loose screws, wrong facts, and obviously have not yet recovered from Purim. Even worse you obviously have had your mind destroyed by too much Internet!

      This is a case of one major talmid chachom who drove another talmid chachom out of Lakewood with false charges. Why do you insist on lying and covering up the truth?

      You don't lose Olam Habah for defending an innocent talmid chachom against slander.

      Never was thrown out of Boro Park and never lived in Monsey.

    2. I agree with Stand Up For Your Rights in his address towards you. You are no "Rabbi"; I think "Mr" is pushing it.

      "You don't lose Olam Habah for defending an innocent talmid chachom against slander."

      Who decided it was slander? You, Mr. Eidensohn? Sorry, I'll go with Harav Belsky over you any day of the week.

      And let's say you were right, and Harav Belsky was wrong. Does that allow you a free pass to say what you please and throw filth at a Rosh Yeshiva? Is he no longer a Talmid Chochom and therefore you can bash him as you please?

    3. Uri you can't have it both ways. Rav Sternbuch said it was obligatory for the father to go to the police while Rav Belsky says that the father was not only a moser but was guilty of molesting his son.

      If you don't accept Rav Sternbuch's word then maybe you will accept Rav Belsky's own written letter which he says that a person who knows about child abuse should go to the police. That is what the father did and yet Rav Belsky drove him out of Lakewood for doing just that.

      So according to Rav Sternbuch and Rav Belsky - Rav Belsky had no justification for slandering the father as a moser. Furthermore if he knew the father had molested his son - as he states in his letter - then according to his second letter he was required to report that to the police - which he didn't.

      I don't claim to be passed Rav Belsky's toe nails as a talmid chachom. But everyone with an IQ over 80 understands that Rav Belsky can't have it both ways.

      Since when does a talmid chachom have an excuse to destroy another talmid chachom and his family with the slander that he is a moser - just because he is a big talmid chachom?! Having spent hundreds of hours going through the Torah sources of child abuse and consulting with Rav Sternbuch and getting his approval to my understanding of the sources consulting with many others - your moronic comment about having a "free pass" and "throwing filth" and "bash him as you please" are total nonsense. You are an idiot. If you have something intelligent to say - say it! Justifying Rav Belsky's public actions against Rav "S" because he is a Talmid Chochom is an incredible insult to the Torah.

    4. Let me begin my response by saying that I respect your work, but I think you need to be more careful in your crticism of Talmidei Chachomim.

      "Uri you can't have it both ways. Rav Sternbuch said it was obligatory for the father to go to the police while Rav Belsky says that the father was not only a moser but was guilty of molesting his son."

      Oh, the irony! I'm the one who can't have it both ways!?! I respect HaRav Sternbuch's words as well as Harav Belsky's. It seems to me that they both agree in principle in regards to going to the police when one has creditable evidence. What we don't know however, are the particulars of this case. Is it possible that HaRav Belsky has some specific knowledge in this case which we don't know about? So while you accuse me of "having it both ways," I'm the one who is attempting to stay consistent throughout in my trust of our leaders, while YOU have chosen to support Harav Shternbuch (who is a true Gadol B'yisroel) while decisively criticizing Rabbi Belsky. So again, WHO is the one having it both ways?

      "Since when does a talmid chachom have an excuse to destroy another talmid chachom and his family with the slander that he is a moser - just because he is a big talmid chachom?!"

      Let's assume that Harav Belsky had some knowledge about this particular case which led to his belief that Kolko was innocent. I'm not asking you to agree with that, but just follow my line of reasoning. If you accept that this was Harav Belsky's belief, then why should Kolko's life be destroyed if he is innocent? Are we more worried about the ruined life of an "innocent" defendant or a "guilty" accuser?

      "If you have something intelligent to say - say it!"

      I just did.

    5. Sorry your reply totally missed the point and shows you are living in a fantasy world. If Rav Belsky has evidence that Kolko is totally innocent as the result of his investigation - 1) where is the evidence? 2) Rav Goldin who works with Rav Belsky and posted Rav Beslky's call to go to the police in abuse cases wrote to me the the evidence was overwhelming against Kolko. Why wasn't Rav Belsky able to convince him otherwise? 3) Rav Belsky publicly accused the father of molesting his son - why didn't he go to the police with this outrageous claim? 4) If Rav Belsky has evidence that Kolko is innocent why didn't he present it? Why should Kolko suffer because Rav Belsky won't share what he claims have have discovered? 5)Since it is clear that most people now accept that Kolko is guilty - on what basis is Rav Belsky clinging to the view that Kolko is innocent and why conceal it?

      Your sevora of what might be is not something an intelligent person would believe at this stage. It might have been appropriate before the evidence was gathered.- but it only makes sense now only to someone who refuses to face reality.

      Bottom line:Either Rav Belsky produces his evidence that Kolko is innocent and that the father molested his son - or he retracts his claims and apologizes. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

    6. Rabbi Goldin's exact statement to me was:

      2. Concerning the Kolko case, Rabbi Belsky made it clear, based upon his involvement in the case, that he believes the defendant to be innocent of the charges and that the accusers are actually the guilty parties. He is convinced of this position, in spite of what seems to be overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

    7. Your 5 "different" points are one and the same. You want to know where the evidence is. It's unnecessary to give off the impression that you have an over-inflated "laundry list" of accusations against Harav Belsky.

      If you had read my "fantasy world" post, you would have noticed that I never used the word "evidence."

      What I did say however, was "knowledge." Is it possible for a person to know something without being able to prove it with evidence? Don't think so? Well, on which side of the bed did you wake up this morning? Can you prove THAT? Well, being that you can't prove it with evidence, you must be wrong. Right?

      I also find it quite amusing how you avoid some of the points which I raise against you.

      You never addressed your right to throw mud on Harav Belsky (even assuming that he has made a mistake in either Halacha or judgement - which may or may not be true). If your Rebbi, Harav Shternbuch, Shlita, had Ch"V made a similar mistake, would you say half of the things that you have said about Harav Belsky? You should learn how to be right without insulting Gedolim. I would presume that at some point in your schooling for your Ph.D. or 25 years of counseling you would have learned that personal insults and attacks (especially against Talmidei Chachomim) get you nowhere. It is utterly ridiculous how you post nonsensical statements about Shiurim which he's giving. It's not only wrong, but childish as well.

    8. Uri you sound like a lawyer who does a fancy pilpul but constantly misses the main point.

      If Rav Belsky was accused of not knowing what side of the bed he got up - I would not require proof.

      As in other cases which involves another person whom Rav Belsky attacked - the burden of evidence is in fact on Rav Belsky. A relatively obvious point that you keep ignoring. Unless you are claiming a prophetic form of Daas Torah for Rav Belsky - so that he just "knows".

      If Rav Sternbuch made a similar error in judgment and set about destroying another person without justification - yes he would get the same treatment.

      The Torah itself requires chastising your fellow Jew - even if he is your rebbe.

      Again - Rav Belsky slandered another Jew without providing any evidence. He helped drive that Jew - who is a major talmid chachom who deserves at least as much kavod as Rav Belsky - out of Lakewood. His victim deserves to know the basis for the slander and every Jew has a right to know why Rav Belsky has done this.

      We are dealing with clear halachic issues - not mud slinging. If I called Rav Belsky Amalek than your claims would be justified. He has slandered a Jew by calling him a moser and a child molester - without presenting any halachic justification - why is that so difficult for you understand to be problematic? He has in fact supported and enabled child molesters. We are waiting to here why.

    9. Uri

      Your missing the point!

      Even if R' Belsky has this "inside information", the father definitely doesn't. So how in heaven can he fault the father for protecting children, without sharing this prophetic vision with anyone.

      Neither the father nor R' Belsky know firsthand what happened. The Father did the responsible thing and suspected four adult, unrelated witnesses, were not lying. He also shared that info with R' Belsky.

      So yes, the onus right now is squarely on R' Belsky.

    10. "We are dealing with clear halachic issues - not mud slinging. If I called Rav Belsky Amalek than your claims would be justified."

      You keep driving home the exact point which I am making. Thank you! If it's truly a Halachic issue (as you say), then why the insults? Why the personal attacks? State your feelings on the Halachic issue (including why you feel the other party is wrong), without stooping to the level of a five and a half year old. You yourself have said, "I don't claim to be passed Rav Belsky's toe nails as a talmid chachom." You can argue with him if you please, but if he's a Talmid Chochom, then treat him as such. Additionally, why is Amalek the "gold" standard? You don't think that the awful things that you have said about Harav Belsky and other Gedolim fall into the category of being Mevazeh a Talmid Chochom?

      It seems to me that you refuse to explain your childish behavior, because in truth, there is no explanation for it. You know and I know that it is wrong.

      The bottom line is this: We can dispute from now until eternity about the level of Emunas Chachomim that one should have. What should not be up for debate, however, is the total lack of respect which you show towards Gedolim.

      Again, I just want to reiterate that I think your work is important and necessary, but I just think it is important for you to give the proper Kavod towards Talmidei Chachomim. I would hope you agree with that.

    11. First of all if your whole issue is the language of the post - I didn't write it. But I did post it.

      Secondly regarding the cold halachic facts I have in fact reported them many times as cold halachic facts.

      Thirdly - what Rav Belsky has done in this case is to take the issue of out of a dispassionate halachic debate. He is the one who initiated calling another major talmid chachom a moser and the sexual abuser of his own son. Halachically it is permitted to reply in kind to this type of attack.

      In sum, Rav Belsky is the one who first crossed the clear red line in the tone and nature of communication. There is no requirement to ignore this type of verbal abuse - even from a gadol. Please show me a single source that a gadol has a special right to slander another talmid chachom or even an am haaretz without being rebuked?

    12. "First of all if your whole issue is the language of the post - I didn't write it. But I did post it."

      Precisely my point. If you posted it, one can assume you agree with it. I haven't noticed any pro-Rabbi Belsky posts on this blog. If you want me to send you a letter that you can post, I will gladly oblige.

      Furthermore, my bewilderment at your treatment of some Gedolim isn't limited to this post. Anybody who reads through this blog will clearly see your foul treatment of these Torah giants.

      So again, I ask you: What is your Heter to be Mevazeh Talmidei Chachomim?

      If you can't answer this question (as you have ignored it in the past), one can assume that you have no legitimate explanation of your behavior.

    13. Actually there have been pro Rabbi Belsky comments on this blog - made by me. Rav Belsky in fact has many fine qualities.

      If you want to make a guest post - please do.

      You are correct - regarding many topics such as the issue of get Me'usa, Hersh case, Tropper case, child abuse coverups etc I have criticized gedolim. And I stand by what was said then as well as what is said now.

      A gadol is not infallible and is not above criticism - and historically never was. When a gadol slanders another person - then there is no problem pointing it out. When a gadol participates in producing a get me'usa he is not above criticism. When a gadol allows coverups of child abuse - he is going to be criticised. When gadolim participate in a program which corrupts the conversion process for the sake of money - then they get criticized.

      That is the answer which I have stated in the past and is the justification for my comments and allowing them from others.

  9. My correspondence with the OU on this issue is below. Please be advised that in my experience, the OU is actually pretty good about getting back to you but in this case, obviously, I'm not pleased with the answers. I regret that I need to publish these emails but I have never done this in the past to anyone else I have spoken with there. Read from the bottom:
    I understand. This leaves me no choice but to register my disagreement with the Beren Foundation that is supporting the seminar and gives grants to OU Kosher. They may care about this no more than the OU or believe that calling the police on child molesters is mesira unlike the RCA's position, but that is their (and your) prerogative.

    Thanks very much.
    From: "Grossman, Yosef"
    To: 'david held'
    Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 10:20 AM
    Subject: RE: Questions for Rav Belsky

    This is a kashrus forum. We will not be discussing any other matter that the OU or any of its Rabbonim are involved in except kashrus.
    Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 10:19 AM
    To: Grossman, Yosef
    Subject: Re: Questions for Rav Belsky

    Unless you wish to tell me why the questions below are not relevant, I will be telling people that the OU is unwilling to address such matters in this forum - which is public, after all.

    Thanks for your response.


    From: "Grossman, Yosef"
    To: 'david held'
    Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 9:42 AM
    Subject: RE: Questions for Rav Belsky

    Thank you for your questions but we will only be answering Kashrus questions.
    From: david held
    Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 9:28 AM
    To: Grossman, Yosef
    Subject: Questions for Rav Belsky

    Do you still believe Yosef Kolko to be innocent and the father of the sexual abuse victim to be guilty of sexual abuse himself?

    Considering the OU's history with Baruch Lanner, do you think that your support of Yosef Kolko is something of an embarrassment to the Orthodox Union


    David Held

    1. David, it is indeed a kashrus question. How can we rely on the kashrus of someone who is clearly removed from reality.

    2. The OU was quoted in the Jewish Week, in response to  the outcry that they can't be associated with R' Belsky, that " he's only at the OU as a kashrus professional".

      Here also they are saying, "it's strictly a Kashrus forum".

      They seem to believe it's a plausible argument. If they are sincere, they are following this discussion, so let's refute their argument. I really do hope their listening.

      Would the same people defend sceduling Baruch Lanner or Yuddie Kolko  to present at a "kashrus forum"? While we agree that R' Belsky is not in the same category as these guys, the defense would work for them too. After all, they can say, "this is strictly a Kashrus forum!!".

      Presumably, both Kolko and Lanner are looking for a job right now, should they send their resume to the OU? Would the OU hire one of these two, "strictly as a Kashrus expert"?

      [Incidentally, one could argue, what R' Belsky is doing is a bigger Chillul Hashem. These guys were talented educators, not Roshei Yeshiva! Besides, they obviously have a problem, and no one would seek to emulate them at this point.]

      The fact is, Kashrus forum or not, it would give them very valuable face time. The perception would also be clear that the OU is eager to showcase them and proud to have them aboard. After such endorsements, the whole past can be spun as ancient history.

      Now one can argue, that we have to only look at the good in R' Belsky. That might be a argument worth having, but this "Kashrus forum" stuff doesn't fly.

    3. The only place Kolko can presently get a job is in the prison laundry, or the shop where they make license plates. And I doubt he's even receiving minimum wage.

      As for using R. Belsky as a figurehead to legitimize the OU kashrut organization: sooner or later it's going to implode, and it ain't 'gonna be pretty. The fish rots from the head down.

  10. Yosssie and we could rely on him previously after he was allegedly involved in the attack of Avromi Rubin?

  11. Here is grist for a kosher question to Rabbi Belsky:

    Maybe he can enlighten folks about negius:

  12. There would be nothing wrong with consulting Lanner or Kolko from a safe place to get advice on something they excel in. Just because one has a problem does not exclude him from the human race. He still must pray, study and preform all mizvous everyday. They still pay rent, eat, a are alive.

    1. I definitely agree with that, and I would go further than you. If someone suspects that Lanner or Kolko can give him valuable advice, he'd be an idiot not to consult with them!

      The issue here is putting them on a pedestal, and public face time. Are you saying the OU would showcase them in a forum like this?!

  13. "The Torah itself requires chastising your fellow Jew - even if he is your rebbe."

    This statment is the shoresh Neshomah Mitzvah and the # 1 agenda of this site and its author. It should answer all questions about all issues posed here.

    If his Rebbi would only know what gets posted here and would not just give him a 'catre blanche'
    "I trust you" pass.

    1. You keep repeating the same false claim. All my posts are in fact given to Rav Sternbuch at his request and he reads them.

    2. So you're saying that HaRav Shternbuch sees how you refer to many Gedolim and is okay with it? Please tell me you are joking.

      If I were you I'd be horrified to show my Rebbi some of the the things that I had written.

    3. Didn't say he approved but simply that he is fully aware of what I write. Obviously you are not my rebbe and it is obvious why!

    4. "Didn't say he approved but simply that he is fully aware of what I write."

      Enough said. If he doesn't approve of the things which you write, then why do you write them?

      Might I say that your actions are hypocritical? You criticize Rabbonim for what you interpret as going against the words of Harav Shternbuch Shlit"a, but you yourself are above that and don't need to follow your Rebbi?

    5. Uri you are sick. You are not interested in discussing and undertanding issues but rather to see how you can twist thing against me.

      Rav Sternbuch reads my posts. He has not said he approves or disapproves them - but that he wishes to continue receiving copies of my posts. How does that make me a hypocrite?

      It is simply a waste of time publishing your warped comments.

    6. Thank you Rabbi Eidensohn for taking the time to respond to Uri. Even though he may not learn much from this correspondence, I did.

  14. Messira mina lan?July 20, 2013 at 2:17 AM

    Messira mina lan?

    I am seeking clarity and trying to sort out on the issue of Rodef or Moisser depending on the criteria of "RAGLAYIM LEDAVAR", of which is given to establish only by a "RAV", and most recently, for anyone else that knows the facts.

    A Rodef is clear cut, according to Harav Shternbuch Shlit'a veshaar Poskim ugdoilei haDor lefi daas haRashb"a, the victim is URGED to go to the Police so as to stop the Molester, the RODEF in his tracks before he inflicts more damage to the victim or anyone else, period.

    According to R' B., it is Messira. Messira is known to be for something that is to be brought to a Beis Din, rather than Arkaot. Mimo nafshach, if it is made up allegations, that is a full blown "ALILAH" of which has nothing to do with "MESSIRA", regardless whether deposited by a Beis Din or Arkaot. On the other hand, if it IS credible, then the guy is a full blown RODEF, and that has to do with ARKAOT only, "MESSIRA" MINA LAN? MESSIRA man dechar shmei? Hadra Kushye leduchta, how does "RAGLAYIM LEDAVAR" make it or break it as far as from "MESSIRA" automatic to a RODEF, Huh? THAT is a big Mystery that I cannot fathom.

    Raglayim ledavar, the victim knows first hand as a beDidi havey uvda/ witnesses/ or a child telling the Parents or a mandated reporter etc. Let the "AUTHORITIES" listen to what they say happened, and they will sort out the "RAGLAYIM" and the BAAL DAVAR, as well as what further needs to be done, End of story!

    The Beis Din is absolutely NOT equipped to deal with Molestation, neither how to investigate and how to establish whether it has merit, nor to lock him up if it is called for. We also know from the Talmud, kol mi she'eino baki betiv Gittin veKidushin lo yehe esek imahem. Since chamira skanta meissurei, ma im Gittin veKidushin kach, al achat pi kama vekama bedinei Nefashos uPikuach Nefesh.

  15. R. Eidensohn - thank you for being a voice in the wilderness and for injecting a large dose of both sanity and rachmonus into the Orthodox world. Yidden have really lost their way and need to re-establish the high moral ground which we exemplified for millennia.


please use either your real name or a pseudonym.