Frum Follies has been carrying a story regarding Adina Cohen who has defended Meisels. This is a fact and I am not disputing it. The story has also been carried on the Rare View Blog where Adina's father comments that Adina's mother had been murdered in Jerusalem in 2010 and that Meisels had been very supportive of her. He also notes that he has stopped her from further public comments on the matter.
My objection to Lopin is the false story he has fabricated around Adina Cohen.
He claims she is a madricha at Chedvas one of the four seminaries and thus he slams the principal - Rabbi Kahane - for continuing to employ her. He also slams the Israeli Beis Din for ignoring an employee at Rabbi Kahane's seminary who supports Meisels.
These are Lopin's words:
Last week I posted a mass email by Adina Cohen, a madricha (dormitory counselor) in the Meisels seminary, Chedvas Bais Yaakov, directed by Rabbi Meir Kahane. In this email Adina appealed for support for Rabbi (sic) Elimelech Meisels as if he merited respect, as if he was innocent of serious allegations of sexual abuse, as if he still deserved to be called a rabbi. This concerns me because a staff that denies anything happened is telling students they will not be believed if they report abuse.
I am amazed that any seminary would employ such a dorm counselor. It does not square with the Israeli Beit Din position that “There is no cause to refrain from sending girls to study and dorm in these seminaries. It can be confidently assumed that the distinguished staff does its work trustworthily and it will continue to educate Jewish daughters for Torah and purposefulness.”
Obviously the Israeli Beis Din missed this miscreant. One can only wonder how many others they missed. It is clear that their blanket endorsement of staff is based on a very restrictive understanding of proof and a presumption of acceptability (chezkas kashrus). But their flowery language deceives the public into believing that the staff are great. In reality a number of those staff are just not provably guilty because other staff and starry -eyed, mean alumni and students are intimidating witnesses into silence.The above constitutes an outrageous lie. She is not working at the seminaries. She never worked and is not presently a madricha in Chedvas. She actually had nothing to do with Chedvas since her year in Seminary. She WAS a madricha in Binas but she is now living in Baltimore Maryland. Thus her letter has nothing to do with the ruling of the Beis Din regarding the seminaries. It has nothing to do with Rabbi Kahane. It has nothing to do with the integrity and competence of the Israeli Beis Din. But it does have to do with Lopin's vendetta against Rabbi Kahane and the seminaries as well as the Israeli Beis Din.
It is incredible reading the self-righteous commentators on Frum Follies as well as the Rare View who jump through hoops trying to be more "brilliant" than the next in their comments and express greater horror at the awesome significance of this "employee" that Lopin has discovered. Everybody seems to take it as a given that anything that Lopin states must be true when in fact it is a lie. However now that I have exposed the lie - I doubt that any of them - especially Truthseeker - will apologize for babbling slanderous and false comments. They are only concerned with ways to slander others - because the facts are not what is important to them - it is the fun of being self-righteous.
"Everybody seems to take it as a given that anything that Lopin states
ReplyDeletemust be true when in fact it is a lie. However now that I have exposed
the lie - I doubt that any of them - especially Truthseeker - will
apologize for babbling slanderous and false comments. They are only
concerned with ways to slander others - because the facts are not what
is important to them - it is the fun of being self-righteous."
Truer words have never been spoken. None of these people are in this to help victims or make the schools safe -- and in this I include the CBD -- their goal is destruction of the schools, with all the damage that implies. I avoid their websites as I would an open cesspool.
I have corrected my post re her working for Binas, not Chedvas. You are not dealing with her very foul character, something i doubt she developed this year. If anything this outburst from someone in the network of alumni reflects the sort of influence being pumped from Jerusalem and reaching out. Ki mitziyon taytzeh toras hanhalah.
ReplyDelete"But it does have to do with Lopin's vendetta against Rabbi Kahane and the seminaries as well as the Israeli Beis Din."
ReplyDeleteLopin's vendetta is Gottesman's vendetta as well. A grotesque pair, joined at the hip.
@Yerachmiel Lopin - you still don't get it. Your post is a lie. Your defense here is absurd. You don't know whether she has any meaningful connection with the seminaries - but you are tarring and feathing the seminaries and the IBD based entirely on your fertile imagination. Why don't you simply remove the post and apologize?
ReplyDeleteIt is now corrected. I regret an error about the specific seminary in which she worked which grew out of the fact that virtually all the ~70 students addressed in her email were Chedvas students. In my haste i slipped and ignored my notes. However, I am wondering if she did not also send separate mass emails to lists she picked up from staff to alumni and staff of other seminaries. A number of other outrageous mass emails have been sent out since the scandal broke in July. There were many other nasty messages sent to dissenting students to intimidate them into silence about the goings on at the seminaries.
ReplyDeleteI stand behind my claim that this is not an anomaly but is woven into the warp and woof of the culture of the staff which they spread to students. Staff are playing a two-faced game. On the one hand they are claiming that they knew nothing about Meisels at the time but they are now better trained to spot and report either a climate of grooming or reports of abuse. On the other hand they are busy minimizing Meisels misconduct to "Just a hug." and stoking gratitude and sympathy for poor Rabbi Meisels who "has suffered enough." It is a culture of denial by minimization. It is a culture of resentment toward those who exposed Meisels. It is a culture of hostility to any of his victims who dare to report their suffering at the hands of Meisels.
Yerachmiel, we have to accept the reality that whatever Rabbi Meisels is guilty or not guilty of, that if there is a similar case in the future, and the teacher is guilty, he is likely to get away with his crime. The reason is simple: the girls are trained not to testify. As you point out, they are also subject to browbeating. No witnesses, no case. As Reuven said when he went back to the pit, "The child is not." All the evidence went *poof*.
ReplyDelete"The reason is simple: the girls are trained not to testify."
ReplyDeleteAnd you know this how?
"They are only concerned with ways to slander others - because the facts
ReplyDeleteare not what is important to them - it is the fun of being
self-righteous."
This is about much more than being self-righteous. This is about covering their backs after the incredible mess they made with their slanderous allegations and attempts to extort and then shut the seminaries. When the truth gets out about what really went on with the CBD and Mr. Gottesman and thanks to your efforts it's slowly happening, there'll be a lot of people finally understanding why individuals such as Feurst and Cohen are no longer respected in the rabbinic world and have been largely discredited in their very own community.
Good question. (Partial) answer: the girls are trained to get married. In the current marriage system, advertising that they were touched by a male teacher detracts from that goal.
ReplyDeleteProof: This article
http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/08/06/70149.htm
states:
"A rabbi in charge of four Orthodox seminaries in Israel sexually assaulted girls in his charge, and threatened to ruin their marriage prospects if they reported him, the girls' parents claim in a federal class action."
In all that's been written on this blog, and on Lopin's, did anyone say something like, "Why, that's absurd! Nobody has the power to ruin a girl's marriage prospects like that."
Kishke-yumkins, tell me that a girl who takes her teacher to court will be lionized and not ostracized.
While on the subjects of self-righteousness and pointless slander, would you ask your readers to stop slalndering R. Shlomo Gottesman? The conspiracies attributed to him in many comments are ridiculous, but they needlessly impugn his character.
ReplyDelete- a former talmid of his chabura
Unfortunately, the actions attributed to him are not ridiculous, and represent only the smallest fraction of what he is guilty of in this matter. His behavior has been thoroughly wicked. By this time, even the members of the CBD, corrupt as they are, are beginning to rethink their connection to him.
ReplyDelete" In my haste i slipped and ignored my notes."
ReplyDeleteשנאה מקלקלת את השורה
"רגליהם לרע ירוצו"
In other words, you know it from nowhere but your own foolish supposition.
ReplyDeleteThat article is merely a summing-up of the discredited and ridiculous RICO suit ginned up by the so-called dayanim of the CBD and Gottesman. It proves absolutely nothing, as I'm sure you know.
I cannot speak for all girls who take their teacher to court, but the two accusers in this case have both gotten engaged since filing suit. Evidently, it's not as cut-and-dry as you'd like to make it.
"You are not dealing with her very foul character,"
ReplyDeletePot, kettle.
Unfortunately they don't seem to be ridiculous, look at the letter from the IBD describing his behavior.
ReplyDeleteIf you regret the error, why have you not removed Rabbi Kahane's picture?? He has nothing to do with the post! Doesnt's seem like you regret it!
ReplyDeleteFool! The lawsuit wasn't brought by girls who each claimed they were molested. It was brought by girls who claimed they would be at risk of molestation if they went to the school this year. "'...The conspirators hoped that this scheme would force class plaintiffs into leaving their daughters in The Seminaries even though that they were not safe because the conspirators would withhold their tuition deposits.'" Get away from me.
ReplyDeleteWhile you're busy being so concerned about impugning the character of people, perhaps ask Mr. Gottesman why he felt so free to impugn the character of all the staff members? Or was that okay because he once gave you a chabura?
ReplyDeleteA prominent Beis Din in Eretz Yisroel specifically highlighted his awful behavior and criticized it. If you gave a hoot about the truth you'd look at the letters from the Beis Din which are found on this site and educate yourself as to the true nature of your former Rosh Chabura.
You couldn't possibly be concerned with foul characters or you wouldn't be spending so much time with the lovable little "truthseeker" - a fould character if there ever was one.
ReplyDeleteWhy so hasty? You're only dealing with דיני נפשות but you act as if it was eating ice cream.
ReplyDeleteSlow down and reflect on your actions for a moment.
You're the fool. There are two lawsuits. The second, still pending, was brought by the two accusers. Both of whom have since become engaged.
ReplyDeleteWhy so hasty? You're only dealing with דיני נפשות but you act as if it was eating ice cream.
ReplyDeleteWhy may a person not take a long distance trip with a person who violates the Torah?
Same here. If he doesn't value his own life, his own destiny, his family's heritage - why do you think he would value or be "chos" on anyone else's life?
but the two accusers in this case have both gotten engaged since filing suit.
ReplyDeleteSo, will they be getting a full kesubah? Will they invite the CBD to read the kesubah? Will we be able to see the video of the reading of the kesubah?
To Joseph Orlow:
ReplyDelete1) You claimed that girls were taught not to testify
http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2014/12/frum-follies-fabricates-another-lie.html#comment-1733054464
2) You further claimed that girls who do testify would not be able to get married.
http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2014/12/frum-follies-fabricates-another-lie.html#comment-1733359961
3) Those girls who now filed a lawsuit against Mr. Meisels are now engaged.
http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2014/12/frum-follies-fabricates-another-lie.html#comment-1733537828
4) You responded by showing a lack of awareness about the actual lawsuit you are quoting and professing about.
http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2014/12/frum-follies-fabricates-another-lie.html#comment-1734375597
Now that you've been made aware of the actual facts, do you still remain with your original opinion about these seminaries?
You made a similar accusation against a "seminary madricha". Rabbi Eidensohn has cleared up the facts. Can you clear up your position on this as well? Thank you.
Just as quick as we are to condemn people, we have to respond with at least the same speed when err and and correct our misconception and mistake.
Its funny. This supposed anonymous "talmid" has made three previous comments on Disqus.
ReplyDeleteTwo of them are aimed at casting aspirations at the seminaries after a prominent letter of support was released and try to minimize the significance of the letter.
http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2014/08/seminary-scandal-new-letter-from.html#comment-1563774400
And then see his response...
The conspiracies attributed to him in many comments are ridiculous, but they needlessly impugn his character.
Well, anyone think that this may be Mr. Gottesman himself seeking to salvage a teeny bit of his reputation here on blogsphere?
I have to admit that what I did was tainted with foolishness, since I got close to being G'naivos Ha'daas, trickery. I wanted you to clarify what you meant by "this lawsuit", without outright asking you.
ReplyDeleteNow, you have clearly indicated that you hold that these two girls bringing the lawsuit are claiming they were molested. But wait, there was supposed to be only one hug! Perhaps it was a group hug? This evidence, of the existence of these lawsuits, and your averring that the girls' are claiming they were molested, means there's a contradiction here somewhere.
Was there one hug, two hugs, or no hugs?
Bringing a lawsuit is heavy stuff. If the plaintiff loses, she may have to pay her opponent's legal fees if the judge thinks the case was frivolous. There are two lawsuits, so I think there's a medium chance there were two hugs. That evidence for two hugs is about as strong as the other evidence presented that there was one hug, namely, a recorded confession by Rabbi Meisels.
So we have, in my book, contradictory evidence: Rabbi Meisels confession on one hand, and two lawsuits on the other hand. So I conclude there's evidence for more than one hug. I think reasonable people can disagree here. Isn't that the purpose of the comments section? I'm just a blogista, and don't look to pick a fight with anyone. I'm here to learn. But I maintain either there was more than one hug, or there were no hugs. We either accept all medium level evidence, or reject it. Furthermore, the same Bais Din that apparently recorded Rabbi Meisels confessing about a hug, also is telling people Rabbi Meisels confessed to other things.
Rabbi Daniel Eidensohn pointed out to me in a comment on another post that the recorded confession was heard by people outside the Bais Din. If I understand correctly, any other confessions that have been mentioned here and elsewhere have apparently not been shared so widely, if they even exist. So he concludes there's only evidence for a hug and nothing more.
Along those lines, I suppose, a recording can be construed as more compelling than two lawsuits that could yet be thrown out.
I disagree with that line of reasoning, though. I say all the evidence is kind of shaky, and we either accept all of it or none of it.
And these apparent exceptions of Jewish girls taking their teacher to court does not convince me that I am mistaken in my belief that Jewish girls are trained and/or browbeaten into not testifying. I will illustrate with my own case to counter yours. A Jewish girl in New York was raped years ago and her rapist was arrested by the police but she declined to cooperate, I was told, so as not to adversely affect her marriage prospects. If you want details, I can refer you to a source. Please contact me by email or telephone.
@Joe Orlow - please send me the court filings of the lawsuit so I can post them.
ReplyDeleteForgive me, but I can't send them because I have no clue at this point how to get them. I'm relying on Kishke-kootchy in regard to them. She seems informed. I can ask my attorney about it, though, and will get back to you.
ReplyDeleteThis whole "one hug" thing is a figment of your foolish imagination, augmented by the dumpster diving you engage in at Lopin's site. What I've said all along is that he admitted to negiah only. This remains true. I'll leave you to construct elaborate hug theories with your fellow clods on Frum Follies.
ReplyDeleteAs for your supposed "trickery," you may rest assured that had I not wanted to speak of the second lawsuit, your inane comment would not have induced me to. In fact, the second lawsuit is common knowledge among those who actually know something about this case. You, however, opine endlessly, but know little, and understand less.
"So we have, in my book, contradictory evidence: Rabbi Meisels confession on one hand, and two lawsuits on the other hand."
ReplyDeleteYou, like other Lopinite tipshim, consistently confuse lawsuits with evidence. It's foolishness, but there's no point in dwelling on it. It's clear that you believe what you want to believe. You construct yourr theories afterward to fit your preferred narrative.
I'm consistently underwhelmed by your shaky logic but this breaks new ground. You admit [and demonstrate] that you actually know virtually nothing factual about the case. All you know is some hearsay, allegations, and something about some lawsuits, but you're willing to draw real conclusions that have lifelong implications for real people!
ReplyDeleteMind-boggling really. Play with people, their reputations and parnossos as if it's all just a bit of play-do and don't give it a second thought.
Another option might be to accept that you don't know facts and therefore ought to accept Chazal's recommendation of שתיקה יפה. Your silence would add more to this board than anything you could possibly say.
@Joe Orlow - what are you standing by. The false claim that she was employed by Rabbi Kahana? The false claim that she is presently employed as a madriacha at one of the four seminaries? The true fact that Meislels helped her out when her mother was murdered and at other times and she feels very grateful for that help? That there are many girls who were helped by Meisels and they still are appreciative? In what sense do the guidelines cover this situation - are you claiming that there need to be indoctrination session to uproot any sense of gratitude to Meisels for the assistance he provided them
ReplyDeleteHow should the teachers have handled this - when in fact the beis din has not dealt with this? Were the teachers supposed to issue a definitive psak on what happened?
Please enlighten us about your canary theory - is Adina a canary who keeled over in a mine from the poisonous gas of Meisels? Perhaps you mean that Adina is proof that there are girls who have strong loyalty to those that offered critivcal assistance and you want the teachers to tell them that whatever he did was because he was a sexual predator not a rabbi who cared for them. If so do you have proof that that is true?
Bottom line your request seems rather impossible without a definite psak from the beis din. The CBD provided guidelines for Meisels relationship with the girls and school - but did it also provide guideines for the teachers and students as to how they are to think and feel?
By your own admission, you know nothing of this second lawsuit other than what I have told you. in fact, until I mentioned it, you did not know it existed. Yet, you have no problem composing an eight-paragraph theory about it. You blaze new trails in narishkeit.
ReplyDelete"@Joe Orlow - what are you standing by."
ReplyDeleteI stand by the way I worded my original comments. I did not endorse anything Lopin commented. I stand by my characterization of the letter FF posted as being a real letter from a real Madricha. Someone who taught me years ago at a school is my teacher, and I will refer to them as such, whether or not they are still teaching at that school. The Madricha apparently addressed her letter in part to alumni, some of whom presumably had her as a Madricha.
"In what sense do the guidelines cover this situation - are you claiming that there need to be indoctrination session to uproot any sense of gratitude to Meisels for the assistance he provided them"
The guidelines were put in place to ensure that the situation that occurred at the seminary not repeat itself. What did happen at the seminary? A teacher said something that should not be said, and did something that should not be done. Allegedly, that teacher is Rabbi Meisels. He removed himself or was removed, specifically so that his contact with the students would be limited and thus the whole question of what he might say or do in the future with them is moot.
"How should the teachers have handled this - when in fact the beis din has not dealt with this? Were the teachers supposed to issue a definitive psak on what happened?"
I think it is the role of the teachers is to keep a distance between the alleged molester and students that he had past contact with. Is it possible that some teachers are unaware that Rabbi Meisels was removed because of his alleged questionable contact? I hope not.
"Please enlighten us about your canary theory"
Adina, perhaps to her credit, was trying to make peace. Nevertheless, in the course of doing so it would involve communications sent from former students that would likely have contact info connected to it, such as email addresses in headers, return addresses on letters, etc. Thus, if the goal of the school is to be more sensitive to the fact that Rabbi Meisels allegedly molested women, then the school should be concerned if the girls are writing him kind letters that he may respond to in kind.
In a mine, the canary detects poisonous gases, even the minutest amounts. The email, I wrote, was the canary. The fact that the email was apparently unchallenged alerted the rest of us that the school was seemingly unconcerned by this minute opening that Rabbi Meisels could exploit. "Why thank you, Miss Plonit, for your heartfelt words. I know the Bais Din feels we shouldn't meet, but a cup of coffee in a public café...." "But -- Rabbi Meisels...!" "Shah shah shah. It's my way of expressing gratitude. Not the end of the world, now is it? Let this be our little secret."
"The CBD provided guidelines for Meisels relationship with the girls and school - but did it also provide guideines for the teachers and students as to how they are to think and feel?"
If the Bais Din told Rabbi Meisels to stay away from students, the teachers can figure out that students should stay away from Rabbi Meisels. Unless the school is to take a strict reading of the guidelines and argue they have no obligation to notify students who associate with Rabbi Meisels that Rabbi Meisels is enjoined by a Bais Din to keep his distance from them.
"...this Court finds that plaintiffs have established special circumstances to warrant authorization to proceed anonymously...." I wonder what that's all about. Any thoughts Monkeyum? How about you, David?
ReplyDeleteI imagine they convinced the court that their reputations would be harmed if their names were publicized. Even you should be able to figure that out yourself.
ReplyDeleteKishkeyum,
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure I have more to contribute at this this time. I appreciate your taking my barbs at your screen name. I pray that all single women find good matches and establish beautiful families.
please move this to the post about the lawsuit
ReplyDeleteMy screen name is something silly I made up on the spur of the moment without giving it much thought. Why would I care if someone mocks it? It is a meaningless handle.
ReplyDeleteIn any case, I apologize for some of the sharper sobriquets I applied to you in the course of our discussion. Please forgive those.