Wednesday, April 1, 2015

Psak saying the seminaries staff acted properly and they are a good place for Torah education

Hopefully this psak will settle the issue of the seminaries. This is the final page of the 18 page psak presenting the view of Rav Shafran and Rav Malinowitz. I debated with myself whether to post all 18 pages where the testimony of the witnesses was presented and analyzed, where questions were raised and different ways were discussed of viewing the case.

However I decided that this together with the final psak of the joint beis din that the seminaries are safe and are good places for Torah education and that none of the staff need be fired should be sufficient and clear. In addition the joint beis din called for a restoration of college grants. My understanding is that in fact the college funding has been restored and that contrary to dire predictions [or rather nasty hopes] of some outsiders - all the seminaries are doing well with healthy enrollments and the excellent staff continues as before - without anyone being fire, suspended or even censured. It is time to stop the negative conjecture and accept that the seminaries - after a through investigation - have been cleared. In addition they have taken very strong positive steps to ensure the well being of all the students - a significant advancement beyond other seminaries.

Finally I have been informed that the seminaries have recently been sold to Rabbi Gedalya Weinberger, prominent member of Agudas Yisroel. All the seminaries have quality groups and nice quantity groups as well and Excelsior college is back for all seminaries. Finally  Binas is opening a Shana Bais seminary on top of its existing upcoming Shana Alef. New program is called " Havineini,  - unto more Binah"



122 comments:

  1. Boruch Hashem! May the seminaries, and most importantly - the girls be blessed in every way.

    Hopefully all those who need to heel, will successfully heel very soon.

    Hopefully some vital lessons have been learnt from this horrible saga. Principals; teachers; students. More importantly, askonim; rahbonim; and onlookers.

    Lets follow the order:

    א) הוו מתונים בדין. ב) והעמידו תלמידים הרבה. ג) ועשו סייג לתורה.(אבות א)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Clear, direct, powerful words by R' Malinowitz.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Once again, this document relates only to the heads of the seminaries, and gives no enlightenment as to whether there are individual teachers who were negligent/incompetent. You had written earlier that the Rabbi Shafran pesak would clear that up. Why are you hiding this essential information from the public?

    ReplyDelete
  4. When I asked about this earlier, you responded: "Yehoshua - excellent question. Rav Shafran discusses it in detail in his minority view. I hope to be able to expand on this issue - but now is not the time - but it is important."
    So, when are you going to back up your words?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I understand perfectly what this says. It says that there is no one there to protect your daughter from being molested. It says that if your daughter is involved in a seal relationship, it is either because your daughter is immoral or because she's stupid. When you send your daughter to our seminary and something happens to her, do not fault the seminary, they only wanted your money anyway.
    Get my drift here, Rabbi E.? Who is at fault? The girls or the person who was running the seminaries? If it was the person in charge, then the people under him had a lot of questions they never asked that they should have. If I would take those girls for late night rides, a poster of my actions signed by every rabbi would be hanging in every jewish area. No one thought it was wrong or even strange? The Bais Din simply is saying, if the person in charge is at fault, is that stupidity on the part of the heads of the individual seminaries is not a crime. OR maybe the Bais Din is saying that 18 year old girls should themselves be smarter and do what is right. However, that doesn't include going to rabbis or the heads of seminaries because we already said they were allowed to be blind and stupid. It means GO TO THE POLICE.
    Rabbi E., please tell us, after you have defended this decision, what should the girls have done when they found themselves in compromising positions?
    Waiting for your answer.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sorry if you did not like the tone. However, as matters stand, the Beis Din has to date issued a pesak that is not worth the paper it is printed on. For a parent trying to decide if a specific seminary is a safe environment for their daughter, it is not enough to know that the principal of a school acted appropriately. If there are teachers on staff who were aware of what was going on and tried to hush things up or the like, that is pertinent information for the parents to know. I do not know if that occurred or not, but the pesak issued by the Beis Din seems to deliberately avoid this issue. The statement that Peninim is fine because Meisels was the principal at the time is laughable. The silence concerning the behavior of the staff at large at the schools about which there have been allegations is deafening. You stated that the Rabbi Shafran pesak will clear up this issue, and the portion you have released did not address it at all.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The Bais Din simply is saying..is that stupidity on the part of the heads of the individual seminaries is not a crime.

    I guess the Bais Din is just not as smart as you, right?

    Where is it you have your information from? What are you basing your conclusions on as to what actually transpired at the seminaries?

    However, that doesn't include going to rabbis or the heads of seminaries because we already said they were allowed to be blind and stupid.

    Huh?

    It means GO TO THE POLICE.

    OK. Or just file a fantastical RICO suit.

    what should the girls have done when they found themselves in compromising positions?



    What did they do? What happened?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Parents have to do their due diligence investigations before placing their daughters in any seminary. Asking people whose livelihood depends on high enrollment, or who may be personal friends of owners, administrators or staff, may not yield the full picture.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Honesty,
    Just to be clear here, you are saying there was nothing that happened and that all these stories were made up. I have no proof that that is true or not. I hope it is but then what was the Bais Din doing all this time? They didn't say that the top top of the seminaries was not guilty, they said his underlings were allowed to act as they did.
    I just want to know, what should these girls have done? What should be done that this doesn't happen again? The reason we have lost faith in our rabbinical system is not that they don't know the halacha. It is what protection can you give if the halacha is as it is.
    If a whole school is not responsible for a child being molested by a teacher, does that mean it didn't happen? It means we need another plan. Something this Bais Din did not give. Something none of these rabbis have given. How do you think these girls, if the stories are true, feel? DO YOU EVEN CARE?

    ReplyDelete
  10. @Yehoshua - why do you think that anybody who thinks differently than you is either not rational or responsible?

    you wrote:

    "For a parent trying to decide if a specific seminary is a safe environment for their daughter, it is not enough to know that the principal of a school acted appropriately."



    There are many parents who disagree with you and in fact have relied on the psak and the advice of educators and rabbbis that the seminaries are safe and an excellent place for their daughters to be educated. The psak dealt with whether the seminaries as a whole - which would include administration and teachers. It also didn't mentioned the cook, janitor etc


    You obviously do not trust any rabbis - including the rabbis of the CBD who were not to long ago viewed as heroes for their stance in this matter. There are many of us who do not hold it against a person that he is referred to as rabbi.


    Regarding presenting the whole psak - I am trying to balance a number of contradictory demands. When the time is appropriate I will publish it.

    ReplyDelete
  11. You, of all people, certainly are aware that there is reason to be cautious when Rabbonim say "nothing to worry about" when it comes to sexual abuse. That being said, if these rabbonim would say that they investigated the teachers and found xyz and therefore think the schools are safe, I would trust them, contrary to your assertion. The problem is that not one word in the pesak you published a couple of weeks ago or this pesak you published today relates to the teachers at all. Therefore, it is reasonable to be concerned that this issue has not been addressed satisfactorily.

    ReplyDelete
  12. @righteous - your name says it all. You are very self righteous but ignorant of what the psak says.You also seem ignorant of the culture of American seminaries. Do you believe that someone should not speak with his sister or that sidewalks need to be segregated be gender? Do you say hello to women you know? For Shabbos do the men eating in the dining room and the women in the kitchen? If you were teaching girls would you answer questions that they asked? Is your wife one of the "Taliban ladies"? Do you minimize the conversations that you have with your wife? etc etc


    please tell us what compromising positions occurred and how did the girls end up in them? Please also explain why there were only a couple of girls who were involved?

    ReplyDelete
  13. don't use the name anonymous - future replies will simply be deleted

    ReplyDelete
  14. @righeous - why are you ignoring the measures that were instituted by the seminaries? Why are you complaining about schools that lack such measures?

    ReplyDelete
  15. And, therefore?


    What of what I wrote are you responding to, and what is the point you're making?

    ReplyDelete
  16. @Ram500 - which educational experts are you discarding. Which family rabbi are you dismissing? There are many people - not associated with the seminaries who think that they are safe. There are many people who highly regard the views of the dayanim who were involved in this case. You seem to have a rather low opinion of the typcial frum family and their ability to find out useful information.

    ReplyDelete
  17. All refund claims were settled by the seminaries long ago. Including those who never joined the fake RICO.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Correct, the stories were made up.
    The BD put a safety plan in place immediately. You just pretend otherwise b/c you have an axe to grind.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Seeing that you've been obsessively following my comments on this, you surely know that a number of commenters have demanded information about me, and I have not acceded to their demands. I'm not planning to accede to yours either, so don't bother asking. Suffice to say, I hate corruption, and the actions of the cbd and gottesman are corruption exemplified.

    ReplyDelete
  20. There was no reason the seminaries should have offered a refund on a deposit the parents agreed were non-refundable. And hopefully no refund was granted for the few that were requested.

    ReplyDelete
  21. The first recommendation one has is the (american) high school. (Assuming no sisters, other relatives, friends, etc.)

    The first place an accussing student would have gone to would be the high school / bais yaakov that recommended a particular seminary.

    The fact that they know nothing is telling (that this was a fraud.)

    ReplyDelete
  22. Rabbi E, please understand that I am NOT questioning you or the decision of the rabbis. I am wondering why these measures were NEVER in place until now. Unlike you, I feel that the seminary under heads were guilty of not being on top of this situation. However, that guilt is only in the court of public opinion and not one that justifies being fired. But why are these guidelines ONLY for these schools? Why aren't they THE guidelines for every seminary and why weren't they ever in place before these things happened. You are merely interested in guilt and non guilt. However, this is very different from your war on child molestation where you are always demanding more in the sense of protection. For every girl that comes forward with her story there is at least one that didnt. These schools are in the news, but are we really thinking these are the only ones? I don't understand how you have taken this stance and made it a war on a single individual (who may very well be innocent) instead of seeing there is a major problem here. I don't think parents realize that some of these girls are completely unsupervised and that there are preditors that take advantage in the name of religion. I am in no way taking a specific stand on this specific case.
    Lastly, you haven't updated us on the Epstein trial in a couple of days, is anything happening.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I mean ALL seminaries need to be looked at so parents have the full picture going in. Really all educational institutions. Not limited to the matters discussed here. Frum families are busy people and might over-rely on interested parties.

    ReplyDelete
  24. This is laughable. It is clear that the CBD did not agree with anything which Malinowitz and Shafran believe. Let's not forget the fact that Malinowitz thought the seminaries were sold back in the summer time, which they were clearly NOT until now.

    I had attended a Bais Din with the teachers, both Batei Din, and others a few months ago. I personally attended. There were an enormous amount of problems from the teachers. It was shocking. This is one of the worst cover-ups I have seen yet.

    ReplyDelete
  25. How about:
    צדק צדק תרדוף
    and
    לא תגזול
    and
    לא תחמוד
    and
    מדבר שקר תרחק

    ReplyDelete
  26. @ ---seeker
    "This is laughable. It is clear that the CBD did not agree with anything which Malinowitz and Shafran believe."

    your understanding is absurd and shows either a poor understanding of has happened or you are deliberately distorting them. While there are clearly points of disagreement - there was in fact a joint psak including the CBD showing that they are in basic agreement - which directly contradicts your allegations here..

    You keep repeating that the claim that the seminaries were not sold - please produce evidence that the seminaries were never transferred from Meisels to Yarmish. Rav Ahron Feldman clearly disagreed with you. Or put another way - please produce evidence that Meisels was fully in control of the seminaries until they were just bought by R Weinberger.

    Finally your version of what happened at the Beis Din contradicts what I was told by others attended it. Furthermore there is no evidence supporting your claim in either the joint psak or the minority two minority reports. Which means that either you are a liar or the CBD and IBD are liars. I'll stick with the dayanim - untill you produce some clear objective proof. Your track record on reporting facts is not very good. You still haven't explained your allegations regarding Magen.- which were directly contradicted.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Of course every seminary will be adopting procedures like this. You want a good job for a few years (this will all be forgotten in a a few years) open up a hechsher organization for seminaries. If a seminary is not a member, few parents will go.

    ReplyDelete
  28. @Righteous - there are two issues here 1) is whether the sins of Meisels were handled properly by the seminaries and they found out or should have known something improper was going on 2) is the culture of the all American seminaries inherently incorrect and therefore should have been fixed a long time ago.

    The issue of child abuse acknowledges that the child needs to be protected because he can't protect himself - adulters are different.

    In fact Rav Neuwirth paskened at a convention of psychologists that one go directly to the police for child abuse - but for domestic vioence.

    It is clear from the reaction to this scandal that adjustments need to be made in the easy going American style culture - the question is whether it needs to be rejected or just fine tuned? There are defintiely positive things that come from this culture - but is it worth the price?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Just to be clear here, you are saying there was nothing that happened and that all these stories were made up.

    Others have answered better than I can. But here goes mine:

    What relevant stories are you talking about? Do you base all your decisions on gossip which has been completely reject by all Botei DIn and the greatest and most selfless educators?

    I just want to know, what should these girls have done?

    I'm not sure what in the world you're talking about.

    What do girls in college do when a professor, or another student is inappropriate with them?

    The reason we have lost faith in our rabbinical system is not that they don't know the halacha. It is what protection can you give if the halacha is as it is.

    Huh? I assume you speak for yourself. Have you any idea what the culture at college campuses are? How about Spring Break in Florida? Please read up about it. We are a million times more protected in seminaries. True, more should still be done. That is being addressed. These seminaries have had the more done.

    How do you think these girls, if the stories are true, feel? DO YOU EVEN CARE?

    http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2015/04/psak-saying-seminaries-staff-acted.html#comment-1939118130



    Beating up innocent people will not help anyone heal in a healthy way. Misery may love company - but hurting hundreds, or thousands of former seminary students has not helped anyone heal. It has only exacerbated their situation. The saddest part is that those who need to heal were used and abused by people with their own agendas - which did not include the best interest of those who need to heal. This only prevented their healing, and actually even hurt them more. Hopefully, now, all those who need to heal will be able to heal.

    ReplyDelete
  30. All I have seen you do is insult your commenters left and right. Just some advice- that's not a good way to make ppl see your side on things.

    You claim many things. You say I do not have facts, when I have ALWAYS had facts to prove to everything and have personally experienced many things myself. You can scream all you want that I am a liar. That doesn't bother me a bit.

    Let me repeat myself- I was AT the Bais Din myself. Were you? No, you were not. Let's leave it at that.
    The CBD does not agree with you or anything you write. Give Rabbi Fuerst a call. You'll be pleasantly surprised. Either way, you choose to live in a bubble of fantasy. Suit yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  31. All this does is disprove the theory that Das Torah (not this blog, but "real" Das Torah) is sometimes wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  32. @flower - not sure I get your point

    Are you saying that Daas Torah is sometimes wrong or always right ?

    ReplyDelete
  33. R' Eidensohn, there's something i don't get here.

    First, how come it keeps being repeated that the CBD agreed with the psak, that may be true, but the most that can be proven is that Rav brudny agreed with the psak- that would give the IBD the majority and the CBD would have to sign on even if they disagreed and it would be assur for them to even say that they didn't.

    Which leads to my 2nd point- how come we keep hearing about "minority opinions"? I am no expert in halacha but where does there exist a concept of "minority opinions" in a din torah. Isn't it a befeirush mishnah that it's completely assur for any outvoted dayan to state or even hint to his disagreement either publicly or privately, let alone publish a dissent?! Please explain what's going on here.

    ReplyDelete
  34. @YitzShpitz -

    The Chicago Beis Din did write a minority report which confirms their agreement with the Joint Beis Din's psak except for certain details or emphasis

    Regarding the minority reports - the fact that both the IBD and the CBD wrote such reports clearly indicates that your premise can't be true.

    My understanding is that all the dayanim agreed that there would be a unanimous joint statement - and so the wording was carefully chosen that all could agree to it. But in addition that they would have the ability to write minority reports to express points for which there was clear disagreement

    ReplyDelete
  35. Rabbi Eideonsohn, you are purposely not allowing my last comment to show in defense of the insults you have said about me (and calling me a "liar") and your other commenters. Incredible. You indeed only show your viewers partial bits of conversations to make yourself look good.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Insane that you say it was all made up. I have little respect from Rabbi Eidensohn for allowing u to say such things and by not challenging you.

    ReplyDelete
  37. RDE thank you for responding. I am not trying to argue the facts here, I just want to know if you as a talmid chacham have ever seen or heard of a halachic precedent orjustification of releasing minority opinions in a din torah. Is this not masneh al mah shekasuv even if all the dayanim agree?

    ReplyDelete
  38. and so the wording was carefully chosen that all could agree to it.

    That is correct. The Chicago rabbis signed what they were forced to admit was true. And what I've heard about their "minority view" conforms to what you say: there is nothing in there which disputes anything that appears in the joint psak. Now that their supposed evidence has proved to be nonexistent, they are backtracking as fast as they possibly can. These incompentents (at best) should be removed from their positions.

    ReplyDelete
  39. @@---seeker - you are deliberately ignoring my questions. Please answer them instead of repeating allegations for which you provide no evidence except that you claim you know. Sorry that is not enough

    Furthermore you have trouble understanding - please reread my comments

    ReplyDelete
  40. @YitzShpitz - I was told that it is accepted practice in Israel

    ReplyDelete
  41. The stories told by the CBD about rapes and tens of victims were made up. The evidence they claimed to have was also made up. When the facts emerged at the JBD hearings, they were forced to own up. And now everyone knows the truth about them and their invented "evidence."

    We know what you think of RDE b/c you've told us many times, despite as many promises to stop commenting here. I cannot imagine anyone caring much about getting respect from you. הכל לפי המבייש והמתבייש.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Unlike you, I feel that the seminary under heads were guilty of not being on top of this situation.

    It's not a matter of "feelings," it's a matter of "facts." You are not in possession of the facts, so your feelings are based on nothing at all but your personal biases, or perhaps some lies you read on the internet somewhere.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Not looking for respect from anyone and certainly not from the tyrants on this blog. They were forced to "own up"? You like to make things up in your mind, it seems.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Any reason the courtesan "TruthSeeker" is permitted to post her trash here? A strumpet like that should find an appropriate venue for their wares.

    ReplyDelete
  45. No, I like to read things on paper. Such as the paper on which the JBD psak is written, which states clearly that there were never more than the two accusers, and that the tales of tens of victims (retailed by Fuerst and his cronies) were false. This was signed by the three members of the cbd. So yes, they owned up.

    In fact, you crave respect more than anything else. It's what rumbles beneath all your statements and activities in this matter.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Why put in a safety plan if the stories were made up? Why would Meisels sell his profitable cash-cows over made-up stories? Why no Rubashkin-style outcry over false allegations? Why won't the Meisels wife and kids come forward to talk about the horrible allilas dom being perpetrated against their husband and father? You know that Meisels is guilty of far more than questionable behavior, yet you insist on defending the indefensible.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Call up Rabbi Fuerst. He will tell you a diff story. But if you've refused to call him in the past, then I doubt you'd do it now.

    ReplyDelete
  48. I HAVE called Rabbi Feurst and he told me the Chicago BD changed their mind! So...

    ReplyDelete
  49. CBD told me they were misinformed.

    ReplyDelete
  50. I take it that you mean "rubbish." Since the seminary was not demolished, there is emotional debris, but no "rubble".

    1. She had boots -- er, make that flats -- on the ground where the events under discussion took place, that is, at a seminary under discussion. This allows her to provide an insider's perspective.

    2. She was detrimentally affected by what happened at the seminary. Thus, we cut her some slack.

    3. Her disrespect is intolerable for us blog readers. Still, the prerogative belongs to the Blogmaster, not us, whether to be Mochel or not. There is the hope, perhaps, that she will provide some concrete information she is privy to, along with documentation of that information, that would put the discussion on a whole new level. She's been close to doing that several times, and I think actually achieved it to some extent by her credible claims that she repeatedly confronted the head of her seminary in regard to certain allegedly outrageous behavior on his part.

    ReplyDelete
  51. I was quite clear on many occasions about what Meisels admitted to, and I stated that for those reasons alone, he must not be in chinuch. He was forced to sell b/c of the lies, which numerous gullible people still believe, and more importantly, which the colleges choose to believe. Or have you been under a rock the last nine months?

    No, I do not know he is guilty of "more than questionable behavior," nor do you, although you evidently want to believe that he is. I defend nothing that he has done, nor have I ever defended it. I have defended the innocent teachers and principals, and I have deplored the corrupt and dishonest behavior of the cbd.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Credible claims???


    The joint BD heard her "claims" at the joint diyun. Clearly, they did not find her too credible!

    ReplyDelete
  53. Call Rabbi Fuerst? I wouldn't trust Rabbi Fuerst to tell me his name. He has been caught in so many untruths, which he now claims was misinformation. It's difficult to imagine a BD in so little control of their own facts that they take drastic action on the basis of misinformation given them by another. Isn't it the job of BD to ascertain facts for themselves? But that's the CBD for you.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Target, call rabbis Cohen and Fuerst. I dare you. Let them tell you of they think I was credible. You have some nerve claiming I am not credible when u have no idea what went on during the BD.

    And let me be clear...I was ASKED by the Batei Din to be there. They asked me. Not the other way around. If you want to get to the truth (which u clearly do not), you wouldn't simply sign ppl off as "not credible". Call the rabbis.

    ReplyDelete
  55. @off-Target: are you sure you're responding to what I wrote, or are you commenting on what you think I wrote? It's my understanding that the Bais Din decided, based on other testimony, that Rabbi Meisels engaged in questionable activities. I would guess the Bais Din did not spend overmuch time on Truthseeker's allegations that she openly and repeatedly confronted Rabbi Meisels about behavior that Truthseeker found questionable, if they even took such testimony from her.

    Truthseeker's reports were relevant here on this blog as they indicated to us that at least one student at the seminary seemed aware that something was apparently out of order and that she tried tried to address it directly and forcefully.

    If you have documentation from the Bais Din to contradict my suppositions, by all means, present it.

    ReplyDelete
  56. "It is clear that the CBD did not agree with anything which Malinowitz and Shafran believe."

    How is it clear? They signed the Psak stating that everything is okay with the sems and CLEARLY stating the opposite of much of what they preached for so long about 40 girls. That's what's clear.

    "Let's not forget the fact that Malinowitz thought the seminaries were sold back in the summer time, which they were clearly NOT until now."

    Again - how is that clear? This sale was from Yarmish to Weinberger, not Meisels. He's been off the books since it was sold to Yarmish. Prove otherwise.

    "I had attended a Bais Din with the teachers, both Batei Din, and others a few months ago. I personally attended. There were an enormous amount of problems from the teachers. It was shocking.

    Fascinating because the psak that was signed by the CBD members themselves says otherwise. Apparently they're also liars. The only truthful one here is you?

    "This is one of the worst cover-ups I have seen yet."

    Finally we agree. The fact that the Psak Din allows the CBD to save face is a terrible cover-up that should never have been allowed to happen. When they couldn't produce any of the vaunted evidence they claimed to be in possession of they should have been hauled out in chains. Sadly, this didn't happen. For that, the IBD should hang their heads in shame.

    The fact that Feurst told me personally and numerous others about forty girls and multiple rape victims and now he put his pen to paper stating otherwise on an official document is a crime of epic proportions. Thankfully many people are aware of his deceptions and the news is spreading.

    ReplyDelete
  57. @...seeker - From the joint psak - it would seem that the CBD does not view your evidence as being significant.

    How do you explain that your allegations of a teacher coverup were not mentioned? In fact your other allegations don't seem to have been taken seriously by the jjoint beis din.

    ReplyDelete
  58. I've called him and he no longer speaks as openly about the case or makes his earlier claims. He hems and haws and says that "bad things happened" but provides NO details and avoids the word rape or anything like that.

    Suddenly he's not so sure about what transpired. Shame that it's only after he did a masterful job of ruining so many people's lives.

    Don't rely on him anymore. He's no longer in your corner as before.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Rabbi Fuerst did not sign and neither did rabbi Cohen

    ReplyDelete
  60. Did $omething help them change their mind? I'm refferring to the $ettlement of the RICO case. (Don't tell me all they got back was refund of tuition, and the in$tigators got nothing.)

    ReplyDelete
  61. The joint BD asked you to come because YOU called up the IBD and said you had claims. Remember how you kvetched that Rabbi Malinowitz "didn't take you seriously" and just told you they'd be in touch for the next diyun?? Remember your whole immature rant on this very blog site??? Then, they call you for the next diyun and you claim THEY invited you??? Can we say "perception problem"??? (Or maybe Truthseeker simply sees, hears and claims what she wants irrelevant of accuracy.) And clearly your claims that the staff covered up (and your immature and silly little petition) made very little impact on them as well given that the entire JBD agreed there was no cover up by any staff member whatsoever.


    I stand by my comment- you are not credible.(And I myself have caught you contradicting yourself. I would actually call it hilarious if it wasn't so sad.)

    ReplyDelete
  62. One student out of thousands doesn't impress me and from the comments on this blog site a few months ago, many students disagree with her and apparently so do the JBD. Maybe Truthseeker has a lot of problems and is not believable? I bet there are a lot of people that you know whom you would never take their comments seriously. What if Truthseeker is just like them?

    ReplyDelete
  63. I'm confused why u are repeating yourself. I was called up and asked to be at the BD. I did not run after anyone. In fact, I was told that I was believed. There was nothing not to believe. You can make all the assumptions you'd like that they "didn't believe me". This entire outcome is a cover-up for the staff, because of how irresponsible they were in ignoring Meisles behavior. Let me say that I was not the only student who complained at the JBD.

    ReplyDelete
  64. How do we know that her allegations of a teacher cover up were not mentioned if the pesak you released does not discuss the teachers at all?

    ReplyDelete
  65. I WILL REPEAT: THE JBD POSKINED THAT THERE WAS NO COVER UP. THEY COULD NOT HAVE BEEN CLEARER ON THIS POINT. That runs counter to your claim that there was. Obviously your testimony had little impact. I will illustrate with a mashal since apparently this is too hard for you to understand (or part of your perception problem). If someone testifies that someone murdered another and the court determines he's innocent, THAT MEANS THE EVIDENCE AND CLAIMS WERE NOT COMPELLING.


    AND REGARDING YOUR CLAIM THAT YOU WERE NOT THE ONLY STUDENT TO TESTIFY- YET ANOTHER IMPRECISION FOR LIESEEKER (CAN TRUTHSEEKER TELL THE TRUTH????). THE PSAK SAYS THE ONLY OTHER 2 PEOPLE TO TESTIFY WERE THE CLAIMANTS THEMSELVES. SO LIESEEKER, YOU WERE THE ONLY WITNESS! SCARY.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Disappointed????? This was their psak?!? They should have poskined the opposite if that was the truth. Or they are disappointed in the truth?? I feel like I am in Alice In Wonderland when I read Truthseekers comments.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Pray tell how many you have seen???


    And, apparently the JBD doesn't feel this was a cover up at all LET ALONE "THE WORST...". YOU ARE LIVING A FANTASY. GET OVER IT.

    ReplyDelete
  68. ARE YOU JOKING????????????? THEY BOTH SIGNED. WHAT ARE YOU SPEWING?


    THATS IT. RABBI EIDENSON, SHE NEVER READ THE PSAK OR SHE THINKS NONE OF US DID, WHY ARE WE LETTING HER COMMENT???? SHE DIDNT EVEN LOOK TO SEE WHO'S SIGNATURES ARE ON THE PSAK.
    LET THIS BE YET ANOTHER INDICATION THAT TRUTHSEEKER SAYS ANYTHING THAT COMES TO MIND IRRELEVANT OF ACCURACY.
    I HINK TRUTHSEKER OWES A BIG APOLOGY TO ALL OF HER VICTIMS. LETS MAKE A PETITION!

    ReplyDelete
  69. I SPOKE TO RABBI FEURST. HE SAID THE BD CHANGED THEIR MIND. ID STOP QUOTING HIM TRUTHSEEKER, HE'S NOT ON YOUR SIDE.

    ReplyDelete
  70. RABBI EIDENSON. MAYBE POST THE LINK TO THE POST WHERE TRUTHSEEKER IS FURIOUS THAT THE IBD WOULDNT TAKE HER TESTIMONY OVER THE PHONE AFTER BEGGING THEM TO, AND THE FRUM FOLLIES POSTS WHERE HER CRONIES TRY TO RAISE MONEY FOR HER TO GO TO ISRAEL TO TESTIFY? IF THATS NOT CALLED "RUNNING AFTER", I DONT KNOW WHAT IS. ONCE AGAIN TRUTHSEEKER SEES THINGS (AND COMMENTS) DIFFERENTLY THAN THE REALITY.

    ReplyDelete
  71. I'm willing to admit the possibility you are somewhat right, since I've never met Truthseeker, and I wasn't within a thousand miles of where the incidents took place when they took place.

    According to the Midrash,mMiriam the Prophetess, as a little girl, rebuked her father Aharon, who was the Leader of the Generation. Are you willing to admit the possibility that Truthseeker, a former student, has shown up the seminary Establishment and has the power (if only she would exercise it wisely!) to put them in their place?

    Whistleblowers are routinely vilified. It comes with the territory.

    Maybe Truthseeker is a phony. Maybe not. Maybe you are a vilifier. Truthseeker's been outed. My name you know. Why don't you step out from behind the curtain and reveal yourself?

    ReplyDelete
  72. IF THAT IS IDEED YOUR REAL NAME....


    THERE IS NO INTENTION HERE TO VILIFY TRUTHSEEKER. JUST TO HONESTLY EVALUATE HER COMMENTS . HER TONE AND WORDING GENERALLY IMPLY RAGE AND FRUSTRATION AND HER COMMENTS LACK CONTENT.THAT MADE MADE AND CONTINUES TO MAKE A BIG IMPRESSION ON ME AND THE WEIGHT I GIVE TO HER POINTS. MOREOVER SHE IS CLAIMING THE STAFF COVERED UP AND THE JBD SAID THEY DIDNT EVEN AFTER HEARING HER TESTIMONY.


    MY LOGIC SAYS HER POINTS NEED TO BE TAKING WITH MANY GRAINS OF SALT PARTICULARLY WHEN MANY STUDENTS DO NOT AGREE WITH HER CLAIMS,

    ReplyDelete
  73. You sound terribly angry with all your caps lock. The last psak that was posted on this blog- go back and read the signature. I never asked to go to the BD bc I never even knew there was going to be one until they asked me to come. You can call me a liar all you want. Doesn't bother me.

    And let me ask everyone a very simple question- if the teachers were completely innocent, then why had it taken literally over half a year to come to that conclusion?
    Bc it was a COVER-UP.
    I was at the BD and I know what occured more than any of you posting. Whether you believe me or not- that doesn't matter to me much.

    ReplyDelete
  74. In other words, her claims are nonsense. I think you've hit the nail on the head. She's a frustrated child, full of rage, desperately seeking attention. That's what lies beneath everything she writes.

    ReplyDelete
  75. The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

    ReplyDelete
  76. if the teachers were completely innocent, then why had it taken literally over half a year to come to that conclusion?

    One of the silliest things you've written yet, and that's saying a lot. The actual diyunim were only a few days. What took half a year was getting Chicago to finally agree to produce their supposed evidence. Once they did, the decision did not take long at all. You'd realize this if you weren't blinded by hate, and by your need for attention and validation.

    ReplyDelete
  77. I DONT BELIEVE SOMEONE CALLED TRUTHSEEKER ISNT BOTHERED BY BEING CALLED A LIAR. THATS ANOTHER LIE. THANKS FOR BEING CONSISTENT.


    ALSO, THANKS FOR CONFIRMING THAT YOU DID NOT READ THE PSAK, OR, IF YOU DID, YOU DID NOT UNDERSTAND IT. ALL 7 DAYANIM STATED CLEARLY THERE WAS NO COVER UP BY ANY STAFF MEMBER. HOW LONG WILL YOU PERSIST TO MAKE YOURSELF LOOK DUMB?


    ,

    ReplyDelete
  78. "Daas Torah"- when, in the midst of all this, have you EVER bothered to contact the CBD. Do yourself a favor and take that upon yourself to do. The truth, the world will never know bc of the terrible tendency within frum Jews to cover-ups. Face the problem. It took so long to "clear" the teachers from their guilt bc it was a cover-up to save their jobs. I have nothing else to add

    ReplyDelete
  79. I am glad to hear you finally understand you are not contributing to this discussion

    ReplyDelete
  80. Insult me all you like. And like I said, makes no difference to me whether u believe me or not.
    I'm unsure whether we are taking about the same piece of paper which was posted recently. The one I am referring to clearly has no signature from the CBD. Chag kasher v'sameach

    ReplyDelete
  81. Why is TruthSeeker accusing the CBD of a coverup? (The CBD was part of the JBD.) I thought TruthSeeker loved the CBD.

    ReplyDelete
  82. KEEP DREAMING LIESEEKER. YOUR LIVING IN A WORLD OF MAKE BELIEVE. COVER-UPS MIGHT INDEED BE A PROBLEM IN GENERAL, BUT NO ONE COVERED UP IN THIS CASE. THE CBD ASSUMED THERE WERE COVER-UPS AT THE BEGINNING AND CHANGED THEIR MIND IN THE FINAL PSAK. YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE WHO PERSISTS WITH THIS SILLINESS. EVEN THE CBD ISNT SAYING IT ANYMORE. GET OVER THIS AND MOVE ON. ITS MORE THAN RIDICULOUS BY THIS POINT.

    ReplyDelete
  83. I am simply pointing out you are bluffing to hide you don't understand what this discussion is about. I now see you can't answer my questions because you don't understand the difference between the iBD cBD jBD and minority view or intermediate peak you also can not read the documents nor do you comprehend the issues
    You are simply ignorant and refuse to acknowledge that fact

    ReplyDelete
  84. OY VEY. THAT IS NOT THE PSAK. TRUTHSEEKER, YOU DONT KNOW HOW TO READ A PSAK BAIS DIN. YOU ARE LOOKING AWFULLY FOOLISH NOW. WHATEVER. HAPPY PESACH TO YOU TOO!!

    ReplyDelete
  85. SHE'S CONFUSED. ITL TAKE HER A LITTLE LONGER TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON AND TO ACCEPT THAT THE CBD THAT SHE HAS BEEN HIDING BEHIND HAS INDEED CHANGED THEIR MIND.

    ReplyDelete
  86. 2 things. 1st -stop writing in caps it's supremely annoying.


    2nd- please stop saying things to the effect of "ALL 7 DAYANIM STATED CLEARLY ". It might be true but you have no idea. The way dinei torah work is that you go "acharei rabim lihatos" so if Rav Br

    ReplyDelete
  87. As I'm sure we are all busy this erev pesach, I don't have so much time to keep responding. Apologies if there were any miscommunications. We are obviously not talking about the same piece of paper. The one I am referring to does not have the CBD signature. Furthermore, the CBD has another psak but they have simply not released it. I'm not sure it will ever be released. There are major problems with cover-ups in the frum world, and this case is a prime example of that issue. Ok, no matter all the arguing and name-calling on this blog, wishing everyone a chag sameach this pesach. - TruthSeeker

    ReplyDelete
  88. Au contraire. Justice sometimes runs on less than stellar witness testimony. I don't speak of the JBD Bais Din hearings, nor of the ideal evidence required in, say, the proceedings of the Sanhedrin. My interest in this case runs more mundane. I am trying to judge for myself what happened at the seminary. Truthseeker's statements seem spot on when she discusses how her intuition sensed that something was out-of-whack with her seminary head's speech and behavior.

    Yes, there's a lot of static and detritus in her comments sometimes. It is work to tease out the silk from the burlap. For those willing to wade into the stream of her thoughts, there's gold thar to be panned out.

    Another benefit of her statements are that they flush out the die-hard seminary defenders from the bushes. This is significant, because the comments of the seminary avengers seem designed to not only simultaneously provoke and hush-up Truthseeker, but to send a shot across the bow to any other student who might even be considering the possibility of perhaps chiming in.

    In other words, if it was only a matter of Truthseeker sticking her head in here from time to time, I would be wont to discount her comments. It's the constant browbeating she endures, along with the drumbeat of accusations directed her way that she prattles on, that raises an eyebrow. Some of the accusers seem to be doing their own share of jabbering. If they're going to shred to pieces Truthseeker's poorly regarded comments, why not be fair to her, and also acknowledge that something rings true about other comments she's made?

    I make comments that are duds all the time -- could be that this is a good example! Does that mean I should be universally shunned and ignored?

    ReplyDelete
  89. I would like to see all the documents including the full minority views of both the CBD and the IBD. Just seeing select sources is not very informative. It would be best if minutes from the court proceedings could be released. Anything less could easily be a repeat of cover-ups we have seen for years.

    ReplyDelete
  90. "I would like to see all the documents including the full minority views of both the CBD and the IBD....Anything less could easily be a repeat of cover-ups we have seen for years."


    @JBlog - your skepticism seems rather limited. Why weren't you calling for documents and details from the CBD when they declared the schools were not safe?

    Why are you yelling coverup now? What is being covered up? It is clear that the original claims made by the CBD and hangers on - were simply not credible.

    I have published most of the documents including the joint psak, and the summary page of the IBD minority view. What is there to coverup? Are you claiming that the psak of these dayanim contradicts the evidence i.e., they are lying?

    On what basis do you have the chutzpah to make such an assertion? Is it simply that you can't conceive that the IBD was right all along

    ReplyDelete
  91. @....seeker - this is your last slanderous comment. You have consistently refused to provide any evidence for your accusations. You keep repeating that the dayanim are covering up the truth i.e., lying. Your incompetence in reading and understanding the documentations further compounds the falsehoods you are propagating.

    Bottom line - either produce evidence for your claims or your comments will not be published!

    ReplyDelete
  92. How do we know that her allegations of a teacher cover up were not mentioned


    In other words, how do we know that the teachers aren't dangerous or incompetent? Good question. The answer is, the JBD put out a clear statement that the seminaries are a good place for education i.e. the teachers are competent and not dangerous.


    However, why don't you ask how do we know that the unpublished part of the psak doesn't say that certain teachers do not keep Shabbos? Who knows what else the unpublished part of the psak states. All that is relevant, is the very clear and unequivocal statement that the seminaries are excellent places for a Torah education.


    Either you're going to accuse all the dayanim of incompetence and negligence, or you're going to accept their expertise. But you won't be able to continue down the path of McCarthyism and just continue to make unsupported accusation.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Bc it was a COVER-UP.


    Huh? Who supposedly covered up what?
    Why would it take these criminals six months to come up with their cover up, but no one ever presented evidence exposing this cover up? Why have you made many commitments about evidence being forthcoming, yet not once in the past 10 months have you produced even a smidgen (where have I gotten that word from!) of evidence?


    It seems that you are guilty of what you're accusing everyone else of.
    1) Giving out false information
    2)Covering up the inappropriate lying and slander you have committed against the former seminary students.
    3) Angry bullying.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Interesting... you mean there is psak, but no one can see it???!!!!! Why would they poskin but keep their psak a secret?????? That's so bizarre.... particularly because, apparently, the psak they don't agree with they published and the one they do agree with no one can know about??? This sounds way too odd to have any semblance of accuracy. Sorry Truthseeker. I value your war on cover-ups, but I recommend that you go to a case where there is one and stop trying to turn this case into something it is not. You're wasting your time and ours.

    ReplyDelete
  95. It is possible to interpret page 18 pf the Psak in a way that is consistent with Truthseeker's statements.

    From the document: "There was nothing that the heads saw that could have or should have raised a 'red flag' to any reasonable person...."

    The key term: "that the heads saw". A possible inference is that non-heads, such as students, may have seen things that could have or should have raised a "red flag" to any reasonable person.

    Truthseeker (quoting a letter she gave to Rabbi Meisels): "Back in January, just a few days after you arrived back from America, you were (once again) spending a late night in school speaking to girls, staff, etc. But by this time there was practically no one downstairs anymore but me and another girl." (posted on another blog)

    ReplyDelete
  96. "Either you're going to accuse all the dayanim of incompetence and negligence, or you're going to accept their expertise."
    To me, it is not a simple binary choice as you present it. The Beis Din may have different ideas as to what constitutes a "safe environment" then I do. I do not have any way of ascertaining the facts of what occurred, but I do have the ability to analyze these facts if I have access to them. This is very similar to the role of higher courts in the U.S. system, where they will generally accept the factual determinations of the lower courts but will often disagree on the interpretation and application of the law.
    Now, if this were to be a case of a Choshen Mishpat din Torah or the like, obviously the expertise of these dayanim far exceeds mine, and it would be silly for me to think that I would issue a different "peask" than theirs if I would know the facts. However, here the issue is one of judgment and common sense. If the dayanim discovered that teachers did mess up but that the retraining they had is sufficient to avoid those problems in the future, that is their assessment. It may be a reasonable one in the circumstances, and it may not be. Either way, if I am a parent considering sending to one of the schools, I would rather make that judgment myself than rely on the decision of others.

    ReplyDelete
  97. How do you know what the minority opinion says, it hasn't been published anywhere I'm aware of.


    But

    ReplyDelete
  98. @The JBD did not find that the teachers messed up. Please show me where they say that the teachers messed up but the retraining is sufficient to avoid the problems in the future? it is not in any documents - published or unpublished

    Since that is not the view of either the IBD or the CBD you are basically saying that the dayanim were given a job and they were severely negligent by ignoring this issue. However aside from the shrill whining of truthseeker the teachers have not been blamed.

    We are not dealing with esoteric knowledge - and all the dayanim are experienced with dealing with abuse cases. So your only point can be is that you view them as incompetent and negligent.

    ReplyDelete
  99. @Joe your are really straining. It is similar to the Rambam's report that the Shma is in fact support of the doctrine of the trinity.

    There is no mention in the document of the teacher's being negligent. there is no mention that they even though the teachers were neglitgent they will only discuss whether the administration was negligent.

    Claiming that these experienced judges deliberately distorted their task of clarifying the saftety of the seminaries by dleiberately avoiding dealing with the guilt of teachers - is insulting to say the least.

    ReplyDelete
  100. The Beis Din may have different ideas as to what constitutes a "safe environment" then I do.


    Very nice. Therefore, continue down your McCarthyism path. However, it is very clear that you are seeking to publicly accuse the Beis Din of incompetence and negligence. If you were to behave with paranoia in your own life, then that would be your personal issue. However, you are seeking to try influence others to join your McCarthy paranoid group, despite the fact that every accusation leveled at the seminaries has been proven and ruled to be unfounded.


    A psak of a kosher Beis DIn is not analogous to the USA court system. Need I remind you of Rashi right at the beginning of Parshas Mishpatim? The comparison is a clear chillul Hashem.

    ReplyDelete
  101. "Please show me where they say that the teachers messed up but the retraining is sufficient to avoid the problems in the future."
    Well, I can't show you where they say that because you refuse to publish the pesak. I am not saying that they ignored this issue, I am saying that the public does not know what they think about this issue. The only comments about the complicity/negligence of the teachers were from the CBD letter, which was decidedly negative. They may have changed their minds after the JBD hearing, but we don't know that, as, once again, you are not releasing the pesak that may or may not address this point.

    ReplyDelete
  102. BTW, if your caps lock is on, pressing shift will give you lowercase letters.

    ReplyDelete
  103. I think you'd like to go over to FrumFollies and see what he has to say. And read the comments on the conversion betwn Malinowtiz and Eidensohn. If you don't believe those things, then I guess I give up. See ya

    ReplyDelete
  104. I don't understand your response to what I wrote. I did not mention teachers. I did not even hint that the judges erred in any way.

    I'm not familiar with how seminaries run. In general, though, places like prisons, colleges and schools with dormitories, and so on, have administrative staff, teachers, etc. that are on campus for work hours, which means about one third of the day. That leaves two thirds of the day where the inmates, students, whatever the case may be, rule the roost, with only a skeleton crew of guards.

    Truthseeker wrote a letter to Rabbi Meisels when she was a student in the seminary. Apparently, she preserved a copy of this letter. I quoted an excerpt from this documented correspondence. The letter describes an incident she and another student witnessed. It seems apparent that the incident occurred after hours, and that the blatant licentiousness she reports was in contrast to more restrained licentiousness during regular hours when teachers would be around.

    My comment is not insulting -- to say the least. My point is that the judges heard testimony from the teachers who presumably did not witness directly the kind of behavior and speech that Truthseeker witnessed directly. This may be because Rabbi Meisels did not generally act in front of the teachers the way he acted in front of some students. Thus, the judges concluded that the teachers could not be expected to have drawn the conclusion that some line had been crossed.

    From the wording of the Psak, however, it can be inferred that the judges may have concluded that others could have been expected to have drawn the conclusion that some line had been crossed. I am simply adding the conjecture that this is not contradictory. There was some overlap between what the teachers witnessed and what students witnessed, but some students may have had a fuller overall picture of Rabbi Meisels conduct.

    ReplyDelete
  105. If in fact there is no mention at all of the teachers, then I have no problem insulting the Beis Din. That would be neglect of the most severe level. What would be the justification for not assessing the behavior of the teachers? At least one of those former teachers is now an administrator, and the others continue to serve in positions of chinuch. If any of them were guilty of downplaying the concerns that students presented to them, that is definitely a matter that must be addressed.

    ReplyDelete
  106. PLEASE GIVE UP. PLEASE, PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  107. @Yehoshua - does it mention it in the psak of the JBD? That is the final psak.

    ReplyDelete
  108. For the maybe 100th time, I don't know if it mentions it in the pesak of the JBD. We have seen only a small part of it. There are several minority dissents that have not been issued, and one that has been issued, but is being suppressed.

    ReplyDelete
  109. @Yehoshua - the published psak of the JBD is not "only a small part of it"

    ReplyDelete
  110. The psak is around. People have copies of it. You just have to do your research. I did mine, and found a copy and read it. That's when I changed my tune. The psak says unequivocally that there was no cover-up by any of the staff- teachers or principals. That was an unbased and false assumption when the scandal broke that was disproven many times over. All 7 members of the JBD agree on this point. That is very, very clear. The dissenting view is regarding a particular staff member regarding a particular incident and whether or not it was handled well. On that there is a dispute. But as to whether or not there was a cover up, ALL dayanim said with absolute certainty there was not.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Well, considered that only one of the minority dissents is 18 pages long, it is definitely the smaller part of it. You yourself stated that Rabbi Shafran's dissent addresses the issue of the teachers in detail. I will wait to form a judgment until at least that is released.

    ReplyDelete
  112. Would you like to share that document with us?

    ReplyDelete
  113. I will wait to form a judgment until at least that is released.


    Baloney. You've already formed a judgment of seeking to fear-monger and confuse others. Based upon the very clear and explicit psak of the JBD, there is absolutely nothing to be concerned about. Period.


    If you now seek to create concerns based upon the possibility that the Bottei Din are being reckless, then that is your personal issue. However, if you are seeking to try and hurt people due to your own definitions of "justice", be honest and frank about it. Do not hide behind a facade of "maybe Mr. X, is and ax murderer, Rabbi Y. is trafficker, and Mrs. Z. is klutz". Be honest and upfront about the destruction you seek bring. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  114. I have no problem insulting the Beis Din. That would be neglect of the most severe level.

    When did this begin? Just a few hours earlier you claimed that you do not accuse the Beis Din of negligence nor incompetence.
    http://daattorah.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/psak-saying-seminaries-staff-acted.html#comment-1948503841



    How about full disclosure. Be upfront about your goals of imposing your own perverted justice system onto others. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  115. I have been honest and upfront. If the Beis Din did not even consider whether or not teachers had reacted properly when faced with either indications of or direct student complaints of improprieties, then I believe they did not do their job. If they did consider this and concluded that all teachers acted properly, I would like to see how they came to those conclusions. If there are others who are comfortable relying on the pesak of the JBD even without this knowledge, that is their business.

    ReplyDelete
  116. If they did consider this and concluded that all teachers acted properly, I would like to see how they came to those conclusions.

    OK. So what are you doing on this blog? This is something that either your therapist or the dayanim can help you with. Your continuous McCarthy-type accusations, right here on this blog, suggest a complete different - yet consistent - picture.

    If there are others who are comfortable relying on the pesak of the JBD

    This makes you very, very uncomfortable.


    http://daattorah.blogspot.co.il/2014/12/rolling-stones-disastrous-story-of.html

    ReplyDelete
  117. Not sure what you are trying to link to.
    What am I doing on this blog? Trying to get information about this matter. I am not sure if you are aware, but the moderator of this blog wrote that the issue of the teachers is dealt with explicitly by Rabbi Shafran in his dissent. So, for starters, I would hope to see that. I don't think it is McCarthyite to say that since the Beis Din has interviewed witnesses and (presumably) teachers about this matter, it would be helpful to find out what they discovered.
    By the way, I know that we are all anonymous here, but that is not a reason not to be civil.

    ReplyDelete
  118. Actually, yes, but its not mine to share. Itl get leaked at some point. Bottom line of the psak is that the staff is 150% clear from all 7 dayanim and the accusations against them were unjust to say the very least.

    ReplyDelete
  119. Not sure what you are trying to link to.

    Huh? What do you mean? Are the links not working for you? Do explain, honestly.

    What am I doing on this blog? Trying to get information about this matter.

    Another misstatement. Rabbi Eidensohn made it very clear to you that he will publish what he can, as soon as he can do so. However, you are not simply making requests for precise information. You are explicitly making baseless, slanderous accusations and insinuations against many, many people. Yet you lie and say that all you're seeking is information. Please.

    I don't think it is McCarthyite


    Yet another misstatement. WDQfe
    http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/a-rape-on-campus-what-went-wrong-20150405

    ReplyDelete
  120. As a parent of a current Pninim student, this year has been an incredible year for my daughter. Whatever issues there MAY have been, are not there now. There are safeguards in place limiting contact between male staff members and the girls (as there should be in all girl's seminaries). The school provides an incredible experience for these girls to grow and develop into strong Jewish women. Try to look forward and use the controversy over this school and others to create positive environments for our daughters. Pninim has achieved this goal this year and I'm sure it will carry-over into future years too.

    ReplyDelete
  121. Would you and/or your daughter be interested in writing an expanded post about the seminary?

    This invitation applies to anyone else currently enrolled in ANY seminary or a recent graduate.

    I think it would be helpful expressing what the seminaries provide that justiy the expense and a year away from home.

    ReplyDelete

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