Billionaire to fight charges in Florida

Haaretz

Guma Aguiar said this week the court deal he had worked out last month to rid himself of two misdemeanor charges was off. The American-Israeli multimillionaire added that with the help of Alan Dershowitz - who is part of his legal team - he would sue the police officers who he says physically abused him after arresting him in June.

In July, Aguiar had pleaded not guilty and threatened to sue the Broward County Sheriff's Office located in southern Florida for the alleged abuse.

On September 17, Aguiar's lawyers entered a "no contest" plea, which means he neither accepts nor denies guilt for the two charges, possession of cannabis and drug paraphernalia. According to the deal, Aguiar has to pay $536 in court costs and attend a three-hour drug abuse education course.[...]

'Basement rapist' :Mistake of giving a molester a second chance

JPost

A Tel Aviv court on Thursday indicted a 29-year-old Givat Shmuel resident on charges of attempting to sexually assault a minor, kidnapping and false imprisonment. The alleged incident occurred only six months after the suspect was released from prison after serving 10 years on previous child sex crimes convictions.[...]

Justice - Harvard Prof Michael Sandel #4

EJF & Rav Reuven Feinstein (video)

Daas Torah - Interview with Prof Lawrence Kaplan

Seforim Blog

Baruch Pelta: I guess my first question has to be if you changed your position since writing your famous essay on Daas Torah [1] and also, has Daas Torah evolved as a conception since then? [...]

Discussing accusations of rabbinic malpractise

THIS IS TO NOTIFY READERS THAT A LOT OF MISINFORMATION IS CONTAINED IN THESE LETTERS AND THEIR ASSERTIONS SHOULD BE PRESUMED TO BE MISTAKEN UNLESS CONFIRMED BY RELIABLE SOURCES.

FURTHERMORE SINCE THIS IS NOT A BEIS DIN AND THERE ARE NO WITNESSES - AT MOST THE ASSERTIONS MADE IN THE COMMENTS CAN BE REASON FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION, BUT THEY ARE NOT TO BE BELIEVED TO BE TRUE. FINALLY EVEN IF THE LETTERS AND OTHER PROOF ARE IN FACT VALID DOCUMENTS - THERE IS NO CONTEXT OR PROPER DESCRIPTION OF PRECEDING OR SUBSEQUENT EVENTS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO COME TO A PROPER UNDERSTANDING OF EVENTS

IN SUM THESE SOURCES ARE UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES TO BE TAKEN AT FACE VALUE AND ARE NOT TO BE BELIEVED WITHOUT DISCUSSION WITH COMPETENT RABBIS.


THE MATERIAL PRESENTED IN THE COMMENTS IS ONLY SO THAT A PERSON SHOULD BE AWARE OF POSSIBLE CONCERNS SO THAT HE CAN PROTECT HIMSELF FROM POSSIBLE HARM - BUT THE MATERIAL BY ITSELF CAN NOT ESTABLISH THE TRUTH OF THE ASSERTIONS.

Pischei Tshuva (O.C. 156): I want to note here that while all the books of mussar are greatly concerned about the sin of lashon harah, I am greatly concerned about the opposite problem. I want to protest about the even greater and more common sin of refraining from speaking negatively when it is necessary to save someone from being harmed. For example if you saw a person waiting in ambush to kill someone or breaking into someone’s house or store at night. Is it conceivable that you would refrain from notifying the intended victim to protect himself from the assailant - because of the prohibition of speaking lashon harah? By not saying anything you commit the unbearable sin of transgressing the prohibition of Vayikra (19:16): Do not speak lashon harah [but] do not stand idly by when the blood of your fellow man is threatened? By not speaking up, you violate the mitzva of returning that which is lost to its owner Devarim (22:2). Now if you can understand the obvious necessity of speaking up in these cases then what is the difference between a robber breaking into someone’s house or store or seeing that his servants are secretly stealing from him or that his partner is deceiving him in their business or that another person is cheating him in commerce or that he is lending money to someone that you know doesn’t repay? How is this different from stopping a proposed marriage to someone you know is a wicked person who would be a horrible husband. Saving a person from these situations is clearly included in the command (Devarim 22:2) to return to the person himself or his money. From where do we get the mistaken idea that in the case of murder, I will speak up but that it is prohibited to say anything in other situations where someone is being harmed? The general principle is that these are matters which depend upon the speakers motivation. If the informant’s intent in relating these matters is entirely to cause harm that is lashon harah. However if his intent is to bring about benefit to the other person and to save him and to protect him – then it is a great mitzva. In my opinion this is the underlying intent of the Yerushalmi which the Magen Avraham brings which says that it is permitted to speak lashon harah about people who cause disputes. … It is obvious that even concerning those who cause disputes it is not permitted to speak lashon harah gratuitously about them in all matters. It is only permitted for those things directly related to the particular dispute. It is only permitted concerning that which they are trying to harm others. In such a case it is permitted to reveal degrading things about them in order to save others. … Unfortunately I have seen many times where someone witnesses another person trying to cause harm to someone – and he suppresses the information and says, “Why should I get involved in a matter which isn’t my business…However one needs to be very careful about these and similar matters. Our Sages have said – when the permissibility depends on motivation - it says, “And you should be afraid of your G‑d.”

Anyone who feels the above is not sufficient justification to read assertions and charges against others - should skip this post.

meinyan leinyan beosso inyan said:

Rav Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz's shita is that such things as corrupt rabbonim being machshil the rabim need to be publicized.

RSFM was a fearless man who took a lot of petch for doing the right thing. Not everyone is necessarily mechuyev to do the same. I could not quote the rabbonim who spoke to me on certain items because they must maintain a low profile unless they want to invite certain dark forces to harass them or worse.

=====================
Chazon Ish(2:133)… My opinion is that it is appropriate to have true knowledge about a talmid chachom who shapes yiddishkeit. If it is permitted to tell someone who needs to know about the bad points of an artisan in regards to his qualifiation for doing a job, then it is surely permitted in regards to conveying information about an influential talmid chachom for those who need to know. That is because knowing about the great scholars of the generation concerning their thoughts and characteristics – is itself considered Torah. [In other words just as one is permitted to convey accurate information about an artisan if there is to'eles so it it permitted to reveal information about a gadol if there is to'eles. Nevertheless it is necessary to be extremely careful not to distort the facts in the slights, because that would lead to slandering a talmid chachom.

This indicates that expressing negative information about others is relevant specifically for those who are considered influential authorities and only concerning isssues that are critical for the listener – in order to understand the degree to rely on them.

Shabbos elevators - Belz doesn't prohibit

Chareidim

Words of Gedolim: Apparent contradictions

Berachos (27b): It is related that a certain disciple came before R. Joshua and asked him, Is the evening Tefillah compulsory or optional? He replied: It is optional. He then presented himself before Rabban Gamaliel and asked him: Is the evening Tefillah compulsory or optional? He replied: It is compulsory. But, he said, did not R. Joshua tell me that it is optional? He said: Wait till the champions enter the Beth ha-Midrash. When the champions came in, someone rose and inquired, Is the evening Tefillah compulsory or optional? Rabban Gamaliel replied: It is compulsory. Said Rabban Gamaliel to the Sages: Is there anyone who disputes this? R. Joshua replied to him: No. He said to him: Did they not report you to me as saying that it is optional? He then went on: Joshua, stand up and let them testify against you! R. Joshua stood up and said: Were I alive and he [the witness] dead, the living could contradict the dead. But now that he is alive and I am alive, how can the living contradict the living?

Multimillionaire takes plea deal in drug case

South Florida Sun Sentinel

A Fort Lauderdale multimillionaire has quietly taken a plea deal in a misdemeanor drug case after telling Israeli media that Broward sheriff's deputies beat him and made anti-Semitic remarks during his arrest. [...]

R' Tropper: Charisma from the Torah

Charisma From the Torah

Posted by Rabbi Tropper Posted in torah Posted on 17-10-2009

Question:

I really enjoyed your words and comparative study regarding a topic not often discussed. I want to ask you about Charisma. Again is there any meaning from a Torah perspective to this 'thing' called charisma?

I understand that you were gifted with a tremendous amount of charisma, so I guess you are probably aware of it's spiritual value?

Nosson Velvel A.
Miami Beach, FL

Rabbi Tropper Responds:

Thank you for the generous remark. I do not believe that I possess charisma.

A Torah Jew believes in 'Chayn' or 'Nesias Chayn' which in most cases represents virtue though in of itself is not a virtue. Charisma and its seductive power do not even represent virtue. Charisma and it's power to create social revolutionary change can be extremly dangerous. Hitler, ym'sh had charisma. He used it to become the planet's worst criminal.

Moralists have discounted charisma as 'deplorably superficial'.

Psyhcologists have said that the proverb 'familiarity breeds contempt' has a corollary "foreign breeds charisma".

Rav Reuven Feinstein: Kiruv and mixed couples

I was sent a recent recording of Rav Reuven Feinstein,shlita regarding kiruv and mixed couples. He explicitly says that it is prohibited to advertise and promote seminars to attract mixed couples to come with the hope that they will eventually convert. He says that is only permitted to strengthen those couples that come on their own with a genuine interest to learn more about Judaism and without an awareness that mixed marriages are prohibited. Only such couples who are interested lshem shamayim are to be converted while those who know that intermarriage is wrong are to be rejected. He says it is not only his view but it is one Rav Eliashiv, shlita, expressed when they asked him what was permitted. Rav Reuven's view is the one I have long defended as normative against R' Tropper and his representative Roni - while they defended the view which Rav Reuven explicity rejects on this recording. Below is an example of EJF's advertisement for attracting mixed couples to a seminar - exactly that which Rav Reuven says on this recording is clearly prohibited.

Hidabroot Org BNRImgDetail ASP Qs3czfsi

Eternal Jewish Family - funding

The following is information freely and readily obtainable on the internet. It was sent to me by an interested party.

Lillian Kaplan 2006-300127083-0373d0e6-F-1

Lillian Kaplan 2007-134077539-048af66a-9-2
Lillian Kaplan 2007-300127083-047134f5-F-1

Roni is having a breakdown

Despite my banning Roni, he is still compulsively sending me emails about how I am promoting intermarriage and phony conversons and am really a secret agent for all the people he has been condemning for the last year. He has even complained again to Rav Sternbuch about what an evil person I am.

Roni - I think it is best for your mental health to take a long vacation - maybe in your local mental hospital.

wishing you a refuah shleima

Eternal Jewish Family's Application Form

Application Form - EJF website

Application Form - EJF