Monday, September 15, 2014

R Eliezer Berland - arrested and released in Holland - fighting extradition to Israel

Arutz7   Authorities in Holland released Rabbi Eliezer Berland last week, but his passport has been confiscated, pending a decision on his extradition back to Israel. He was arrested at Amsterdam Airport on September 11 at the request of Israeli authorities. 

Berland, the founder and head of the Shuvu Banim community located in the Old City of Jerusalem, is suspected of a number of sexual assaults against women. He has been considered a fugitive since fleeing Israel two years ago, when allegations first surfaced and he was asked to come in for questioning. The arrest in Amsterdam was made at the request of the Israeli State Attorney's international department, using a warrant, issued by police unit Lahav 433, through Interpol. 

"I have no clue. It's all rumors spread over the past ten years," Rabbi Berland stated to Channel 10 news. "No proof exists. The police (in Amsterdam) released me and told me that that all complaints against me had no foundation and no basis." 

Disregarding the pending extradition, Rabbi Berland proclaimed, "I'm finished with the land of Israel. It is a country of Hamas for me." [...]

Tuesday, September 9, 2014

After 14 years, Israeli woman wins religious divorce - from homosexual husband

update - just added Igros Moshe (E.H IV 113) regarding the need for a get if husband is a homosexual

Times of Israel   Ashkenazic Chief Rabbi David Lau intervened to help a woman obtain a religious divorce after a 14-year wait.

The woman discovered 14 years ago that her husband was having a homosexual relationship with a Filipino caregiver. The woman immediately filed for divorce in the Jerusalem Rabbinical Court.

The Supreme Rabbinical Court then attempted to broker a deal under which the husband would agree to the divorce if she paid him 18 percent of a jointly owned apartment. The woman refused, according to The Jerusalem Post, insisting that she should not have to buy a bill of divorce from her husband.

In a hearing of the Supreme Rabbinical Court last week, Lau, who sat on the panel, over five hours convinced the husband to drop his claim to part of the apartment and to grant the bill of the get if the wife dropped her claim in Family Court. [...]



שו"ת אגרות משה אבן העזר חלק ד סימן קיג

מי שלאחר נישואיו נודע שהוא שטוף במשכב זכר אם הוא מק"ט =מקח טעות=.

י' סיון תשל"ח מע"כ ידידי הרה"ג מוהר"ר שמואל טובי' שטערן.

הנה ראיתי את כל קונטרסו במה שרוצה כתר"ה לחלק בין דורות אלו לדורות הקדמונים ממה שרואין שהנשים בדורות אלו מקפידין עוד יותר במומין דהאיש ממה שמקפידין האנשים במומי הנשים, הנה אף ששייך לומר סברא כזו קשה לעשות מעשה כי הרי גם בזמן הגמ' מצינו דהנשים לא היו מתרצות אלא למי שהחשיבוהו להגון להן כדאשכחן בכמה מקומות, כהא דבכתובות דף כ"ב ע"א שהיתה נאמנת האשה שאמרה לאיזה בני אדם שקפצו עליה לקדשה ואמרה א"א אני ואח"כ עמדה וקידשה את עצמה שהאמינו לה באמתלא שלאלו שאמרה בתחלה א"א אני היה זה שקר משום שלא רצתה להנשא להן שהיו אינם מהוגנים ולאיש זה שנתקדשה הוא הגון, ואם חזקה הוא שהאשה בכל דהו ניחא לה לא היו מאמינים לה, דהא לא משמע שאנשים שלא רצתה בהם היו גרועין כאלו שאף סתם אשה לא היתה רוצה דלאנשים כאלו לא היתה צריכה לשקר ולומר שהיא א"א אלא לא היתה בושה לומר להם שאינה רוצית בהן אלא ודאי שהיו אנשים חשובין בעצם והיתה חוששת שאינשי מכיריה וקרוביה ישתדלו לפייסה שתנשא לאחד מהן או הם עצמם יפצרו בה עד שתתרצה, ומ"מ היתה נאמנת שהוא רק מחמת שלא לכל אדם אשה רוצה להתקדש אף שלפי דעת אינשי היו הגונים לה, וגם משמע שעבר הרבה זמן עד שנתקדשה למי שהיתה סבורה שהוא הגון לה וחפצה והיה לה לחוש שיעבור זמן יותר גדול ומ"מ לא רצתה לינשא לאלו שרצו בה, אך אפשר לדחות דאשה זו שהיתה גדולה בנוי שאני שלכן האמינו לה שלא רצתה בהן משום שהיה ברור לה שיזדמן מי שירצה בה איש כזה שגם היא תרצה בו ביותר ותאמר שזה הגון לה, ומה שליכא חלוק לכל הדינים שהוא מטעם דר"ל דטב למיתב טן דו הוא משום לא פלוג ולא ניתן הדבר לשיעורין ורק לענין אמתלא זו שייך לחלק משום דכל אמתלא אינה שוה לכל הנשים ובהכרח מיפלגו כל אחת באמתלא השייך לה.

אבל הא א"ר יהודה אמר רב ואמרי לה ר"א אסור לאדם שיקדש את בתו כשהיא קטנה עד שתגדל ותאמר בפלוני אני רוצה כדאיתא בקידושין דף מ"א ע"א, והרי האב ברובא דרובא פעמים מקדש את בתו לראוי והגון לה ומ"מ אסרו מטעם דשמא אם היתה גדולה לא היתה מתרצית, ואם הנשים היו בזמן ההוא מתרצות בבעל כ"ד לא היה שייך לאסור להאב לקדש את בתו בשביל איזה חשש רחוק, אלא ודאי גם בזמנם רוב הנשים לא היו מתקדשות אלא למי שחושבות שהוא יותר טוב להן אך מ"מ היו נמצאות איזה נשי שהיו מתרצות אף לבעל כ"ד, שלכן כשעשתה שליח לקדש אף כשלא ראתהו לא חיישינן שמא תחזור בה וליכא איסורא מחשש שמא יתגנה עליה כדכתבו שם התוס' דהרי חזינן שהיא מן המיעוט שלא קפדי כל כך, וכן הוא בקידושין דף ז' ע"א דאשה ניחא לה להתקדש בקנין כל דהוא דלכן לא היינו יודעין מדמקודשת בתן מנה לפלוני ואקדש אני לך ובתן מנה לפלוני ואקדש אני לו ובהילך מנה ואקדש אני לך גם בקנין כסף דשדה שג"כ הוא משום דאמרה בעצמה זה, אבל באמת תמוה שם מה שמביא הגמ' הא דר"ל דברור לנו אדרבה שרובא דרובא נשי לא איכפת להו במה שמקדשין אותה, ומפורש ברמ"א אה"ע סימן ל"א סעי' ב' גם נוהגין לכסות פני הכלות הצנועות ואינן מקפידות במה מקדש אותן שא"כ אין זה מהא דר"ל דטב למיתב טן דו שכשרות וצנועות שאין מקפידות במה מקדשין אותן מקפידות שלא לינשא אלא להגון להן, ובלא זה הא אף מדינא דגמרא חייב אדם ליתן נדוניא לבתו כדי שיקפצו עליה ואף עני המשיא את בתו תנן בכתובות דף ס"ז ע"א דלא יפחות לה מחמשים זוז ואף מכיס של צדקה אין פוחתין מחמשים זוז וכשיש להאב הוא עישור נכסים וגם מצדקה מוסיפין כשיש בכיס שא"כ ודאי אם לא היה דין התורה שצריך כסף לקנין קידושין לא היתה אף אשה אחת שתרצה שיתנו לה כסף שאף דינר אינו כלום נגד הנדוניא והוצאות החתונה ורק מגזה"כ הוא נותן לה כסף והיא מקבלת הכסף, ורק מאחר שחייבה התורה שיתן לה כסף יש שמקפידות מצד כבוד בעלמא שיתן לה דבר השוה הרבה וע"ז כתב הרמ"א שכשרות וצנועות לא יקפידו על זה, וא"כ אף בלא דר"ל ידוע שכל עשיית הקידושין בכסף הוא רק משום שצריך קנין ולא מפני שהאשה אינה רוצה להתקדש ולכן ברור שאם רוצה להתקדש במה שיתן לפלוני ובהנאה דקבלת אדם חשוב מקודשת אבל במכירת שדה שכל הענין הוא בשביל קבלת כסף לא היינו יודעין ובהכרח צריך לומר דליותר פשיטותא הביא הגמ' מהא דר"ל ועדיין צע"ק בזה.

אך מצינו שלהתגרש לא ניחא לנשי כל כך בהא דמזכה גט במקום קטטה ביבמות דף קי"ח ע"ב, וכן לטעמא דרבא בכתובות דף ע"ה ע"א איכא חלוק דהאיש מקפיד שלא יאסר בקרובות דאשה חשובה והאשה לא איכפת לה אם תאסר בקרובים דאדם החשוב משום דקפידא זו להניח בעל זה בשביל קפידא על בעל זה שלא נזהר בנדרים אף שהתירם מחמת שתאסר לשנים ושלשה אינשי שלא ידוע לה שהם ירצו בה, והאיש שג"כ אין טעם שיניח אשה חשובה זו בשביל ספק שתים ושלש נשי דיאסר בהן דאפשר שהן לא יתרצו להנשא לו שצריך לומר שהוא מגאות האיש שחושב שודאי יתרצו, הגאוה כזו ליכא לנשי שחוששות יותר לשמא לא ירצו בה מכפי האיש, אבל בעצם גם בזמנם היו רוב נשי מקפידות מלינשא אלא לאנשים שחושבות שהם הגונים להן, אבל מ"מ חששו יותר בנשי שיותר מתרצות מבאינשי א"כ גם בזה"ז אין לסמוך לומר שנשתנה.

אבל לענין נ"ד כיון שמצינו שבמום גדול הוא בעצם מקח טעות גם באשה כדבארתי באג"מ חאה"ע ח"א סימן ע"ט וסימן פ' מסתבר שזה דהבעל הוא שטוף במשכב זכור שהוא התועבה היותר גדולה והמאוס ביותר והוא דבר גנאי לכל המשפחה, וכ"ש שיהיה זה גנאי ביותר לאשתו אם בעלה בוחר יותר במשכב המאוס הזה תחת משכב אשתו הוא ודאי קידושי טעות וברור לן ששום אשה לא היתה מתרצית להנשא לאדם מנוול ומאוס ובזוי כזה, ואם תיכף כשנודעת מזה הלכה ממנו מסתבר שאם אי אפשר להשיג גט ממנו יש להתירה מדין קידושי טעות, אך אם אפשר להשיג גט צריך להשתדל בכל מאי דאפשר להשיג גט כשר, דהא אם אינו שטוף בזה אלא שנזדמן איזה פעם מצד שתקפו יצרו אולי אין להחשיב זה לקידושי טעות אף שהוא רשע גמור גם בשביל פעם אחת ויש שיטעו לדמות להחשיב גם זה קידושי טעות, אבל אם הוא שטוף בזה שיותר נהנה ממשכב זכור ממשכב נשים הוא ודאי קידושי טעות, אבל כל זה אם הלכה ממנו תיכף אבל אם שהתה אצלו אף אחר שנודעת אז קשה לבטל הקידושין. ואם בא זה מענין שטות מאחר שהוא שלא כדרך הטבע ודאי הוא מום דכיון שהוא מצד שטות עלול לעוד שטותים, אבל בעצם הוא מצד רשעות וניוול שג"כ הוא טעות כדלעיל.

והנני ידידו, משה פיינשטיין.

Did the Holocaust save the Chareidi world from extinction?

YNet



מחקר חדש מעלה כי בתקופה שלפני מלחמת העולם השנייה היו רק אלפים בודדים של תלמידי ישיבה באירופה. החורבן העצום גרם לניצולי השואה להתגייסות חירום: "הם הבינו שזה 'להיות או לחדול'", אומרת החוקרת. "יתכן ואם לא הייתה שואה, לא היו חרדים". צפו

הם לא תמיד עומדים בצפירה, לא לוקחים חלק משמעותי בטקסי יום השואה, אבל החברה החרדית מקיימת בעצם קיומה מפעל הנצחה, שבו גם נשים לוקחות חלק משמעותי. מחקר שערכה ד"ר מיכל שאול על העולם החרדי והקשר לשואה, מגלה כי התעצמותו והתפתחותו בשישים השנים האחרונות הגיע דווקא בזכות השואה. את הנתונים הרבים שאספה במהלך הדוקטורט היא איגדה לספר חדש - "אפר תחת אפר "

ד"ר שאול קובעת כי עולם התורה הלך ונעלם עד לשואה, ולולא האסון הנורא שאירע לעם היהודי, ייתכן והחרדיוּת לא הייתה קיימת עוד בדורנו. "בתחילת המאה ה-20 היה עולם התורה נתון במשבר עמוק", היא אומרת. "החרדיות כמעט ונכחדה. תנועות ההשכלה, הציונות והסוציאליזם נגסו בה, והסחף היה אדיר. על פי הערכה, בתקופה שלפני המלחמה היו רק אלפים בודדים של תלמידי ישיבה, במזרח אירופה"

לדבריה, דווקא החורבן העצום גרם לניצולי השואה להתגייסות חירום. "הם הבינו שזה 'להיות או לחדול'", היא מסבירה. כאשר הניצולים ראו בסיום המלחמה כיצד כמעט כל עולם התורה עלה בלהבות, ועם קימומה של מדינת ישראל החילונית, הבינו מנהיגי עולם התורה, וכן אנשים ונשים מן השורה כי אין ברירה, יש לקום ולעשות מעשה - להילחם ולהקים את עולם התורה על תילו. "ישנה סבירות שלולא השואה, עולם התורה היה נכחד".[...]

Monday, September 8, 2014

Court vindicates Beit Shemesh Charedim in conflict with Education Ministry

YNet   Members of the Beit Shemesh Haredi community arrived at the Safot V’Tarbuyot school Thursday night and dismantled a barrier that was serving as a partition between ultra-Orthodox and secular students amid a controversy that recently drove the Ministry of Education to postpone the school's opening.

The destruction of the partition came just hours after the Magistrates Court in Jerusalem effectively handed the Haredis a victory by rejecting a request from the Education Ministry to close classrooms that were organized specifically for ultra-Orthodox students, separating them from the secular students.  

"The fence was constructed at the request of the school, but it was taken out of proportion and used by parties with interests in creating conflict," said Beit Shemesh Mayor Moshe Abutbul. "As a gesture of reconciliation, I instructed the removal of the fence which has already managed to get the nickname "wall", and I hope that as a result, the wall between the sides will fall as well."

The judge in Jerusalem decided that the case didn't fall under the Magistrates jurisdiction and should be passed down to the Municipal Court in Beit Shemesh. As the indirect result of the legal decision, a wall that was constructed in the Safot V'Tarbuyot school to divide the Haredi classrooms from the secular ones, will remain for the time being.  [...]

"The ownership of school structures and the right to use them is subject to the municipality of Beit Shemesh," the judge explained. "Therefore, the plaintiff (the Education Ministry) has no claim to original ownership or use of the school."[...]

Messianic Sex Cult - that required prostitution with Arabs - exposed

Arutz 7   A media gag order was lifted on Monday on the testimony of the main complainant against the extremist Messianic cult exposed the day before, which brain-washed Jewish women into taking drugs and having sex with Arab men in order to "bring the redemption."

The Lehava anti-assimilation organization led police in gathering evidence and exposing the cult, which has led to the arrest of at least six key figures on suspicion of pressuring women into prostitution, trafficking of women, rape, providing drugs and holding people in conditions of slavery.

"I was so captive, I didn't have the option to get out of there," revealed the main complainant in her chilling testimony. "I don't know how many (other women) were in my condition, I do know of two others. Not everyone can reach such places, to reach the situation I was in is to be completely erased." [...]

Recalling her experiences with the cult, the woman stated "one time I met someone and told him everything, and he told me 'you have no idea where you are, I've never seen anyone with brain-washing on this kind of level. I've seen everything in my life but I've never seen anything like this - when you get out you'll understand.'"

"Afterwards, a friend saw how G. treated me," said the victim, referring to the main suspect who headed the cult. "He wouldn't speak, instead he whistled at me, and when he whistled I'd come and (my friend) didn't know what was going on."

The woman lived with G. before escaping two years ago. In order to entrap her, she reports that G. promised to marry her, but said he would do so "only after you finish all the spiritual sparks" - namely having sex with Arab men to "purify the non-Jews" under the warped ideology he brain-washed her with.

At one point she recalls "I left, but I returned to live with him. My brain was trapped there. ...That a woman reaches a point where she's with eight Arabs she needs to be at a stage of serious (spiritual) deletion - that a man would whistle and I would come, that a man would sleep on the bed and I would sleep underneath the bed (on the floor)."

"I asked him (G.) 'why can't I sleep with you on the bed?' He answered 'your brain disturbs my holy brain, sleep on the floor.' When I asked 'why on the floor? I can sleep in the other room on the bed,' he answered that my brain helped him, and that I need to be near him," she recalled. "When I remember these little examples it's horrifying." [...]

Sunday, September 7, 2014

The story of Big History - What would a Jewish version look like?


NY Times   As Gates was working his way through the series, he stumbled upon a set of DVDs titled “Big History” — an unusual college course taught by a jovial, gesticulating professor from Australia named David Christian. Unlike the previous DVDs, “Big History” did not confine itself to any particular topic, or even to a single academic discipline. Instead, it put forward a synthesis of history, biology, chemistry, astronomy and other disparate fields, which Christian wove together into nothing less than a unifying narrative of life on earth. Standing inside a small “Mr. Rogers"-style set, flanked by an imitation ivy-covered brick wall, Christian explained to the camera that he was influenced by the Annales School, a group of early-20th-century French historians who insisted that history be explored on multiple scales of time and space. Christian had subsequently divided the history of the world into eight separate “thresholds,” beginning with the Big Bang, 13 billion years ago (Threshold 1), moving through to the origin of Homo sapiens (Threshold 6), the appearance of agriculture (Threshold 7) and, finally, the forces that gave birth to our modern world (Threshold 8).

Christian’s aim was not to offer discrete accounts of each period so much as to integrate them all into vertiginous conceptual narratives, sweeping through billions of years in the span of a single semester. A lecture on the Big Bang, for instance, offered a complete history of cosmology, starting with the ancient God-centered view of the universe and proceeding through Ptolemy’s Earth-based model, through the heliocentric versions advanced by thinkers from Copernicus to Galileo and eventually arriving at Hubble’s idea of an expanding universe. In the worldview of “Big History,” a discussion about the formation of stars cannot help including Einstein and the hydrogen bomb; a lesson on the rise of life will find its way to Jane Goodall and Dian Fossey. “I hope by the end of this course, you will also have a much better sense of the underlying unity of modern knowledge,” Christian said at the close of the first lecture. “There is a unified account.”

As Gates sweated away on his treadmill, he found himself marveling at the class’s ability to connect complex concepts. “I just loved it,” he said. “It was very clarifying for me. I thought, God, everybody should watch this thing!” At the time, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation had donated hundreds of millions of dollars to educational initiatives, but many of these were high-level policy projects, like the Common Core Standards Initiative, which the foundation was instrumental in pushing through. And Gates, who had recently decided to become a full-time philanthropist, seemed to pine for a project that was a little more tangible. He was frustrated with the state of interactive coursework and classroom technology since before he dropped out of Harvard in the mid-1970s; he yearned to experiment with entirely new approaches. “I wanted to explore how you did digital things,” he told me. “That was a big issue for me in terms of where education was going — taking my previous skills and applying them to education.” Soon after getting off the treadmill, he asked an assistant to set a meeting with Christian. [...]

Christian began wondering if he could apply this everything-is-connected idea to a larger scale: “I began thinking, Could I teach a course not of Russia but of humanity?” He soon became infatuated with the concept. “I remember the chain of thought,” he said. “I had to do prehistory, so I have to do some archaeology. But to do it seriously, I’m going to talk about how humans evolved, so, yikes, I’m in biology now. I thought: To do it seriously, I have to talk about how mammals evolved, how primates evolved. I have to go back to multicelled organisms, I have to go back to primeval slime. And then I thought: I have to talk about how life was created, how life appeared on earth! I have to talk geology, the history of the planet. And so you can see, this is pushing me back and back and back, until I realized there’s a stopping point — which is the Big Bang.” He paused. “I thought, Boy, would that be exciting to teach a course like this!” [...]

Saturday, September 6, 2014

NY Times coverage of Gaza war was biased against Israel (surprise?!)


Tablet Magazine    I am a lifelong Democrat, a political liberal, a Reform rabbi, and for four decades, until last week, a New York Times subscriber. What drove me away was the paper’s incessant denigration of Israel, a torrent of articles, photographs, and op-ed columns that consistently present the Jewish State in the worst possible light.

This phenomenon is not new. Knowledgeable observers have long assailed the Times lack of objectivity and absence of journalistic integrity in reporting on Israel. My chronic irritation finally morphed into alienation and then to visceral disgust this summer, after Hamas renewed its terrorist assaults upon Israel and the Times launched what can only be described as a campaign to delegitimize the Jewish State. 

The Middle East conflict is complex, but the root cause of Israel’s confrontation with Hamas is not. Committed by its charter to “obliterate” Israel and kill all Jews everywhere, Hamas is recognized as a terrorist organization by the U.S., Britain, and the European Union, a designation substantiated by its raining rockets down on Israel’s civilians and tunneling under its border to kill and kidnap, indisputable war crimes.

Renowned Israeli novelist, leftist, and self-declared “Israeli peacenik” Amos Oz captured the essence of the conflict in two questions he posed to a German radio audience. “What would you do if your neighbor across the street sits down on the balcony, puts his little boy on his lap and starts shooting machine gun fire into your nursery? What would you do if your neighbor across the street digs a tunnel from his nursery to your nursery in order to blow up your home or in order to kidnap your family?”

The answers are self-evident to everyone except the New York Times. Its obsessive focus is on Palestinian civilian casualties, especially children, publishing photos of their corpses and little else, as if they tell the whole story. The deaths of innocents in wartime are tragic and heartbreaking; they diminish us all. But a newspaper committed to balance and fairness would provide context and perspective. It would show traumatized Israeli children running to shelters, cowering, wetting their beds, and suffering nightmares. It would publish photos and accounts of militants launching rockets from the roofs of mosques, a church, and a media hotel, alongside schools, refugee shelters, clinics and hospitals, and of weapons concealed by Hamas in UN facilities. It would substantiate casualty figures from Hamas, which is known to have falsified them in the past, before reporting them as fact. It would highlight Hamas’ use of civilians as human shields, its urging civilians to ignore Israel’s advance warnings to depart, so that Gazans would be killed and inflict PR damage on Israel. Such a paper would cover the threats of death that inhibited reporters and photojournalists from telling the true, full story. But the Times did not.

What it did instead is revealed by a sample of headlines: “As Israel Hits Mosque and Clinic, Air Campaign’s Risks Come Home;” “Israelis Watch Bombs Drop on Gaza From Front-Row Seats;” “Questions About Tactics and Targets as Civilian Toll Climbs in Israeli Strikes;” “Foreign Correspondents in Israel Complain of Intimidation;” “Israeli Shells are Said to Hit UN School;” “Military Censorship in Israel;” “A Boy at Play in Gaza, a Renewal of War, A Family in Mourning;” “Israel’s Supporters Try to Come to Terms with the Killing of Children in Gaza;” “Israel Braces for War Crimes Inquiries on Gaza;” “Resisting Nazis, He Saw Need for Israel. Now He Is Its Critic.” [...]

Friday, September 5, 2014

Appeals court upholds dismissal of lawsuit regarding sexaul abuse at Yeshiva University

NY Times     A federal appeals court panel ruled on Thursday that dozens of men who say Yeshiva University covered up their sexual abuse at the hands of rabbis cannot sue for damages because too many years had elapsed since the abuse took place.

In upholding the dismissal of the lawsuit, the three-judge panel for the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in Manhattan, placed responsibility for pursuing signs of a cover-up sooner on the 34 men, who say they were abused from the 1970s through early 1990s by two rabbis at the university’s high school in Washington Heights.

At the time the students graduated from Yeshiva University High School, more than 20 years ago, their knowledge that the rabbis who abused them were still allowed to teach at the school “was sufficient to put them on at least inquiry notice as to the school’s awareness of and indifference to the abusive conduct by its teachers,” the judges wrote in their decision.

The plaintiffs argued that the clock did not start ticking on their case until Yeshiva’s role in hiding the rabbis’ conduct was revealed in a December 2012 article in The Daily Forward. But, the judges wrote, when “administrators rebuffed their complaints or otherwise failed to take remedial action” after some of the men reported their abuse, they should have realized that they could have filed suit against the school.

In a statement on Thursday, Yeshiva lauded its current sexual abuse policies for creating a “safe and inspiring” atmosphere, saying that “our thoughts remain with anyone who may have been harmed by actions that occurred many years ago.”

“Today’s decision concludes a legal proceeding that has been trying for all involved,” the statement said. [...]

Rivky Stein & Yoel Weiss: Before Rosh HaShana all those who mistakenly believed Rivky and slandered Yoel should ask him for forgiveness

As everyone knows by now, Rivky perpetrated a massive fraud and chillul hashem. In particular she tried to destroy her husband by having a non-existent beis din issue a seruv and put him in cherem and "posken" that he was obligated to give her a Get. She has a $480 million dollar RICO claim against him. Even worse is the slander she spread in her public appearances and interviews with the news media - and her face book page.I think most people believed her claim until recently when Yoel produced an affidavit that showed the beis din was phony. You can see from the comments on her Facebook page that her followers have turned against her.

However because they believed her and sympathized with her - there was a massive campaign of lashon harah and slander against Yoel. He became one of the most hated people because of the campaign. His denials of the charges only made people angrier and spread more lashon harah about him.

I have been having a debate with myself. However many of the thousands of people who have slandered Yoel - are going to ask him for forgiveness before Rosh Hashanna? The answer I think is at most 5 people.  After all they were only being righteous people defending a helpless "aguna" - why should they have to apologize for showing mercy to what seemed like horrible domestic violence. After all she did have the documents from the beis din. She did have the legal papers. She did have many YouTube videos and she did seem that she was telling the truth.

I am giving all those who slandered Yoel the chance to ask him for forgiveness here on my blog. All it will take is to write a brief comment acknowledging that you slandered him and ask for forgiveness. It will take about 2 minutes.  Hopefully there will be more than 5 responses.

Tuesday, September 2, 2014

Seminary Scandal: Harry Maryles fails to get his facts and halacha straight before he pontificates

While it is true that I said that it is time to move on in dealing with the Seminary scandal, Harry Maryles just posted an article attacking me that is so full of false analogies and distorted facts that I can't ignore it. Harry Maryles demands justice - but so does the IBD and myself. What is it that Harry doesn't understand? Because I respect Harry as a sincere person I will try explaining the facts one more time - in clear style with my point repeated a couple times - and hopefully this time he will understand.

First of all my statement that is was time to end the discussion of this scandal and get on with life is simple a recognition that the discussion has become repetition, shrill and is not accomplishing anything. It is not, contrary to Harry Maryles, comparable to Hillary Clinton's attempt to avoid facing facts and cover up events - before facts were known. That should be obvious to anybody who has read my many posts on the subjects and the comments that I have spent countless hours responding to all type of questions and criticism. That is called a cover up? Ridiculous!

Secondly it is elementary that a judge needs to pasken on the information he has been presented. When no new information is forthcoming the judge needs to make a decision based on the available evidence. This doesn't mean that he refuses to consider information that comes later. The Sanhedrin, acknowledging the possibility of error even in capital cases, even after they sentenced someone to death - still remained open to the possibility that new information would exonerate the one found guilty. They set up a communication system - that could stop his execution up to the last instant. Would Harry Maryles claim that the Sanhedrin was acting like Hillary Clinton because they said that they needed to arrive at a pask after no new information was forthcoming ?!

Thirdly a stalemate had developed in the situation between the CBD and IBD. The IBD requested the information that CBD had collected and the CBD refused.  The CBD issued a advisory not to go to the seminaries because they claimed some staff was complicit - but at the same time they refused the IBD's request to see the information needed to pasken whether  in fact any staff was complicit. The CBD has no ability to resolve this issue because the seminaries have signed a shtar with the IBD. (The CBD is in America and the seminaries are in Israel.That is why the CBD asked the IBD to take the case.) The seminaries thus could not clear their names according to the demands of the CBD but the CBD did not have the authority or ability to fire staff they claim had to go.

Contrary to Harry Maryles repeated claims, the IBD is not letting the seminaries go ahead knowing that there was staff that enabled  Meisels misdeeds. The CBD has not produced the evidence they claim incriminates some staff members. At this point, the IBD says the CBD lacks credibility. A beis din can only act on evidence that it has. Unsubstantiated claims of evidence that are not produced despite repeated requests - does not influence the judgment of beis din. Elementary rule of beis din.

Thus the CBD was holding the seminaries and the students hostage unless they were given total control. The seminaries and the IBD refused. Finally the stalemate was broken by the letter from the 5 American gedolim - including Rav Levine - who is a member of the CBD. The message was clear. Based on their intimate knowledge of the situation they declared - contrary to the CBD - that the seminaries were fine places to learn and safe. They added a Vaad hachinuch and Reb Birnbaum as overall director for added protection beyond what other seminaries have.

Again contrary to Harry Maryles' faulty understanding - this is no way comparable to Hillary Clinton's cover up. This was a move taken by 5 gedolim after careful consideration - that it was time to get on with life. His criticism of me is misplaced. I was simply reporting the message that is inherent in the letter of these gedolim. Harry doesn't like this or understand it because he is so committed to the CBD that anything against them has to be a signs of corruption, moral blindness or maybe plain stupidity. 
 Harry Maryles is wrong!

Until the CBD has produced evidence that the staff were Meisels enablers - these 5 gedolim are supporting the view of the  IBD  that the seminaries are safe. They are saying the CBD can not hold the seminaries hostage for their own selfish purposes. 

 I am capitalizing the following statement because Harry Maryles seems to have problem reading.  As I have stated this idea a number of times already in different posts.

 IF AND WHEN THE CBD PRODUCES EVIDENCE THAT THERE WERE ENABLERS AMONGST THE STAFF - THEY WILL BE FIRED IF THE ALLEGATIONS ARE CONFIRMED BY THE  ISRAELI BEIS DIN. FURTHERMORE IF AND WHEN EVIDENCE COMES FROM OTHERS SOURCES REGARDING THE STAFF OR VICTIMS - IT WILL BE EXAMINED CAREFULLY AND ACTED UPON ACCORDING TO THE HALACHA.

Contrary to Harry Maryles, this is not a cover up to save the jobs of kollel couples, it is not a cover up to prevent embarrassing the frum community, it is not a cover up for the sake of shidduchin - IT IS SIMPLY NOT A COVERUP BUT ELEMENTARY HALACHA!

Harry I think it is time that you move on from the rut you are in with your mistaken views that are based on your intense loyalty to the CBD.

Defeat and victory is in the eyes of the beholder - or why Palestinians think Hamas won

Contrary to what is typically understood - victory or defeat is not dependent on objective reality but the subjective reality. What is required for the Palestinians to acknowledge they were defeated - is it the number of dead, number of buildings destroyed or perhaps it is the failure to inflict significant harm to Israel. Answer it is none of the above. They know they won because Israel stopped fighting.


An overwhelming majority of Palestinians believe Hamas defeated Israel in the recent Gaza operation, and support the continuation of rocket attacks if Israel does not remove the blockade on Gaza, a new Palestinian poll revealed.

According to the data collected on August 26-30 by the Ramallah-based Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR) headed by pollster Khalil Shikaki, 79 percent of Palestinians questioned in Gaza and the West Bank said that Hamas had won the war against Israel, while only 3% said Israel had won. A similar majority believed that Israel was responsible for the breakout of the war. 

In stark contrast to predictions voiced during Operation Protective Edge by senior Israeli military officers saying the extent of damage in Gaza would likely turn the civilian population against Hamas, 94% of respondents said they were satisfied with Hamas’s performance in confronting the IDF and 78% were pleased with the movement’s defense of civilians in Gaza. Eighty-six percent of the 1,270 adults questioned in the survey said they supported the continuation of rocket attacks at Israel as long as the blockade on Gaza is maintained. [...]

Judges slam Yeshiva University in $680 million abuse case- Title IX - defining statute of limitation

Forward  Imagine you are in a car accident. It’s the other guy’s fault, and you know your insurance company will sue his. But should you then and there investigate the car manufacturer for deliberately ignoring a mechanical fault, even if you have no reason to know that’s true?

That’s essentially the question United States Circuit Judge Guido Calabresi asked August 28 as he lambasted a Yeshiva University lawyer for claiming that dozens of former schoolboys ought to have sued Y.U. decades ago for a sexual abuse cover-up. 

Y.U.’s lawyer, Karen Bitar, argued that students should have found out soon after they were assaulted, during the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s, that Y.U. was deliberately indifferent to the fact that it employed abusive staff. Calabresi said: “It seems to me that’s a mighty hard way to look at this.” 

Thirty-four former students of Yeshiva University High School for Boys sued Y.U. for $680 million in 2013. They claimed Y.U. administrators, trustees, and other staff, facilitated a massive, decades-long cover-up of abuse at the Y.U.-run high school.  [....] 

 Under Title IX, students have three years from the time they become aware of a school’s deliberate indifference to their abuse to file a suit. To prove deliberate indifference, students must show that before they were abused, a high-ranking official knew that the school employed an abusive staff member and did not act appropriately. Calabresi, part of a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, reminded Y.U.’s lawyer that not even Koeltl believed the statute of limitations began as far back as the time each of the students was abused. [...]