Watch this. I do not understand how the Israeli secular court system has done anything wrong except uphold the law of Israel. In this case it has conflicting evidence of Leifer’s alleged mental condition and is now seeking a court-based independent assessment before extradition. Is that not proper? Will the psychiatrist be considered biased if he/she concludes that Leifer is some sort of unfit mental maniac?
Video below from the ABC. It took a long time till victims came forward, and it takes a long bow to allege that Israel is dragging its feet on this and to say so on television. The case is proceeding as it should, and my expectation is that she will be found to be fit and extradited for trial. If it wasn’t a Jew who made this claim about the Israeli Court System, some might call the comments anti-semitic. There are processes, and they must be followed. Prime Ministers and Presidents are put in prison in Israel.
It takes time.
The law isn’t the fastest runner on the block and these are weighty issues.
On Thursday nights, I quickly glance through the Australian Jewish News (AJN) while I eat my dinner. There is the usual stuff which is so boring: Henry Herzog’s letters about section 18C and his obvious anti-Right stance at all costs (love your work Henry), Michael Burd and others in opposition and so on. These are ubiquitous and I’d suggest the AJN probably doesn’t have enough letter writers which is why the letters section seems like the same section one read two weeks prior.
Moving along, and the headline this week screams that Manny Waks was FORCED to apologise to Rabbi Glick after the former was dealing with defamation proceedings. When I read this, I asked myself whether the AJN knew that Manny was ‘forced’ or whether they were exercising Journalistic hyperbole in the (mistaken) belief that they would sell more papers.
Isn’t is possible that when Manny was made aware that he was likely to have crossed a line and that he AGREED to apologise?
Or was it a case where his Board of Tzedek “forced” him to apologise. He wasn’t forced, he could have resigned and held his ground if he felt that what he did was the correct thing to do. This makes such apologies rather vacuous potentially.
Someone who thinks they are right, or at least 100% right is never forced to do anything. They can face the music, and win or lose. If they are convinced they will win the case, they won’t settle. I am sure Manny’s organisation (actually I know that his organisation) has lawyers who will work pro bono. Maybe they advised him to apologise. Is that “forced”?
So where did the AJN get this factoid from? Isn’t it just possible that Rabbi Glick was a Mentch and didn’t want to subject Manny to a trial and was satisfied with a simple apology? Okay, since certain folk decided to name Rabbi Glick to the press originally, that apology had to be public in the sense that it was posted on Facebook?
I would hope that an Australian JEWISH News would adopt standards that are higher than the gutter press. Then again, I don’t know what their standards or definitions are. We read about people, including some politicians being “Jewish” in the AJN. Perhaps they could tell us which definition they subscribe to in an editorial? Do they use Hitler’s (may his name be erased) definition or the Jewish definition? I don’t mean progressive, or even Bialik’s Stowe-Linder that would seemingly accept anything as long as you carry a badge on your lapel which says “Jewish”. It’s what I call extreme pluralism which dilutes everything to the lowest common denominator.
Finally, the thing that really gets up my goat is when I read “news stories” that are so stale as they have appeared online at least 4 days prior. Get your act together AJN. There is more than one way to sell papers.
Disclaimer: I have performed at Menachem Waks’ wedding (and it was a lovely wedding, which I remember clearly) as well as some of Rabbi Glick’s daughters. I have no axe to bring with either of them. It’s about the AJN./
I have a lecture to prepare. I don’t really have the time to deal with scurrilous nonsense, so I will be brief.
Tzedek was set up with the best intentions. I am confident that the financial and non financial backers are good people whose final and laudable aim is to help our society deal with past ills and (perhaps even more importantly) create an awareness so that the horrible crime of abuse is seriously minimised etc
Organisations, though, need to be very careful with their words and claims. It is relatively easy to lose credibility very quickly. That’s not to say they shouldn’t speak out. That’s an entirely different matter.
I don’t allow ad hominem attacks on this blog. The purpose of this blog is multifarious as can be seen by the range of topics I choose to write about.
In trying to discredit me, however, I had to laugh with angst at claims and descriptions put out by Tzedek.
I’m ultra-orthodox. Well, let’s see. Where do I start. My Rabbi isn’t. He advises me on halachic matters. He is shunned by the ultra-orthodox and described as modern orthodox or centrist orthodox. He is a world-class Talmid Chacham but the Aguda don’t even let him speak or sit on a dias at Daf Hayomi Siyumim. He sits at the back on a normal table. It’s a bizayon Talmidei Chachomim. He can learn better than most of them on the dias, but because he is not considered ultra-orthodox, he has no place! I have a PhD, which means I spent many years of my life studying in a University. That’s a no no. Worse, I’m still there. I teach secular topics—Science. I even use the internet, constantly. I use social media. I have a blog. All these are forbidden by ultra orthodox. But wait, it gets even worse. I run a band which plays non-Jewish music and this is to crowds who are mixed dancing. Guests aren’t dressed modestly either, especially in the warmer months. Read my posts on Israel and related matters and see if I’m closer to Zionism than “non” or “anti” Zionism—hallmarks of ultra orthodox. Read my critique of the extreme groups. Yes, I have to unashamedly try to keep Torah and Mitzvos, but if that’s the definition of ultra-orthodox, then I guess many of us are damned by Tzedek. Tzedek’s CEO’s own father is “ultra-orthodox”. Does he describe him as “my ultra orthodox father”. Why do I say, “damned”? Because it is entirely irrelevant what shade of white, black or grey somebody is unless you believe in strange conspiracy theories that people who are lumped by Tzedek into some category (which they don’t define) are likely to be so dumb and stupid, that they will hide the truth or protect people from that same “Tzedek category”. Sorry, this type of characterisation is Grade 1 level. Does the CEO preface his remarks about someone defending homosexuality as saying “Homosexual Joe Jones said …” that’s simply boorish. It has no credibility as far as debating logic is concerned, let alone, in my case any resemblance to fact. It is a transparent and poor attempt to deflect from the lack of research conducted by Tzedek on the matter of Rabbi Brander’s visit to our shores. Did Tzedek actually ring a roof body, all of whom reacted with probity after reading some of the toilet blog posts and their comments? At the risk of repeating myself, there is no such thing as a Gzera Shava for people, to the extent that if one does belong to a group, that they are thereby tarnished ipso facto and have lost their independence of thought and action. There is no better proof of that than Tzedek’s CEO’s own father. Is he tarnished because he is Chabad? Why not? Answer: he has his own views and expresses them. A contradiction to the implied thesis in the CEO’s hyperbole. But …. maybe I am ultra orthodox in Galus Australis style, simply because I don’t eat at Lord of the Fries or similar establishments? The mind boggles.
I’ve been criticised because I sit on a Shule board, one of whose ex-members is now facing proceedings. I understand that the CEO of Tzedek is alleged to be one of the victims of said ex-member. Well, hello there Tzedek. Your CEO and his father (and indeed readers of my blog) know very well that it was me who initiated the removal of said ex-member from the board. Do you not remember my father הכ’’מ asking me to take a post down because he thought I should not get involved! Let’s go further. I even had an attempted intervention order (later withdrawn) placed out on me by the aforementioned ex-board member now facing trial, because I was “in his face” so to speak. Tzedek, you have the wrong address. But it’s worse than simply having the wrong address. What’s really worrying, is that (a) you actually know you have the wrong address on such matters, and (b) had you even bothered to ring a single board member of my Shule, they would have told you this. Indeed, ring the accused’s father! Go on, do us all a favour and return with your findings.
On the matter of the COSV and the accused’s membership, again, Tzedek is so far off the mark, it’s really sad that this fact demeans Tzedek terribly. I was present when the conundrum was raised, and frankly, Tzedek ought to have been proud, of the attitude of each member of that executive and individual Shule Presidents. But, let us not let the truth get in the way of Tzedek’s tirades, hyperbole, and one liners in the press.
A pattern is emerging with Tzedek, and it’s a very sad one. It is turning people off Tzedek; people who used to look up to them. Their raison detre is brave and important, but their execution (sic) due to poor research, questionable leadership and the emotive untruths expressed by its leader(ship) is damaging its credibility. That would be a great shame.
I don’t have a clue if any member of Tzedek’s board read my blog, so my words may be in vain. By all means, someone please pass on this blog post to each and everyone of Tzedek’s board members. I would be most happy to meet them in my house at a time of their choosing, and properly explain what is wrong and my thoughts on how it can be fixed.