 |
| NEW YORK PRESS - FEBRUARY 28, 2000 |
EVERY SIGNATURE MATTERS - THIS BILL MUST PASS!
CLICK - GOAL - 100,000 NEW SIGNATURES! 75,000 SIGNATURES HAVE ALREADY BEEN SUBMITTED TO GOVERNOR CUOMO!
EFF Urges Court to Block Dragnet Subpoenas Targeting Online Commenters
CLICK! For the full motion to quash: http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/hersh_v_cohen/UOJ-motiontoquashmemo.pdf
14 comments:
This article seems to be a fake. Who can vouch for its authenticity?
Did the NY Press & Reuters really run this article on Belsky or is it a spoof? I am trying to find it online. Shia Director is misspelled as Dector.
You think it's a fake because Belsky was near a shower right? Well, he takes a shower once a year whether he needs one or not!
It won't really help to verify with Belsky himself. Rabbi Dr. Doniel Eidensohn blogged a few years ago that he once confronted Belsky to his face about rumors he was hearing about the bittul kiddushin that Belsky did for big $$$ and regarding rumors of other shenanigans. Belsky laughed everything off and blamed a certain "troublemaker" for spreading "false" rumors (see Michael Salamon's recent article about rabbis with personality disorders who blame everything on others). Eidensohn later came across documentation verifying Belsky's guilt
Aside from being insane and obviously fake, it's dated February 28th (which is in the future).
Another way to know it's fake:
There's no way Coney Island Hospital of all places would've brought him back....
Coney Island Hospital gets lucky sometimes. Al Sharpton was taken there & emerged alive after he was stabbed at the Yousef Hawkins protest in Bensonhurst.
Rabbi Belsky has issued this afternoon in Torah Vodaah a stringent warning that it is forbidden for anyone to read the blog The Unorthodox Jew or to tell anyone to read it. Doesn't that prove the Reuters article is not accurate?
> Aside from being insane and obviously fake, it's dated February 28th (which is in the future).
Look at the year. It's 2000.
This sounds and looks fake. why are you picking on Rabbi Belsky so much. Yes He was stridently against the Eruv in Brooklyn, but that was based on Rav Moshes Psak. Many people viewed it as a big chutzpa to go against Rav Moshes Psak regarding making an Eruv in Brooklyn. Yes He was wrong about the Kolko Case. Yes He is wrong or very naive about the molestation issue. The Bittul Kiddushin I think he was right on that issue. The husband was an oisvorf who did not want to give a get and he had a long history of frequenting houses of ill repute from before his marriage - Mekach To'us.And I agree he is wrong on the issue of Metzitza B'PEH But why are you so vehement against him. Is there something personal there? Just because you don't agree with someone on all issues does not justify making that person into a villain.
How does one get every major issue facing your community so wrong, yet, in the world of the Haredi he is still a posek, a rosh yeshiva, a godol, a leader, an authority on kashrus?
Belsky was absolutely wrong on the bittul kiddushin as per halacha. And Rav Shlomo Miller's halacha teshuva on the topic demolishes every one of Belsky's bogus arguments even if the halacha could have been on Belsky's side.
12:14 PM obviously has no clue of what kind of gangster Belsky is
Belsky was absolutely wrong on the bittul kiddushin as per halacha. And Rav Shlomo Miller's halacha teshuva on the topic demolishes every one of Belsky's bogus arguments even if the halacha could have been on Belsky's side.
12:14 PM obviously has no clue of what kind of gangster Belsky is
Even though Rav Elyashev couldn't stand Belsky & told visiting rabbonim that none of Belsky's psak in kashrus, gittin, etc, is valid, he was willing to sit down with Belsky regarding the anisakis worms in fish for the benefit of Klal Yisroel since most hashgochos are following the OU's Belsky-led charge to allow the worms.
Belsky proved very elusive by making conditions for the sit down that he knew Rav Elyashev could never agree to.
Post a Comment