"Homolka and his husband engaged in misconduct" --- The so-called Jewish Leader In Germany & His Husband....

“A significant cause for the emergence of the problems identified by the investigators at the institutions under investigation is the personal misconduct of Rabbi Prof. Dr. Homolka in his function as a leader or person with great influence, which the investigators are convinced of,” the investigators wrote in their report. He presided over an institution ruled by a “culture of fear,” the investigators found, leaving employees and students alike less likely to express criticism or concerns because of the possibility of reprisals.

 

Prominent German rabbi exits leadership roles as report confirms allegations against him

 

Rabbi Walter Homolka, rector of the Abraham Geiger College, in the Liberal Jewish community's synagogue in Hanover, Germany 

 

BERLIN (JTA) – In a landmark step, investigators commissioned by Germany’s main Jewish organization have concluded that abuse of power and sexual harassment did occur at Germany’s liberal rabbinical seminary — and some of it, they say, may have crossed the line into illegality.

The 44-page “executive summary” of an investigation initiated by the Central Council of Jews in Germany is the latest and most damning report about the leadership of Rabbi Walter Homolka since accusations against him broke into public view last May.

Issued Wednesday after tense public conflict between the council and Homolka’s attorneys, the report concludes that structural changes are required to set Germany’s liberal rabbinical seminary, known as Abraham Geiger College, and other related Jewish institutions on the correct footing.

“A significant cause for the emergence of the problems identified by the investigators at the institutions under investigation is the personal misconduct of Rabbi Prof. Dr. Homolka in his function as a leader or person with great influence, which the investigators are convinced of,” the investigators wrote in their report.

Homolka announced Monday that he would withdraw from all functions in the seminary that he and a German-born American rabbi named Walter Jacob, founded in 1999. He also dropped out of the running on Tuesday for another term as chair of the Union of Progressive Jews in Germany.

A more comprehensive report including details about incidents in which investigators concluded that Homolka and his husband engaged in misconduct is due out in January, according to the Cologne-based law firm Gercke Wollschläger.

The preliminary report was welcomed in a joint statement by the Central Council, the German Interior Ministry and the Brandenburg State Ministry of Science, Research and Culture, which said they would “continue to fund the Abraham Geiger College to the same extent as before until the structural new beginning has been completed.”

It was also greeted with relief by the former cantorial student whose complaints kicked off the scandal.

“I think the report and the subsequent documents are a blessed development,” Itamar Cohen, now a cantor, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. “It seems to confirm many suspicions which I and others share. It does affirm that I did the right thing and [this] could be the beginning of a new chapter of liberal Judaism in Germany.”

The scandal that erupted publicly in May began after Cohen sought help from Jonathan Schorsch, a professor at the School of Jewish Theology, in dealing with unsolicited pornographic material allegedly received from Homolka’s husband, who was also an employee at the seminary. (Abraham Geiger College is part of the School of Jewish Theology, which itself is under the auspices of the University of Potsdam.)

A German newspaper’s report about the allegations and an apparent effort to obscure them opened the floodgates for criticism of Homolka from past and current students, employees and colleagues. 

Homolka took a leave of absence from the numerous leadership roles he held with liberal Jewish religious and educational institutions that he had helped found since the late 1990s.

The scandal has shaken the foundations of modern liberal Judaism in Germany, and the new report suggests that those foundations were weak because they rested largely on one individual.

Josef Schuster, the president of the Central Council of German Jews, said the report made it clear that Homolka could not continue in his previous roles.

Homolka has rejected the allegations against him throughout, and his attorneys told German news media Wednesday that they believed the entire investigation was politically motivated. They accused Schuster of wanting to see Homolka exit Germany’s liberal Jewish leadership and said the Central Council had failed to consider fully the statement Homolka had given to investigators.

Rabbi Walter Homolka. at left, with other leaders of Germany Jewry

The report is the first to emerge from a third-party investigation into the allegations against Homolka. A separate investigation by the University of Potsdam, released in late October, found that some of the accusations regarding abuse of power to be justified, but did not find any criminally actionable behavior and thus confirmed Homolka’s ongoing employment there as professor. It did not investigate the sexual harassment accusations, as Homolka’s husband had left his job by then.

The new report did scrutinize those allegations. The investigators said they found 13 specific incidents involving allegations against Homolka’s husband. German libel law bars the publication of his name. Using what they called a “traffic light system,” the investigators classified nine of these incidents as “red” cases, in which 25 instances of misconduct could be identified. Two of these cases involved the “initial suspicion of a criminal offense,” they added.

Regarding allegations of abuse of power against Homolka himself, they found — after interviewing 73 individuals — a total of 45 concrete incidents, 14 of which they classified as “red,” involving a total of 23 instances of misconduct. A detailed account of those cases, including responses that Homolka delivered earlier this week, will be included in the final report in January, they said.

More broadly, they said, their interviews had illuminated a culture of misconduct in which unchecked, unlawful or arbitrary decisions could be made largely because of a consolidation of power under Homolka. He presided over an institution ruled by a “culture of fear,” the investigators found, leaving employees and students alike less likely to express criticism or concerns because of the possibility of reprisals.

The investigators said structural changes were needed if there was any hope of shifting the culture. “As long as institutions are in private hands or even in the hands of an individual, or at any rate within the essential sphere of influence of the person who, in the opinion of the investigators, practices and exemplifies misconduct himself, it is hardly conceivable that the causes of the deficits identified can be remedied,” their report says.

Cohen told JTA he wants to see “real change in the leadership” of all liberal Jewish institutions in Germany, and “an external compliance system set up.”

He said, “I hope to see the institutions Homolka founded take a life of their own, no strings attached.”

Anticipating the report, the Abraham Geiger College had announced its own restructuring plans on Monday, a day after ordaining four new rabbis and two cantors at a ceremony in Berlin.

In a statement, interim director Gabriele Thöne said a new foundation would become the provider of rabbinical training in Potsdam.

Further, Thöne said the “door is open to Zacharias Frankel College” — the Conservative movement seminary also under the umbrella of the School of Jewish Theology at the University of Potsdam —  “to join the new foundation on an equal basis while at the same time maintaining its independence.”

But in a scathing response issued Wednesday, the Conservative seminary said the Geiger College interim administration had not consulted them about the restructuring.

“A partnership between equal parties requires joint preparation, mutual trust, transparency and consensus. All this has been lacking so far, and continues to be lacking,” the statement said.

Signed by Rabbi Bradley Artson, dean of Zacharias Frankel College and the Ziegler School of Rabbinic Studies, the Conservative seminary in Los Angeles among others, the statement also said the preliminary report released Wednesday “confirmed the asymmetrical constellations of power in the two Potsdam rabbinical training colleges.”

Zacharias Frankel College  “was in a state of dependency on the will of one person from the time it was founded in 2013. Our institution was deliberately pushed into invisibility and excluded from communication with funders in Germany,” the statement read in part.

“From the outset, the project of a Masorti rabbinical training in Potsdam was merely a makeshift means of being able to found the School of Jewish Theology [also in 2013] and give it the appearance of representing several denominations, and thus of being pluralistically positioned. Instead, however, the accumulation of power led to a monopolization of non-Orthodox Judaism in one person” – namely, Homolka.

For their part, the government and Jewish funding organizations said in their statement Wednesday that they were “committed to ensuring that there will continue to be both liberal and conservative rabbinical training in Potsdam in the future,” but that the proposals developed so far at the Abraham Geiger College do not meet the requirement of being “a clear cut from the previous structure and a comprehensive new beginning.”

The release of the Central Council-commissioned report was preceded by a volley of statements by lawyers for both parties.

On Monday, the council’s attorneys announced that their preliminary report would come out in two days. On Tuesday, Homolka’s attorneys issued a statement criticizing the impending “sudden” release of the report’s summary, suggesting it reeked of “prejudgment.”

The law firm representing Homolka — Behm Becker Geßner — noted that its client had received “a list of questions with serious accusations” from the council’s attorneys, and that he had responded in writing last Sunday. “Should the result not take into account the meaningful statement of our client, there would be a massive violation of personality rights,” warned the lawyers, who have successfully battled some critical press coverage of Homolka.

The Central Council criticized what it called Homolka’s delay tactics, saying its attorneys had asked Homolka in early September if he would respond to questions but had not gotten any response to questions sent Oct. 19 until late Sunday night, well after multiple previous deadlines. Still, the council confirmed, its investigators would take Homolka’s responses into account.

“This tactic is the main reason why the law firm will not be able to complete the final and detailed report of the investigation by the end of the year,” the Central Council said. “The courage of the numerous victims must not be sacrificed to Homolka’s delay tactics.”

Meanwhile, the Union of Progressive Jews in Germany is to meet next week in Berlin, after a three-month postponement. Board elections will be held for the position of chair, previously held by Homolka.

On Nov. 26, that group published a report from an investigation that it had commissioned, which concluded that there was no proof of abuse of power at Abraham Geiger College.

On Wednesday, a critic within the body, the State Association of Jewish Communities of Lower Saxony, said the Central Council’s commissioned report “supports us in our demand for the resignation of Walter Homolka from all his offices within the Jewish community, which we already made in May.”

And there is dissent within the General Rabbinical Conference, Germany’s liberal rabbinical association, as well. About a dozen members issued a statement in November, breaking from the official, cautious tone, saying that “the abuse of power proven against Rabbi Prof. Dr. Homolka [in the university’s report of Oct. 26] is not compatible with the values of Jewish and general ethics.”

The association, known as ARK, issued a statement at the end of November stating that, despite differences of opinion in their ranks, they join the call for a structural and personal new beginning, as “a chance for the next phase of rabbinical training in Germany.”

https://www.jta.org/2022/12/07/global/prominent-german-rabbi-resigns-from-leadership-roles-as-report-confirms-allegations-against-him?utm_source=JTA_Maropost&utm_campaign=JTA_DB&utm_medium=email&mpweb=1161-51537-25499

And So "It's The Jews" Begins....

 

In a Ukrainian city liberated from Russia, local Jewish leaders are being accused of collaboration

Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Wolff and mayor of Kherson Volodymyr Mykolaienko light Hanukkah candles

 

(JTA) — When Russian troops poured across the Ukrainian border in March, thousands fled from the cities that would be first in their path. But in Kherson, the southern port city with strategic value to the Russians, Rabbi Yosef Itzhak Wolff decided to stay put.

His decision to remain put him in line with the philosophy of his Jewish movement, Chabad-Lubavitch, whose rabbis typically commit to the cities where they are stationed and stay there through thick and thin.

But his decision could also cost him the ability to serve Kherson’s Jews. According to a report this week in The New York Times, Wolff is now in Germany, concerned because some in Kherson accuse him of collaborating with the Russian forces.

Meanwhile, a member of his Jewish community is facing life in prison over his actions during the chaotic early days of the war, according to the New York Times report.

Russia captured Kherson on March 2, and for months, the city suffered a brutal occupation that resulted in hundreds dead and scores more “disappeared” or tortured, according to Human Rights Watch.

Among those living in the occupied city was Wolff, an Israel-born rabbi who arrived in Ukraine nearly 30 years ago, just after the fall of the Soviet Union and Ukraine’s independence. For the past 13 years, he had presided over a Jewish community in Kherson estimated before the war at 8,000 people.

In the early days of the war, Wolff’s work to supply food, medicine and at least some semblance of a joyous Purim to his community was highly publicized.

During one trip, the Times of Israel reported, he dodged bullets shuttling food back to the city from the border with Crimea, where his brother is also a rabbi. In another, according to Chabad.org, he went out to deliver food even as Russian tanks rolled through the town.

“Despite heavy fighting in the streets of Kherson, Rabbi Yosef Wolff did not abandon his community for a moment, remaining in the war-torn city through it all and serving the local population,” Rabbi Motti Seligson, a spokesperson for the Chabad movement, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. He called Wolff a “true hero of the Jewish people and for people of good conscience everywhere.”

Before the Holocaust, Kherson was a major center of Jewish life, with some 26 synagogues, but now, there is only Wolff’s. And before the war, it was like Chabad centers around the world: serving a local community, but also famously welcoming to unfamiliar faces, including foreign visitors.

Opening the doors to newcomers took on added gravity after the war began and Russians streamed into Kherson. For much of the year, it was unclear whether Ukraine would regain control of the city, or whether it would become like Crimea and remain under Russian occupation. But last month, Ukraine liberated Kherson, generating scenes of jubilation — and putting anyone perceived as collaborating with the Russian army under suspicion.

Some of that suspicion landed on Wolff, who had allowed Russian soldiers to pray in his synagogue. The soldiers were Jewish officers who had arrived with armed guards, he told The New York Times.

In the days after liberation, he left Kherson, and Ukraine, for Germany. Now, with efforts to penalize collaborators underway, he told the newspaper that he is not sure when or if he will return.

Among those who remained in Kherson was a prominent member of the Jewish community who is now being prosecuted for his choices amid the messy reality of occupation. Karamalikov held the prisoner in a utility closet in his home for a night, before ultimately making the decision to return him to the Russian forces unharmed.

Illia Karamalikov, a nightclub owner and member of Kherson’s city council, was close to Wolff, frequently allowing Chabad to use his nightclub’s space for events, the rabbi told The New York Times.

In the early days of the occupation, Kherson descended into a state of lawlessness. The Ukrainian civil administration fled ahead of the Russian forces and, after conquering the city without much resistance, Russia took little responsibility for its administration, instead sending soldiers on to other targets such as neighboring regions of Odessa, Mykolaiv, Kryvyi Rih — Ukrainian president Voldymyr Zelensky’s hometown — and ultimately, Kyiv.

Looting was rampant, and cut off from power and supply lines, the thousands of people who remained in the city faced a real risk of starvation.

It was locals who managed to bring back some semblance of order. Karamalikov helped organize a 1,200-strong community patrol to enforce curfews and watch for looters.

 It was in that role, according to the New York Times report, that he found himself face to face with a lost and confused Russian pilot, whom his men had taken into captivity.

That earned him a 12-page indictment from Ukraine, as he ran afoul of new laws enacted at the outbreak of the war that stipulate that “cooperation with the aggressor state, its armed formations, or its occupation administration” are punishable as acts of collaboration under Ukraine’s criminal code. 

Many of those who spoke to The New York Times said the laws don’t account for the reality of living under occupation.

“All these people who ran away are judging us,” Wolff told the newspaper. “These are cruel times.”

Through returning the soldier, Karamalikov allegedly “organized the further participation of a Russian serviceman in aggression against Ukraine,” according to his indictment.

But many in Kherson are not sure what other option they had. Karamalikov’s community watch organization was a volunteer and non-military force whose limited power involved pressing looters into doing community service. To have harmed the soldier would have made them combatants against Russia.

“We wondered later: Should we have killed the soldier and kept it secret?” one of Karamalikov’s watchmen, Andriy Skvortsov told The New York Times. “But I’ve decided no, that wouldn’t have been good.”

“With a life in his hands, I can’t imagine Illia ever killing anyone,” Wolff told the newspaper. “What he did was the most humane decision he could make.”

 

https://www.jta.org/2022/12/07/global/with-russian-troops-ousted-from-kherson-local-jewish-leaders-find-themselves-accused-of-collaboration?utm_source=JTA_Maropost&utm_campaign=JTA_DB&utm_medium=email&mpweb=1161-51477-462090

A has-been, a never-been, and a never-will-been walk into a bar…Hosted by one of the biggest degenerates in the last 100 years...

 

 "As he has done with just about every other issue, former President Donald Trump is sucking the oxygen out of any discussion on the antisemitism of rap star/fashion mogul Kanye West and his far-right allies. Rather than express remorse for his unfathomable dinner meeting at Mar-a-Lago with West, Holocaust-denier Nick Fuentes and fellow alt-right hater Milo Yiannopoulos, he characteristically refused to apologize.

The event, which provided the trio with publicity and a degree of legitimacy in circles where his whims are treated as indisputably rational, was itself deeply problematic. It was made worse, however, by the fact that the focus of the debate it engendered about the rising tide of antisemitism turned into one about Trump himself."

*

Ye x Milo x Fuentes

A has-been, a never-been, and a never-will-been walk into a bar…

Stop me if you've ever heard this one before:

Fueled by his hatred of Jews, one of the most recognizable black man of his era decided to forge an alliance with one of its most high-profile white nationalist, or, at the very least, the one whose juvenile stunts attract the most attention. One of the men behind the scenes who worked on arranging the meeting is himself Jewish, though he has long repudiated his heritage, is known to have engaged in antisemitism, as well as for being a grifter, and is distrusted by many in the movement. On the other hand, he has shown an uncanny ability to ingratiate himself with its leaders and keep the spotlight on himself. All of this revolving around grand political ambitions on both sides.

Obviously, I'm referring to the infamous 1961 entente of George Lincoln Rockwell, Malcolm X, and Daniel Burros which culminated in years of friendly relationships between the American Nazi Party and the Nation of Islam.

On June 25th, 1961, ten members of the American Nazi Party quietly arrived at the Nation of Islam rally in Washington, DC. In the Uline arena, they were surrounded by more than 8000 members of the Nation of Islam. They were not there to disrupt, attack the attendants, to protest the speech; instead, they were front-row guests. That night, Elijah Muhammad had called in sick, so Malcolm X took the stage to give the keynote speech in his stead. Rockwell contributed $20 to the cause and, while having his picture snapped by Jewish photographer Eve Arnold, he barked at her, 'I'll make a bar of soap out of you.' (She answered, "As long as it isn't a lampshade”). 

At first glance, it would seem highly bizarre that members of the American Nazi Party, in full regalia and occasionally Sieg Heiling, would be tolerated amongst the Black Nationalist movement. Still, it more than made sense once you realized that they shared the same antisemitism and views on racial separatism. There was also a historical precedent; the units described as the most vicious, brutal, and antisemitic of the SS were the 13th Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Handschar, composed almost entirely of Muslims.

Eight months after their first public meeting, George Lincoln Rockwell addressed more than 12,000 black audience members at the Chicago International Amphitheatre, urging them to ally with Nazis to be truly uplifted. "You know we call you niggers," he addressed the crowd. "But wouldn't you rather be confronted by honest white men who tell you to your face what the others all say behind your back?". He later praised the Nation of Islam leader Elijah Muhammad as the 'Adolf Hitler of the black man.'

Black And White Don’t Always Make Gray

It might be ludicrous to think that a White and Black Nationalists alliance might work, even for a short time. Yet they managed to create a political symbiosis that held firm, at least until the death of Elijah Muhammad in 1975. Though the alliance is not today quite what it was back then, it is well known that Louis Farrakhan and Tom Metzger, of White Aryan Resistance fame, have formed a friendship and alliance of their own.

Though it's true that in the late 1950s the American Nazi Party and Klan had fought Black Nationalists through different (and often violent) means, by 1960 they had a ceasefire, and by 1962 worked hand in hand. Just days before his death at the hand of Nation of Islam shooters, Malcom X said he had personally brokered a truce between the two organizations and that "from this day forward the Klan had never interfered with the Black Muslim movement in the South."

It was not a fake alliance or purely practical, either. Rockwell genuinely admired Elijah Muhammad and his followers, declaring that they were "admirable human beings in spite of their color." He also wanted to launch a joint 'Back to Africa' speaking tour with Elijah Muhammad. He wrote to his followers, "Can you imagine a rally of the American Nazis in Union Square, protected from Jewish hecklers by a solid phalanx of Elijah Muhammad's stalwart black stormtroopers?" In today's alt-right lingo, he might as well have called them based black men and offered them a place on their streaming platform. 

The resemblances don't stop there. In fact, the antics of the Goyim Defense League or the Atomwaffens of today are very similar to the ANP antics of yesterday. Rockwell and his boys made a point of being juvenile and crass, publishing material such as The Diary of Anne Fink mocking the Holocaust, had a Volkswagen van they dubbed 'The Hate Bus,' wore rubber noses and Groucho Marx glasses during protests to mock Jews. Rockwell even attempted to stop Martin Luther King Jr.'s 'I Have a Dream' speech with 10,000 pro-segregationist protesters, although ultimately only 90 showed up, and Rockwell couldn't even obtain a permit for his protest. 

Daniel Burros was a crucial man in Rockwell's entourage, his right-hand man until a political disagreement drove him to quit the ANP and eventually join the Klan, becoming the leader of its New York chapter. Daniel was also a (not-so-)nice Jewish boy from Queens. He had held the title of 'extermination planner' after they took over the government "by 1972 at the latest," according to Rockwell. In his youth, Danny had attended the Talmud Torah of Richmond Hills, and this is where he had celebrated his bar mitzvah surrounded by friends, family and others in the community. A star pupil, brilliant in his studies, the Rabbis believed he would join their ranks one day. Yet he became radicalized until hatred consumed his life down a few years later.

Rockwell adored Danny while the others in the movement looked at him askew. He had bizarre ideas, like suggesting that Rockwell and his stormtroopers parachute over New Jersey, waving Nazi flags, and routinely picketed the White House on his own, dressed in full Nazi uniform. Burros also loved to bring Jewish culinary treats like knishes to Nazi meetings, but somehow they only thought of him as quirky as a result but did not suspect him of being Jewish.

Once he became known as the NYS Grand Dragon of the KKK, however, someone leaked his Jewish background to the former newspaper of record, the Times, who published an article entitled 'State Klan Leader Hides Secret of Jewish Origins' on October 31st, 1965. Almost immediately after seeing the headline, he returned to the friend's apartment where he had been staying and shot himself to death.

Danny, standing at the very far right…

His Jewishness was apparently no problem to Rockwell, who praised him in his death and railed about how his Jewish genes had caused his "unfortunate Jewish psychosis." Honoring his "based black men" and "based Jewish men," George Lincoln Rockwell was indeed the roadmap to today's Alt-Right leaders like Nick Fuentes.

This is the Remix

Today, we may be witness history in the making, or at the very least, a fascinating cover. One of the most influential black men of his era has joined forces with the most prominent Gen Z white supremacist of his generation, and there's a very shrewd and quirky Jewish man lurking in the background.

The Torah explains that there's a concept of ירידת הדורות, the decline of generations. It means, colloquially, that every successive generation is weaker than the one previously. Weaker physically, mentally, spiritually, and intellectually. When comparing the trio of Kanye West, Nick Fuentes, and Milo Yannopolous to Malcolm X, George Lincoln Rockwell, and Daniel Burros, one must bow to the eternality and exactitude of the Torah’s truth. It also spells some excellent news for Jews.

While some might regard Kanye as a musical genius, no one would consider him a thought leader. At best, his usefulness for the Farrakhans of this world is to serve as a spokesperson, and considering how fickle he has been, we can always hope he will simply have another 'epiphany' and move to a new subject very soon or that he will have a post-Mecca Malcolm X-type change of heart. To this day, many still advocate and push for Malcolm X's visions for the world. The one before his trip to Mecca and the one afterward. Either way, his words still resonate. In 60 years, it's doubtful even Kanye's albums still will.

Nick Fuentes, while he might undoubtedly be the public face of white supremacy in his generation, is unlikely to gain any real traction with the rest of his own movement, much less the population at large. His problems are threefold: his Mexican origins, his traditional catholicism, and his proclivities. Despite his Holocaust denial and zany rants, the fact is that Nick will forever be seen as a profoundly self-hating homosexual non-white by other white nationalists, and if Fuentes can't convince the people of his own movement that he should lead them, how could he ever convince a significant portion of the population? George Lincoln Rockwall was 6'3", had a square Jaw, was the descendent of a long WASP bloodline, and was a decorated Navy veteran. He still ended a failure who never attracted more than a fringe following. At 5'6", Nick will literally never even be able to fill Rockwell's shoes, much less push the movement further. 

No one would claim that Kanye West's new campaign manager Milo Yannopopoulos is stupid. He might not have a 150 IQ like Burros reportedly had, but there's no denying he has the uncanny ability to rise up every time people think he's down for the count. And once this new venture inevitably fails, he will most likely be around long after Kanye and Fuentes inevitably fade into obscurity. He probably sees himself as the puppetmaster; seeing as he towers both intellectually and physically, it's not hard to see why. But what made Daniel Burros operate so successfully is precisely what Milo lacks: obscurity and anonymity. When news of Danny's Jewishness became public, he knew it was over for him. Milo might have more than nine lives, but there's the issue of diminishing returns. With so many scandals and a history of leaking both to both press and alphabet agencies, who is still willing to trust him? [Update: Milo lied about being Jewish]

So, here we have three self-appointed leaders, but the question remains: Is there going to be a movement for them to lead?

History never repeats itself, but it does often rhyme

There is truly nothing new under the sun, and it really does feel like history is close to, but not quite, repeating itself. The only difference is that today’s rhymes are set to an overproduced beat.

Though I might be wrong, I have come to believe that antisemitism is not truly on the rise. Rather:

1. The proliferation of social media is simply amplifying the voices of those who would have otherwise kept their comments to themselves or for their close friends.

2. The current polarization of society is making it more acceptable to say out loud what people already believed but kept quiet about.

Are we really supposed to think that people liked Jews, were more tolerant, and did not hold the same kind of views about us in the 60s, 70s, or 80s? That the 90s or 00s were such a golden age of tolerance, but somehow antisemitism just re-appeared out of nowhere?

The counterpoint to this would be to say, ‘What about the historical hate crime rates in New York City? Jews are being assaulted in record numbers!’ To which I ask: Are Jews being assaulted in record numbers because antisemitism is rising, or is it because the atmosphere of lawlessness and cashless bail is empowering antisemites to act on their impulses, whereas in the days of law and order ushered by the Giuliani administration, they knew there would be swift consequences? In the 60s and then in the 80s, when lawlessness in New York was at its worst, the Maccabees and the JDL were formed because of the many violent assaults against Jews being committed. No such group exists today (yet, at least).

It’s true that thanks to social media, antisemites can spread their message of hate further and to a newer audience, but aren’t you required to at least be predisposed to hate a particular group to fall for it? Isn’t that precisely what the town square, the church pews, and taverns of yesteryear were for? People in Petersburg did not need memes from a guy in Santa Cruz to hate Jews 500 years ago; they had plenty of homegrown ways to develop their hatred.

Looking back at history, and witnessing our enemies' low quality, there is much to rejoice. From mediocrity rarely comes anything but more of the same. If the long alliance between the American Nazi Party and Nation of Islam fizzled out into nothingness, we have no reason to assume anything will come out of its poor contemporary repeat. We still have to deal with the reality of antisemitic attacks and comments, but knowing that things aren't much worse or different than they have been in the past few decades can at least give us hope that things are not about to get much worse, either.

So Where Do We Stand?

We have to comfort ourselves with the words of our Sages, realize that there is G-d in this world, and that ultimately we see throughout our history what happened to our enemies. Case in point:

• Malcolm X was shot to death in 1965.

• Daniel Burros shot himself to death in 1965.

• George Lincoln Rockwell was shot to death in 1967.

Hillel's maxim about this in the 60s rings as true as ever. Sure, it was the 60s BCE, but eternally true nonetheless.

Pirke Avot 2:6

אַף הוּא רָאָה גֻּלְגֹּֽלֶת אַחַת שֶׁצָּֽפָה עַל פְּנֵי הַמָּֽיִם, אָמַר לָהּ: עַל דְּאַטֵּפְתְּ אַטְּפוּךְ, וְסוֹף מְטַיְפָֽיִךְ יְטוּפוּן.

[Hillel] also saw a skull floating upon the water. Said he to it: Because you drowned others, you were drowned; and those who drowned you, will themselves be drowned.

The Rambam, commenting on this, wrote

There are consequences to our actions — consequences that reflect those actions. If you commit murder and drown others in a river to hide your crime, you will receive your punishment in the form of your crime. If you invent an unjust thing to benefit yourself at the expense of others, that unjust thing will ultimately be used against you. On the positive side, if you introduce something that benefits others, that thing will ultimately come to benefit you as well. It is called: midah k'neged midah — measure for measure.

Based on a long Rabbinical tradition, the Arizal explained that the skull Hillel saw floating was Pharoh's. The second part of his statement was addressed to the Jewish people, that we would ultimately see all of the Jewish people's enemies and persecutors drowned. 

The Lubavitcher Rebbe, commenting on this statement of the Arizal, declared that these words were meant to comfort the tired souls of the exiled Jew, to the soul of one who feels that he or she is up against an insurmountable challenge, an impenetrable cloud of darkness. Much like the times we live in right now. 

Hillel, the great leader of Israel, turns to this person and says: "If Pharaoh, the embodiment of evil, the man who cast fear even into the heart of Moses, so much so that G‑d had to reassure him and say, 'Come to Pharaoh — I will accompany you,' ended up drowned in a river, certainly all the Pharaohs of history, all the great serpents that tried and will try to drown you through physical and spiritual persecution —they will be drowned as well. For evil has no leg to stand on. Like smoke, it obscures our vision for a time but must ultimately disappear." - The Rebbe

• Pharoah died, yet we survived.

• Haman died, yet we survived.

• Hitler died, yet we survived.

• Stalin died, yet we survived.

• Nasser, Assad, Saddam, Arafat, and most of the world leaders who have tried to kill us since 1948 have died, yet we thrive. 

All of our greatest persecutors died, and we are still here. And there is still time for the Kanyes, Fuentes, and Milos of this world to make their choice: are you going to give up the baseless hatred rotting your heart, or are you gonna let it consume you until it drowns you? 

Just know that, whatever you choose, we will survive and we will thrive.

https://magenyehudi.substack.com/p/ye-x-milo-x-fuentes

We Want Moshiach Now Before All H Breaks Loose! --- Eliezer Kornhauser, the founder and acting principal of the small private school Cheder Levi Yitzchok, wrote to the parents on Monday that their children’s continued presence at the school was “untenable”. “As of Monday 5th December, your children are no longer welcome to attend the school

Students expelled after parents refuse to keep quiet on child sex abuse claims

December 6, 2022 — 7.26pm

Several siblings have been expelled from a faith-based school in St Kilda because their parents refused to sign a memorandum of understanding that limited who they could talk to about the alleged sexual abuse of their children.

The parents expressed concerns last month when the school proposed reintegrating a student who had been the subject of a police investigation and complaints of sexual abuse towards other, younger students.

Families of students at Cheder Levi Yitzchok school in St Kilda have been counselled over a string of alleged sexual abuse incidents.Credit:Eddie Jim

 

Eliezer Kornhauser, the founder and acting principal of the small private school Cheder Levi Yitzchok, wrote to the parents on Monday that their children’s continued presence at the school was “untenable”.

“As of Monday 5th December, your children are no longer welcome to attend the school,” he said.

The students might be welcomed back next year, “but we would need to see clear evidence of a change in your mindset, leading to a very different set of behaviours on your part”, he wrote.

Kornhauser had insisted that the parents sign an MOU if they wanted their children to remain at the school, which caters to Melbourne’s small Jewish ultra-Orthodox Chabad movement.

Cheder Levi Yitzchok president and acting principal Eliezer Kornhauser. Credit:Pat Scala

 

The MOU said the parents should air their concerns with school leadership or the authorities but refrain from speaking with other school staff, parents, advocacy groups or the media.

“We are imploring you, in the interests of maintaining our relationship, to follow our guidelines and sign the contract and return it immediately,” Kornhauser wrote to the family last month.

“If you choose another course – which of course you are at liberty to do – you cannot maintain your relationship with our school.”

The alleged sexual abuse did not take place at the school but at the Yeshivah Centre, a religious centre linked with the school, in neighbouring St Kilda East.

The school regulator, the Victorian Registration and Qualifications Authority, recently launched a review of the school’s adherence to child safety standards.

VoicSA, an advocacy group addressing Jewish child sex abuse, was named in the MOU as one organisation the parents should refrain from communicating with about allegations or complaints about the school or its students.

VoicSA spokesman Phillip Weinberg said the group had asked the regulator to suspend the school’s registration “due to immediate concerns for the safety of children”.

Related Article

Parents told the best protection is prayer after school child-sex abuse claims

“Attempts to silence victims/survivors of child sexual abuse in the interests of protecting the reputation of an institution are abhorrent, incompatible with the minimum standards of a registered school and contrary to Jewish law,” Weinberg said.

On Tuesday, Kornhauser wrote an “open letter to the Jewish community”, saying the school had been subjected to an inaccurate and defamatory campaign of slander by VoicSA.

“Perhaps the most slanderous of all is the persistent narrative that in light of Jewish law, the school does not adhere to its mandatory reporting requirements, and indeed ostracises parents if they choose to make reports to the authorities,” he said.

“The school decries even one single act of sexual or other abuse against a child.”

Last month, Kornhauser told the school’s parents to pray to protect their children from abuse after they voiced concerns about sexual abuse allegations.

If you or anyone you know needs support, you can contact the National Sexual Assault, Domestic and Family Violence Counselling Service on 1800RESPECT (1800 737 732) or Kidshelpline on 1800 55 1800.

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/students-expelled-after-parents-refuse-to-keep-quiet-on-child-sex-abuse-claims-20221206-p5c46k.html

Man Bites Dog!

 

 Aaron Twersky Mouthes Off On Agudah:

https://vinnews.com/2022/12/04/watch-during-convention-panel-rabbi-dr-ahron-twersky-says-chassidim-no-longer-represented-by-agudah/

Call Jeff Herman - רופ דזשעף - תתקשר לג'ף - llamar a Jeff - 28 Days Until The CVA Extension Expires !

California Child
Victims Act

HOME / California Child Victims Act

Child sexual assault is a tragic reality affecting our society. In recent years, many states have enacted legislation to address the injustices that childhood sexual assault victims face due to the rigid restrictions of sex abuse statutes of limitations. The California Child Victims Act is changing previous time limits to allow more child sexual abuse victims to bring both civil and criminal lawsuits at any age by hiring a California child sex abuse lawyer, no matter when the abuse happened, to finally get justice and recover compensation for their physical injuries and ongoing emotional harm.

 

REMAINING WINDOW TO FILE A CLAIM IN CALIFORNIA

28  Days

• REMAINING WINDOW TO FILE A CLAIM IN CALIFORNIA
• CALIFORNIA CHILD VICTIMS ACT: JUSTICE FOR SURVIVORS
• WHAT IS THE CALIFORNIA CHILD VICTIMS ACT?
• WHY DO VICTIMS WAIT TO COME FORWARD ABOUT THEIR SEXUAL ABUSE?
• HERMAN LAW DISCUSSES THE REASON MANY VICTIMS WAIT TO COME FORWARD
• WHAT CONSTITUTES CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT? DO I HAVE A VALID CLAIM?
• WHO CAN I CHARGE OR SUE THROUGH THE CALIFORNIA CHILD VICTIMS ACT?
• WHAT PENALTIES CAN MY ABUSER FACE?
• HOW LONG AFTER AN ASSAULT DO I HAVE TO FILE IN CALIFORNIA? IS IT TOO LATE FOR ME TO FILE?
• HOW DO I FILE A CLAIM AS A CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT SURVIVOR?
• HOW CAN A CALIFORNIA SEX ABUSE LAWYER HELP ME AS A SURVIVOR?
•  

 

CALIFORNIA CHILD VICTIMS ACT: JUSTICE FOR SURVIVORS

In 2019, legislators passed the California Child Victims Act (CA AB-218) in California, which took effect on January 1, 2020. This important legislative Act extends the statute of limitations for California child sexual abuse survivors reaching adulthood to initiate a claim against their abusers.

Before January 2020, the law required a survivor of childhood sexual assault to file a lawsuit within three years from the date they discovered or reasonably should have discovered that the sexual abuse resulted in their subsequent psychological injury or illness. The primary restrictive factor linked to the state’s statute of limitations on sex abuse claims barred a child sex abuse survivor from initiating a suit after their 26th birthday.

Studies show that most survivors only begin to reveal their experience with childhood sexual abuse when they reach the age of 52, more than two and a half decades after the arbitrary cutoff of 26. This research shows that many child sexual abuse victims in California could not previously seek justice against both their abusers and the complicit organizations that allowed their abuse to happen.

A combination of egregious injustices against children, including the Larry Nassar imprisonment, the Boy Scouts of America sex abuse scandal, and the numerous sexual assault allegations against the Catholic Church, California legislators recognized that California sexual assault laws needed to change. When California Governor Jerry Brown vetoed SB 131, legislators realized the grave disparity in the former law, essentially requiring victims to bring a lawsuit before they reasonably knew about or could acknowledge their harm.

Perceiving these injustices, the California Legislature adopted AB 218 to encourage child sex abuse survivors to come forward and speak up about their abuse despite the same taking place several years ago. Advocates pushing for these necessary legal changes celebrate, as victims can finally seek compensation and justice against their abusers and the organizations that allowed the abuse to happen to not only themselves but the hundreds of thousands of victims living in the State of California.

File a Claim under the California Child Victims Act

WHAT IS THE CALIFORNIA CHILD VICTIMS ACT?

The California Child Victims Act widens the definition of childhood sexual abuse, compared to the previous law, to include sexual assault. This more broad definition increases the scope of sexual offenses against a minor that are actionable, ultimately helping a child sexual abuse victim.

The Act also extends the time limit to the later of twenty-two years after the minor’s 18th birthday, or within five years of the date the child sex abuse victim discovered their psychological injury that took place after adulthood resulting from the childhood sexual assault.

Most victims of childhood sexual assault may now file a civil suit, or a prosecutor may bring criminal charges against their abuser or a responsible entity. These responsible entities can include organizations where the abuse happened, such as the Catholic Church, a foster care home, the Boy Scouts, a school, a daycare center, or any other organization allowing abusers access to children.

The child sex abuse victim needs to initiate their claim within five years of discovering the causal link between the childhood assault and their resulting psychological illness continuing into adulthood or before the victim turns 40. This change increases the time to file a lawsuit by fourteen years, up from the previously held law indicating the victim only had until they turned 26 to bring a claim.

Additionally, the California AB 218 provides a noteworthy three-year look back window starting January 1, 2020, and ending December 31, 2022. During this time, all childhood sexual assault victims in California can start a civil action for money damages no matter how long ago their abuse occurred.

After the expiry of the look back window, and if the plaintiff files a civil lawsuit at or after the age of 40, the law requires the plaintiff’s therapist and attorney to file certificates of merit stating: “the attorney has reviewed the facts of the case, consulted with at least one mental health practitioner who the attorney reasonably believes is knowledgeable of the relevant facts and issues involved in the particular action, and concluded on the basis of that review and consultation that there is reasonable and meritorious cause for the filing of the action.”

For example, a 52-year-old survivor now has until December 2022 to file suit against their abuser. This look back window and related legislation is an incredible win for child sexual assault victims in California. If someone experienced abuse decades ago, they can now file a civil lawsuit and work toward achieving closure. This new prolonged time limit runs out on December 31, 2022, so it’s essential to speak with a law firm knowledgeable about sexual assault cases to learn how you can pursue legal action.

The Act also provides for situations potentially entitling a victim to obtain up to triple the number of damages (also known as “treble damages”) against a defendant and an entity or the organizations or supervisors aware of the abuse and participating in a cover-up of a minor’s sexual assault. By definition, a cover-up is “a concerted effort to hide evidence related to child sexual assault.”

You can access the full text of the California Child Victims Act AB 218 here.

WHY DO VICTIMS WAIT TO COME FORWARD
ABOUT THEIR SEXUAL ABUSE?

The previous statute of limitations failed to recognize the short- and long-term mental and emotional trauma that child sexual abuse victims endure from the abuse. This trauma often prevents the victim from being able to come forward to talk about or report the abuse. The previous law thereby failed to provide the victims with a reasonable opportunity to press charges or file civil lawsuits against their abusers and the institutions that allowed the abuse.

There are several reasons why survivors are reluctant to reveal information about their abuse. The previous sexual assault statute of limitations made it extremely difficult for victims to introduce their claims because they often don’t realize the psychological effects of their abuse until much later. Reasons why victims wait so long to come forward include:

• Ninety percent of victims are abused by a person they or their family know, making it difficult for the child to come forward, as they either don’t realize that the abuse is wrong or they fear what will happen if they tell someone. They might also be embarrassed or believe it’s their fault.
• The abuser usually gives the child special attention or gifts to gain the child’s trust.
• They believe it’s their fault, and they could’ve done something to stop the abuse or fought harder.
• They feel shame or do not want to relive the abuse.
• They fear they will get in trouble.
• They do not tell anyone to protect their loved ones, attempting to avoid inflicting pain on their parents or other family members.
• They fear no one will believe them.
• If the perpetrator is an admired community member, the child sexual abuse victim fears no one will believe them, or people will be angry with them.
• The shock of the experience may stun them into silence, and they do everything they can just to carry on
• The perpetrator is likely to make threats of blackmail or violence or instruct the victim not to tell anyone else.
• They don’t understand that the abuse was wrong.

Shame and self-blame often accompany each of these reasons for a child sex abuse victim’s silence. It is never the victim’s fault, but this tendency to blame themselves or feel guilty is all too common. Studies show that alongside the stigma, shame, and guilt, family loyalty is a significant factor that deters victims from speaking up when the offender is someone attached to a family member.

 

CONTACT HERMAN LAW AT https://hermanlaw.com/california-child-victims-act/1-800-686-9921.

NATIONWIDE HELP IS AVAILABLE & ALL CALLS ARE STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL.

4001 W Alameda Ave
Suite 208
Burbank, CA 91505

Local: 310-312-8218

Toll-Free: 1-800-686-9921

Map

21051 WARNER CENTER LANE, SUITE 250
WOODLAND HILLS, CA 91367

Local: 310-312-8218

Toll-Free: 1-800-686-9921

Map

434 W. 33rd ST.
PENTHOUSE
NEW YORK, NY 10001

Local: 212-390-0100

Toll-Free: 1-800-686-9921

Map

1800 N. MILITARY TRAIL
SUITE 160
BOCA RATON, FL 33431

Local: 305-931-2200

Toll-Free: 1-800-686-9921