Rome Chief Rabbi decides Not to join the Pope's Minyan with Peres and Abbas

 

It seems that Peres only likes to daven with "Galachim" and terrorists, but the Chief Rabbi of Rome will only daven with other Jews.

 



 At the interfaith prayer meeting held Sunday at the Vatican with Pope Francis, Shimon Peres and Mahmoud Abbas, one Italian religious figure was noticeably absent – Riccardo Di Segni, Rome’s chief rabbi.

Di Segni had been invited to the prayer meeting but did not attend, stating he had “other commitments” to attend according to reports Haaretz

Di Segni has never been a strong proponent of Catholic/Jewish dialogue. In an interview with Haaretz last month, he said, “from the theological point of view,” Catholics and Jews “have nothing to discuss,” but does support what he calls “good neighborly relations.”

The June edition of Pagine Ebraiche – a Jewish monthly magazine – published another interview given by Di Segni where he criticized the interfaith prayer and described it as, “puzzling and even dangerous.”

Il Foglio, a right-wing daily paper with a conservative Catholic perspective, published another interview with Di Segni in which he stated that if he hadn’t already had other plans to attend to, he would have attended “as a mere observer” and made it clear that Pope Francis did not invite him to the session, but Shimon Peres did.

Not all Italian rabbis agree with De Segni. Florence’s chief rabbi, Dr. Joseph Levi, supports the pope’s efforts to build interfaith dialogue, and attended Sunday’s prayer meeting. The president of Italy’s Rabbinic Assembly, Giuseppe Momigliano, also supported the event.
Renzo Gattegna, president of the Comunità Ebraiche Italiane, the national umbrella organization of Italian Jewry, and leader of Rome’s Jewish Community, Riccardo Pacifici, also attended.

Lady Rebbe, Nadverdner Einikel, Will be a Contestant on "Jeopardy" game Show

Nu Nu, looks like she followed the tradition of her Nadverner Zaidis staying up all Shevuois night, but I'll guess that she was probably studying for the show, Jeopardy. 
I'm not certain, but it seems that  she ate alot of Kreplach, but I won't judge her.

Sari Laufer isn’t allowed to say how well she did on the TV quiz show “Jeopardy” until the first episode featuring her airs Wednesday night June 11.

One thing the 35-year-old Reform rabbi will share, however, is that she was “really determined” to answer correctly the one Jewish question that arose during the game.
“No matter how I did, I didn’t want to be embarrassed, particularly not on a question that my congregants would be like, ‘She doesn’t know that?” she said.

The associate rabbi at Manhattan’s Congregation Rodeph Sholom, Laufer is not the first rabbi — or even the first female one — to appear on the 30-year-old quiz show. In 2011, Rabbi Joyce Newmark, a Conservative rabbi who lives in Teaneck, N.J., won $29,000 on the show.

But Laufer had long dreamed of going on the show, which she grew up watching with her grandmother, an ardent “Jeopardy” fan. She first auditioned for the show as an undergrad at Northwestern University. As a rabbinical student at Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion’s Los Angeles campus, she made it all the way to the contestant pool but was never called to tape a show.
Last year, while pregnant with her first child, Laufer got an email from “Jeopardy” inviting her to an in-person interview on the Upper West Side. Again, she made it to the contestant pool, meaning that she could be called any time in the next 18 months.
“I literally forgot about it,” she said, noting that the months after her interview were consumed with becoming a mother (her son Jacob is now 8 months old), closely followed by the loss of her “Jeopardy”-loving grandmother in December.

Because it happened in year marked by critical life events, Laufer said she was able to put the show in perspective and, instead of feeling pressured to win, could relax and enjoy herself.
“I was able to be there and feel like my grandmother was with me,” she said.

Did her rabbinical training help on the show?
“I think more than anything, I’m just totally comfortable in front of a crowd,” she said. “Some people, when they get in there with the lights and microphone, they get overwhelmed. That didn’t faze me.”
“Had I gotten one of those Hebrew Bible categories, it would have been fantastic,” she added.

 

 

Rabbonim attempt to put Lady "Therapist" out of business in Boro-Park

The truth is that this lady (we will not publish her name) calls herself a "mentor". 
But in this poster, the signed Rabbonim say, that no one should consult her because, a) she has no credentials and b) she is "undermining chinuch".

Question: Why was it ok for Weberman, the convicted rapist to be called by Satmar a "therapist" and they defended him, saying that he  was a "therapist" even though he had a zero credentials, but it is not ok for her to be a "therapist" when she has the same credentials as Weberman!

How much "undermining chinuch" did Weberman do when he burned his victims' stomach for his own sadistical desires?

Here Are The Two Multi-Million Dollar Mansions Hillary Says She “Struggled” To Pay Mortgage On

 they purchased this $2.85 million mansion on Embassy Row in Washington D.C. The home has 5 bedrooms and 6 baths.

They bought this $1.7 million mansion in Chappaqua, NY so Hillary could claim residence in the state ahead of her 2000 Senate campaign.

In an interview with Diane Sawyer,

Hillary Clinton claimed that after the White House their family “struggled..to piece together the resources for mortgages, for houses.” 

The “we struggled to get by” defense from a multi-millionaire might be tough to swallow for Americans actually struggling to pay their mortgage. Hillary, after-all, left the White House having spent 20 years living in gratis government mansions in Little Rock and Washington D.C.

Additionally, lets not forget that Bill Clinton’s annual salary was $200,000/year as President and he was able to cash-in on a $50,000 expense account. The Clintons made roughly FOUR times what

After leaving the White House, the Clintons bought two multi-million dollar mansions the average American made and “struggled to get by.”

Frum Israeli Meshiginers Put Mechitza in Elevator!

After Israel’s Supreme Court declared mehadrin buses illegal, we are introduced to mehadrin elevators.

The ארמונות חן simcha hall in Givat Shaul, Yerushalayim, has set up a mehadrin elevator divided by a curtain that separates men and women in the elevator.

The elevator is optional, for guests who wish to offer this new mehadrin service. A nylon curtain is placed in the elevator, permitting men and women to ride without seeking one another, in theory at least.

Hall owner Yosef Cohen told Walla News that on the day of one’s chupah, many wish to be especially careful regarding shmiras einayim and this is just another way of assisting them, nothing more.
Cohen adds that one hall in Bnei Brak has two elevators, one for men and a second for women but he purchased the hall, which only has one elevator so this is the solution for those wishing it. When asked what he has to say to the critics, Cohen questions why anyone finds this bothersome since it is only used upon request of a bal simcha.

How Jews Were Expelled From Arab Lands, Told by a Pro-Palestinian !

(Haaretz) — Nathan Weinstock hadn’t planned to write a book about the Jews of Arab lands. But when he looked for information about the modern history of Moroccan or Iraqi Jewry, he was surprised to discover that there was no book in French that told the story of the elimination of the Jewish communities in the Middle East and North Africa in the mid-20th century.
“In the end,” he says, “I decided to write it myself.”

One of the surprising discoveries he made was about the powerful bond with their roots felt by many of the roughly 1 million Jews in North Africa and the Middle East who left their homes in the decade after the creation of Israel.

“The story I knew,” Weinstock relates in a Skype interview from his home in Nice, in the south of France, “was that the Jews were happy to leave the Arab countries the moment they were given the opportunity to do so.
We were not told anything about the Jews’ deep connection with Arab culture, for example. It was only later that I learned that Jewish writers were the foundation of Iraqi literature. And that in mid-19th-century Egypt, the man who invented the nationalist slogan ‘Egypt for the Egyptians,’ and was known as ‘the Egyptian Molière,’ was a Jew named Jacob Sanua.

“In the course of my research,” he continues, “I found out that the story we had been told –
that the Jews left the Arab countries because they were Zionists – was for the most part wrong.
True, they had an affinity for the Land of Israel – that is certainly correct – but the organized Zionist movement was very weak in the Arab countries.
The great mass of Jews left under duress. They were expelled. They were subjected to such enormous pressure that they had no choice but to leave.”

Weinstock, a self-taught historian, now in his 70s, who previously published studies about the Bund movement in Eastern Europe and Yiddish literature, decided to assume the task of chronicling the expulsion of the Jews from the Arab countries.

The result is a book that was published in France in 2008 as “Une si longue présence: Comment le monde arabe a perdu ses Juifs, 1947-1967” (“A Very Long Presence: How the Arab World Lost Its Jews, 1947-1967)” and has now appeared in Hebrew (Babel Books; translated by Hagit Bat-Ada).

This is a very thorough, detailed, interesting and persuasive book, with more than 900 footnotes, and it is one of the first to deal in this context with the Jewish minority in Ottoman Palestine.

Weinstock has mostly relied on secondary sources, but has also used some primary sources in French from the archives of the Alliance Israelite Universelle in Paris, for example.
What makes Weinstock’s decision to write about the Jews’ expulsion from the Arab world especially surprising is his own political biography:

He was one of the leading figures in the anti-Zionist left in France during the 1960s and ‘70s. From viewing Israel and Zionism as a colonial project aimed at dispossessing the Palestinians, Weinstock underwent a dramatic conceptual upheaval that led him to address a painful and rarely discussed aspect of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

“This book is the story of a tragedy,” he writes in a special introduction to the Hebrew edition, “of the uprooting of hundreds of thousands of Mizrahi Jews, who were torn cruelly from their homes and homelands.
Whole communities of Jews, who had always resided in the heart of the Arab-Muslim world, underwent expulsion, persecution and malicious liquidations… Nevertheless, this drama remains unknown and it has been denied for a lengthy period.”

Weinstock, who was born in Antwerp in 1939, espoused anti-Zionist, pro-Palestinian views even before the 1967 Six-Day War. As such, he was invited, three weeks before the war’s outbreak, to speak to the Palestinian students’ union in Paris. The Paris correspondent of the Israeli newspaper Maariv, Uri Dan, reported about the event at the time: “Most depressing of all was the appearance of Nathan Weinstock, a Jew, who had a place of honor on the stage and delivered the keynote address… Weinstock was even more extreme than the Arabs in the abuse he hurled against Israel.”

In retrospect, Weinstock explains, that event showed him the degree to which he played the part of the “useful idiot” at the time.

“I was thrilled when I got up to speak to the Palestinian students,” he told me. “Very naively, I was convinced that the Palestinian students would be happy to hear my pacifist message. So I was astonished when not one of them showed the least interest in what I said. Instead, they listened ecstatically to Radio Cairo, delighting in every word and swallowing the boastful announcements that the Arab armies would soon throw all the Jews into the sea.”

In 1969, Weinstock published “Zionism: False Messiah,” an anti-Zionist pamphlet (in French; an English translation came out a decade later) that quickly became the bible of anti-Israeli propaganda in France.
Gradually, however, he says, he became aware of “the anti-Semitic nature of the blind assault on Israel. First, ‘the Zionists’ are condemned, then the ‘Zionist takeover’ of the media, and finally ‘Zionist world domination.’ When I was quoted, my criticism of the Palestinians, however minor, was always omitted. In the end, I understood that I had been used. My listeners took no interest whatsoever in me. For them, I was a Jewish alibi for their anti-Jewish posture.”

The straw that broke the camel’s back for Weinstock was the failure of the Camp David summit in 2000. “Once again the Palestinian leadership avoided taking responsibility,” he says. “The Palestinian leadership was cowardly, declining to tell their nation that one has to know when to conclude the struggle, because the central goal has been achieved.”

How do you account for your polar reversal of position – from anti-Zionist guru of the radical left as a young man, to supporter of Israel today?

“In the 1960s I was under strong Trotskyite influence, and I took a doctrinaire approach to issues – not based on a genuine attempt to analyze them, but in order to adjust them to simplistic, pre-set positions. The radical left has not reconsidered that period, and in many senses sounds exactly the same today. When one looks at who supports the Palestinians in Europe – and it is clear that the Palestinians do indeed have rights that need to be addressed – one sees that they don’t care about anything else: not the Armenians, not the Cypriot-Greek issue, not what’s happening in Western Sahara. Only one thing interests them, and I cannot accept that.

“We also need to remember,” he continues “that Israel took a self-righteous stance in that period, and it was very difficult to voice criticism about its behavior. In the meantime, a generation of ‘new historians’ sprang up in Israel, such as Benny Morris, who took a realistic view of history. As in every country, there are dark areas in Israel which need to be examined. But has there been any country in history without dark corners that were kept hidden? This process is underway in Israel today – but where are the Palestinian ‘new historians’? To emerge from the tangle, the Palestinians must show courage and choose the path of coexistence with the Israelis. This is a task that only they can perform for themselves.”

In 1945, Weinstock notes, almost one million Jews lived in the Arab world, whereas today there are about 4,500, the great majority of them in Morocco. According to Weinstock, there is no precedent for such a dramatic termination of Jewish communities anywhere in the world, including during the Holocaust.

What, then, brought about the massive departure of Jews from the Arab countries?
 It was not Zionism that disconnected the Jews from their surroundings, he says.
 On the contrary: In most cases, the Zionist movement had a hard time mustering supporters. Jews also tried to become part of the Arab national-liberation movements.

For example, the chief rabbi of Egypt during the mid-20th century, Chaim Nahum, often spoke out against Zionism; in Iraq, Jewish communists founded the Anti-Zionist League. Activist Jewish communists in North Africa expressed solidarity with the Maghreb peoples and were in the forefront of the demand for national liberation.
Weinstock cites a large number of attacks and pogroms against Jewish communities that are rarely mentioned in history curricula in Israel. In 1912, 12 Jews were killed in Shiraz, Iran, and 51 were killed that year in Fez, Morocco. In 1934, 25 Jews were killed in the Algerian city of Constantine.

In Iraq, 150 Jews were murdered in the Farhud of 1941, a three-day pogrom. 
Seven years later, upon Israel’s establishment, Iraq declared martial law and launched a wave of anti-Jewish persecutions. Many Jews were arrested, tried and convicted, some were sentenced to death, others were given jail terms or slapped with large fines. At this stage, the Jews were forbidden to leave the country, but in March 1950 Iraq allowed the Jews to emigrate, provided they gave up their citizenship and their property.
“The ongoing deterioration in the Jews’ situation and the atmosphere of hate surrounding them led to a mass flight from the country,” Weinstock writes.

The majority of the Jewish population (90 percent of the community of 150,000) left that year, amid a massive plundering of their property by the authorities.

In Egypt, anti-Jewish disturbances broke out in November 1945, on the anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, but the declaration of the State of Israel three years later triggered serious persecution. Hundreds of Jews were arrested, accused of involvement in Zionist or communist plots and had their property confiscated. Continuous attacks on Jews began that June. Bombs were planted in the Jewish quarter of Cairo, and it and the Jewish section of Alexandria were set ablaze. Half the country’s Jewish community left at that time, with the remainder being expelled during the Sinai War of 1956. The Jews who were driven out were not allowed to take with or sell their property.
“The police arrived and pulled grocers, carpenters, woodworkers and glaziers – but also well-known lawyers – from their beds,” Weinstock writes.

Is there anything in common among the different communities?
“Yes, in terms of the legal and social status that the Jews shared under Islamic rule. They possessed dhimmi status, meaning ‘protected person.’ It afforded the Jews the authorities’ protection, but at the same time placed them in an inferior position, humiliated and scorned. Jews were not allowed to bear arms in these countries, in which carrying a weapon was considered a salient sign of manhood.

 In some cases, as in early-19th-century Morocco, Jews were made to go about barefoot, or to wear humiliating clothes.”
In return for protection by the government, the Jews had to pay a special tax. “Nothing better describes the contempt entailed in the status of dhimmitude,” Weinstock writes, “than the ritual of humiliation that accompanied the annual payment of the subjugation tax in Morocco, as recently as the end of the 19th century. Every year, on a fixed date, the head of each Jewish community had to turn over the money to the sultan’s representative, who for his part had to slap [the Jew] or hit him with a stick in order to hammer home the inequality between giver and recipient, by nature of their birth.”

In Yemen, the “Latrines Ordinance,” introduced in the same spirit, obliged the Jewish community periodically to clean out cesspools and clear away animal carcasses that blocked public roads. (The law remained in force until 1950.)

Weinstock describes a very different state of affairs from the oft-voiced myth about the harmonious relations between Jews and Arabs under Islamic rule. Less than 100 years after the Ottoman sultan invited the exiles from Spain to settle throughout his empire, for example, one of his descendants, Murat III, ordered “the liquidation of all the Jews.”

The sultan’s Jewish physician persuaded his mother to intercede, and the order was rescinded.
Over the years, numerous laws were enacted that discriminated against the Jews – from a prohibition against horseback riding to the necessity of wearing particular clothing, and from a ban on giving testimony in court to a prohibition against building homes over a certain height.

At the same time, Weinstock notes, the laws were not enforced identically in every place and in every period. For example, a study of the Cairo Geniza documents, which date back to the ninth century, shows that the clothing regulations were not observed at all.
“There were periods in which the Jews succeeded very well in the Muslim world,” Weinstock says. “At times they were part of the elite. The dhimmi regulations and the scale of humiliation also differed from place to place and from one period to another. But the central axis that dictated the attitude toward the Jews was their dhimmi status, which meant subjugation to the ruling Muslim group.”

Weinstock quotes a Moroccan sultan saying in the mid-19th century: “Our glorious religion grants them only marks of opprobrium and inferiority.”

Weinstock also examines the situation in the Holy Land through the dhimmi prism. The Jewish minority that lived under Ottoman rule experienced humiliation and subordination, he says. Anti-Jewish riots were fomented time and again in the 18th and 19th centuries. He quotes the British consul in Palestine as writing in 1831 that the extortion and acts of suppression against the Jews were so numerous that it was said “that the Jews have to pay even for the air they breathe.”

In the twilight of Ottoman rule, a century ago, the first “Hebrew city” was founded (present-day Tel Aviv), a revival of the Hebrew language began to be felt, and Jewish cooperative farming settlements were established. The local Arab population, Weinstock says, felt that the ground was being pulled from under it, as the dhimmi Jews, who were supposed to possess inferior status, were now striving for more – even for independence.

According to Weinstock, underlying the growing hostility toward the Jewish population in Palestine was the realization that the dhimmi Jews were shaking off their traditional legal status of humiliation and submission. In retrospect, the writer maintains, dhimmi status, on the one hand, and the declared attempt by the Zionist movement to be free of it, on the other, led ultimately to the Arabs’ rejection of the United Nations partition plan in 1947 and to the War of Independence the following year.
Local Palestinians and the Arab world refused to grant the Jews of the country a status different from dhimmi, and they were even less likely to recognize the Jews’ national rights. Zionism, for its part, could not accept Arab sovereignty over all of Palestine, a situation in which the Jewish minority would again find itself under dhimmi status. “Historically, then,” Weinstock says, “dhimmi status is the root of the conflict.”

What impact does this relationship have today?
“It continues to affect Israeli-Arab relations even today, because in Arab eyes the Jew who now lives in Israel is the same Jew whom they customarily saw as humiliated – and who is now taking his revenge. The Arabs experience Israel’s establishment and existence to this day as very painful revenge and as the reversal of dhimmitude. This is a very meaningful and deep aspect of the current political problem, which we cannot allow ourselves to ignore. Without understanding this, it is impossible to understand the conflict.”

Then why is it not dealt with more by academics and the press?
“For the Jewish world, the reason is that Ashkenazi Jews, in Israel and elsewhere, continue to be indifferent to and even disdainful of the Mizrahi Jews.

For the Arab world, this should come as no surprise, as self-criticism is not popular among Arab journalists, intellectuals and public-opinion leaders. With the exception of a very short incidental note by [the late Prof.] Edward Said in one of his books, it is hard to find serious references to the massive emigration of Jews from the Arab countries and its causes.
“The left tends to avoid the subject, because they don’t consider it ‘kosher.’ The left has become extraordinarily dogmatic and lacks the ability of self-criticism today. People define themselves as identifying with ‘the Palestinian cause,’ and that’s all: There is no thought behind it. This subject might upset their one-sided worldview, so they simply avoid it.


Read more: http://forward.com/articles/199257/the-inconvenient-truth-about-jews-from-arab-lands/?p=all#ixzz344CBEa00

Chasidishe Bochur dies drowning in mikva on Shevuois in Uman

 A Chasidishe Bochur  is dead after drowning in a lake while celebrating the Shavuot holiday in Uman, Ukraine, rescue workers in Ukraine said.

23-year-old Shlomo Zalman Kozlowski of Bnei Brak, Israel, drowned in the lake while immersing himself as part of a holy ritual.

Kozlowski went to Uman in order to celebrate the holiday of Shavuot at the grave site of Rabbi Nachman of Breslov. After entering the lake his friends realized that Kozlowski lost his consciousness.

They pulled him out and alerted local rescue workers. Kozlowski was transferred to a nearby hospital where he was pronounced dead.

The victim’s father was identified as Rabbi Shraga Feivel Kozlowski, a member of the Gur Hasidic sect. This was not the first time that a yeshiva student drowned in Uman.

Last year, 19-year-old Eliyahu Al of Netanya, Israel, drowned after immersing himself in the lake. Al died after suffering of hypothermia as the water of the lake was extremely cold.

חג שבועות שמח

In Monroe, "all children born from a marriage not officiated by the the Monroe Rav, are Mamzeirim!

Its official, folks, Satmar has totally separated from the Jewish Religion!
 They have their own religion with vague similarities to Judaism.
In this poster Satmar posts the names of people who were married by Harav Yoel Morgenstern, but not by the Satmar Monroe Rav, and so they are not part of anything that is holy,  Their offspring, also mentioned in the poster are not Kosher Children!

The Punishment of NOT Eating "Kreplach" on Shevuois

Loose Translation of the above writing in the sefer "Panim Me'eerim Shevuois"

It has been said  in the name of Harav Hakodosh Rebe Aaron Leib Hagodol, father of Harav Hakodosh Rebe Meir M'primishlan, that

" You can be certain that the ancestors of those who didn't eat Kreplach on the holiday of Shevuois, weren't by Har Sinai!"

The question now is: What happens is if I ate last year, but will skip this year, were my grandparents there or not!"