Tuesday, December 25, 2007
          Zei veisen alles
According to a source, FBI agents and special linguists working on the Spinka case had done a pretty good job interpreting what had been spoken in Yiddish by the various parties involved. Even vague Yiddishe slang words that had been used to communicate certain items or activities were all figured out and translated by agents.
          
  
 
	
		According to a source, FBI agents and special linguists working on the Spinka case had done a pretty good job interpreting what had been spoken in Yiddish by the various parties involved. Even vague Yiddishe slang words that had been used to communicate certain items or activities were all figured out and translated by agents.
 
 
			Comments:
			
			
			
			
	
	
				 
				In chaider flaget mien rebbe zogen ich veis alas ober ven men zogt mich veis ich noch besser!!!!
WHAT A SHAME TO SET UP A FELLOW JEW LIKE THIS
				
				
			
			
			
			WHAT A SHAME TO SET UP A FELLOW JEW LIKE THIS
				 
				"Even vague Yiddishe slang words"
give an example of a word (so I should know what not to say anymore - just kidding)
				
				
			
			
			
			give an example of a word (so I should know what not to say anymore - just kidding)
				 
				B.S. The only recordings they have is when the moiser wired himself. And those conversations are all in english anyways.
Secondly, they have NOTHING on the Rebbe himself. They arrested him as a publicity stunt because he is the figurehead of the moised and it'll put Orthodox Jews in a bad limelight.
As far as the records they seized, it is practically worthless as it has nothing to do with the alleged activities. All those records, also in Yiddish, were off-site where the FBI never came to, and have since been used to warm that homes fireplace.
In short, they have no case and are on a fruitless fishing expedition.
				
				
			
			
			
			
			
			
			
			
			
			Secondly, they have NOTHING on the Rebbe himself. They arrested him as a publicity stunt because he is the figurehead of the moised and it'll put Orthodox Jews in a bad limelight.
As far as the records they seized, it is practically worthless as it has nothing to do with the alleged activities. All those records, also in Yiddish, were off-site where the FBI never came to, and have since been used to warm that homes fireplace.
In short, they have no case and are on a fruitless fishing expedition.
				 
				whu are you ripping the informant? The bootom line is that if they did the crime they should do the time.
DON'T STEAL AND DON'T GO TO JAIL
				
				
			
			DON'T STEAL AND DON'T GO TO JAIL
				 
				They have nothing on the Rebbe or his Gabbai I am sure of that. I can't imagine the Rebbe coming up with this scam or having any direct knowledge.. Some of the people in his org.. taht's a differant story.
				
				
			
			
				 
				Well dont you think we should rip the informant robert kassirer since he was not only involved in this scam the reason he wore the wire was because of a 130 million dollar bond fraud he was involved in, so he was trying to save his own skin after all he does is lie cheat and steal.
				
				
			
			
				 
				There isn't a soul alive that's not commiting white collar crime to some degree. You think even past Presidents are paying their fair share of taxes? BULL! If RK would be able to turn in any of the past Pres. he would do that too! 
What is the New York Kassirer Mishpacha doing to help the mess that their relatives made?
				
				
			
			What is the New York Kassirer Mishpacha doing to help the mess that their relatives made?
				 
				I generally [tend to] agree with bob 4:43PM but am not as optimistic,
albeit hopeful. We have to do a lot of TEFILLAH.
Phillip 4:28pm (Rhetorical Question) ARE YOU SOOO SQUEEEAKY KLEEEEAN???!!! (chassidic zhlob doesn't know how to spell English, anyway! right!) BTW the last oufgeklerte [prejudiced] prsn. admitted [reluctantly] that meknows spelling [a teeny bit] better than THEM! There's a classical story (maybe to you "classic" only means (that anti-semite) Shakespeare's) "Pound of Flesh" in "The Merchant of Venice" )about Rabbi Akivah, who was arrested (by the Roman Government) for learning Torah, in a similar setup. Anyway, the RAT (or those that were gleeful about the arrest) ended up in the same prison (cell?) as Rabbi Akivah. (for the rest of the story, read the Original Sources!!!
				
				
			
			albeit hopeful. We have to do a lot of TEFILLAH.
Phillip 4:28pm (Rhetorical Question) ARE YOU SOOO SQUEEEAKY KLEEEEAN???!!! (chassidic zhlob doesn't know how to spell English, anyway! right!) BTW the last oufgeklerte [prejudiced] prsn. admitted [reluctantly] that meknows spelling [a teeny bit] better than THEM! There's a classical story (maybe to you "classic" only means (that anti-semite) Shakespeare's) "Pound of Flesh" in "The Merchant of Venice" )about Rabbi Akivah, who was arrested (by the Roman Government) for learning Torah, in a similar setup. Anyway, the RAT (or those that were gleeful about the arrest) ended up in the same prison (cell?) as Rabbi Akivah. (for the rest of the story, read the Original Sources!!!
				 
				Anon. 10:19AM Remember that Banner Headline [of yours]! Sometimes, people have to eat their own words!
				
				
			
			
				 
				You guys obviously did not read the linked document. Read it and you all will wake up and smell the coffee.
				
				
			
			
				 
				Remember that the document is nothing more than the affidavit of a police officer. It is a series of allegations. It isn't evidence. The evidence will be tested in court, where it will be scrutinized for veracity (unless the Rebbe makes a plea, or something). But don't assume that just because a cop swears something is true, that it has even a shred of truth. (We may find, c''v, that it is true... but time will tell. In the meantime, we should be dan l'kaf zechus).
				
				
			
			
				 
				Attention Advocat:
(By the way, what actual attorney does not know how to spell "advocate?")
Yes, indeed, the affidavit, sworn to under penalty of perjury, is made by a law enforcement agent. What motivation this agent has to lie no one has ever said.
But you left out a little detail, namely the recordings, both audio and video, mentioned numerous times in the affidavit.
Those recordings are the evidence and based on their description, they are going to be tough to rebut.
				
				
			
			
			
			
			
			(By the way, what actual attorney does not know how to spell "advocate?")
Yes, indeed, the affidavit, sworn to under penalty of perjury, is made by a law enforcement agent. What motivation this agent has to lie no one has ever said.
But you left out a little detail, namely the recordings, both audio and video, mentioned numerous times in the affidavit.
Those recordings are the evidence and based on their description, they are going to be tough to rebut.
				 
				To Esquire,
Advocate is the English word. The Yiddish word is not pronounced the same way, and so I left off the 'e' so that it would be clear that I intended the Yiddish word advocat (last syllable rhymes with cot). So I turn the question back on you: what kind of a Yid doesn't know Yiddish?
To answer your comments, I was not saying that the Rebbe is not guilty. I was saying that we do not know if the Rebbe is guilty based only on the affadavit. Policemen lie all the time. Sometimes they do it to defend their arrests after the fact, sometimes they do it to justify an arrest they're just itching to make. Obviously policemen are also known to tell the truth from time to time. Time will tell. But the fact that "recordings" were referred to in the affadavit does not mean that said recordings exist or that said recordings demonstrate what the policemen say they demonstrate. Furthermore, the part of the recording that apparently implicates the Spinka Rebbe is very sparse in detail. In order for those comments to actually make the Spinka Rebbe guilty, it would have to be demonstrated that the Spinka Rebbe understood the entire context of the statements he was making. Assuming that the affadavit is accurate, all we know is that the Spinka Rebbe was aware that a transacation was taking place. We do not know whether he realized he was engaging in money laundering. Obviously if the Rebbe was aware of what he was doing, the prosecution may well be able to demonstrate that beyond a reasonable doubt. But the bottom line is this: none of us have seen a shred of evidence, all we have seen is the police officer's promise that there will be evidence. And it certainly is not clear to me that the evidence that the police officer believes he can produce at trial will implicate the Rebbe beyond a reasonable doubt.
Finally, nebuch that this has to happen that we have to discuss such a thing, and it is pathetic that there are people who claim to be frumme yidden on this forum who seem to be giggling with glee at the idea of the Spinka Rebbe going to jail, chas veshalom. We should know only of Moshiach.
				
				
			
			Advocate is the English word. The Yiddish word is not pronounced the same way, and so I left off the 'e' so that it would be clear that I intended the Yiddish word advocat (last syllable rhymes with cot). So I turn the question back on you: what kind of a Yid doesn't know Yiddish?
To answer your comments, I was not saying that the Rebbe is not guilty. I was saying that we do not know if the Rebbe is guilty based only on the affadavit. Policemen lie all the time. Sometimes they do it to defend their arrests after the fact, sometimes they do it to justify an arrest they're just itching to make. Obviously policemen are also known to tell the truth from time to time. Time will tell. But the fact that "recordings" were referred to in the affadavit does not mean that said recordings exist or that said recordings demonstrate what the policemen say they demonstrate. Furthermore, the part of the recording that apparently implicates the Spinka Rebbe is very sparse in detail. In order for those comments to actually make the Spinka Rebbe guilty, it would have to be demonstrated that the Spinka Rebbe understood the entire context of the statements he was making. Assuming that the affadavit is accurate, all we know is that the Spinka Rebbe was aware that a transacation was taking place. We do not know whether he realized he was engaging in money laundering. Obviously if the Rebbe was aware of what he was doing, the prosecution may well be able to demonstrate that beyond a reasonable doubt. But the bottom line is this: none of us have seen a shred of evidence, all we have seen is the police officer's promise that there will be evidence. And it certainly is not clear to me that the evidence that the police officer believes he can produce at trial will implicate the Rebbe beyond a reasonable doubt.
Finally, nebuch that this has to happen that we have to discuss such a thing, and it is pathetic that there are people who claim to be frumme yidden on this forum who seem to be giggling with glee at the idea of the Spinka Rebbe going to jail, chas veshalom. We should know only of Moshiach.
				 
				Advocat,
I am "the kind of Yid" who is not fluent in Yiddish (having gone to a yeshiva that emphasized Ivrit). I presume that being the son of a Bas Yisrael, I am as much a Jew as you even though I don't ask rhetorical questions bordering on Rechilus and/or Lashon Hora.
If you want to write in Yiddish, then using Hebrew script would make it clear you are writing in that language.
To clear things up, your statement "But don't assume that just because a cop swears something is true, that it has even a shred of truth" is absolute naarishkeit. (How's that for Yiddish, oh wise one?)
When an FBI agent swears that audio recordings contain certain words, if those words are not on the tapes, he is committing perjury, a federal offense.
In my experience as a lawyer, this is very unlikely.
As to what context the statements were made, that will all be revealed long before the trial.
You see, my dear prustack, there is something called Brady material. For purposes of this discussion, what you need to know is that the government will have to give the defense copies of the tapes long before the trial. That will provide adequate opportunity to determine exactly who said what to whom and in what context.
By the way, it seems through many of these posts that the following is a recurring theme:
1. A number of Jews in contravention of the Halachic provision that "Dinei d'malchusa k'dina," may have violated federal law.
2. At least one Jew who definitely violated federal law decided to make a deal with the government and obtain evidence against other Jews.
3. Many people on this blog are upset with the Jew who acted as the Confidential Witness.
Is there anyone on this blog willing to say that those who violate the laws of the United States against money laundering, filing false tax returns, tax evasion, conspiracy and numerous other felonies are doing something that violates the Torah?
How about you, Advocat? Is it okay under Halacha for someone to commit the above felonies?
Yes or no, please.
				
				
			
			I am "the kind of Yid" who is not fluent in Yiddish (having gone to a yeshiva that emphasized Ivrit). I presume that being the son of a Bas Yisrael, I am as much a Jew as you even though I don't ask rhetorical questions bordering on Rechilus and/or Lashon Hora.
If you want to write in Yiddish, then using Hebrew script would make it clear you are writing in that language.
To clear things up, your statement "But don't assume that just because a cop swears something is true, that it has even a shred of truth" is absolute naarishkeit. (How's that for Yiddish, oh wise one?)
When an FBI agent swears that audio recordings contain certain words, if those words are not on the tapes, he is committing perjury, a federal offense.
In my experience as a lawyer, this is very unlikely.
As to what context the statements were made, that will all be revealed long before the trial.
You see, my dear prustack, there is something called Brady material. For purposes of this discussion, what you need to know is that the government will have to give the defense copies of the tapes long before the trial. That will provide adequate opportunity to determine exactly who said what to whom and in what context.
By the way, it seems through many of these posts that the following is a recurring theme:
1. A number of Jews in contravention of the Halachic provision that "Dinei d'malchusa k'dina," may have violated federal law.
2. At least one Jew who definitely violated federal law decided to make a deal with the government and obtain evidence against other Jews.
3. Many people on this blog are upset with the Jew who acted as the Confidential Witness.
Is there anyone on this blog willing to say that those who violate the laws of the United States against money laundering, filing false tax returns, tax evasion, conspiracy and numerous other felonies are doing something that violates the Torah?
How about you, Advocat? Is it okay under Halacha for someone to commit the above felonies?
Yes or no, please.
				 
				I feel sorry for those with the last name Kasirer. All relatives  will be cowering in shame after this, for a long time to come. Very sad.
				
				
			
			
				 
				To Esquire,
I apologize for my comments about not knowing Yiddish. They were over the line. As for Hebrew characters: I don't know how to type in Hebrew, but your suggestion is otherwise a good one. I don't see how my comments were rechilus or loshon haroh (an odd accusation, given that you're the one who has already publicly condemned a Torah giant for violating the law based upon the testimony of a moser). But we can agree to disagree on that point.
I want to start by saying that the cast of characters are indeed guilty of the allegations that have been made against them, then it seems clear to me that they have violated the Torah as well. Tax fraud is an aveirah on multiple levels as far as I am concerned, and the lax attitude that some of our Heimisher Brider have (that its "just the goyishe government") is disheartening to say the least.
But, of course, the parties are not guilty of violating Torah (at least with respect to the allegations made in the affidavit) if the allegations are false. You and I may have different experiences with respect to police officer's (or FBI agent's) testimony. In my experience, you can't believe half of what you hear (whether in a police report, under oath in deposition, on the stand in the middle of a trial, or elsewhere), and Police are more than willing to lie when it comes to tarnishing the accused (even States' Attorneys know that, though they tend not to talk about it... you don't have to be a bleeding heart liberal to admit it). Police officers are rarely indicted on perjury charges, especially when ther lies are exaggerated versionis of the truth. The claims that the officer here makes about the Rebbe, for example, are not half as damning as they looks, and it would only take changing the emphasis on a handful of words to make his "translation" seem truly quite innocent, rather than an indictable offense.
My claim that the truth will emerge at trial was, of course, idiomatic. Most indictments don't result in a trial; and most of the facts are on the table well before opening statements or jury selection. I know that, and I know you know that. You must also know that Brady material is not necessarily made part of the public record. Rather, it is released to the Rebbe and to his attorney. We will probably never be privy to actual sound recordings of the tapes, unless someone leaks them. So I stand by my characterizations: the FBI has accomplished an incredible smear against a Rebbe, and in the court of public opinion, it is unlikely that the Rebbe will ever get a fair trial... especially with folks like you willing to skewer him before any evidence is ever presented.
The reason that we are upset about the Jew who acted as a witness against the Rebbe is that he violated halacha by turning a Jew in to the goyish authorities. That is mesirah, and is considered a terrible sin, and a betrayal (guilty or not though the accused and betrayed Jew might be).
I am angry about the lack of respect (in some circles, though not necessarily in Spinka until the government can prove otherwise) for dina d'malchisa dina. Are you angry about the mesirah that undoubtedly occurred here? The brazen violation of halacha?
As an attorney, do you not believe that the Rebbe is entitled to the presumption of innocence, that can only be rebutted through evidence that establishes his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?
				
				
			
			I apologize for my comments about not knowing Yiddish. They were over the line. As for Hebrew characters: I don't know how to type in Hebrew, but your suggestion is otherwise a good one. I don't see how my comments were rechilus or loshon haroh (an odd accusation, given that you're the one who has already publicly condemned a Torah giant for violating the law based upon the testimony of a moser). But we can agree to disagree on that point.
I want to start by saying that the cast of characters are indeed guilty of the allegations that have been made against them, then it seems clear to me that they have violated the Torah as well. Tax fraud is an aveirah on multiple levels as far as I am concerned, and the lax attitude that some of our Heimisher Brider have (that its "just the goyishe government") is disheartening to say the least.
But, of course, the parties are not guilty of violating Torah (at least with respect to the allegations made in the affidavit) if the allegations are false. You and I may have different experiences with respect to police officer's (or FBI agent's) testimony. In my experience, you can't believe half of what you hear (whether in a police report, under oath in deposition, on the stand in the middle of a trial, or elsewhere), and Police are more than willing to lie when it comes to tarnishing the accused (even States' Attorneys know that, though they tend not to talk about it... you don't have to be a bleeding heart liberal to admit it). Police officers are rarely indicted on perjury charges, especially when ther lies are exaggerated versionis of the truth. The claims that the officer here makes about the Rebbe, for example, are not half as damning as they looks, and it would only take changing the emphasis on a handful of words to make his "translation" seem truly quite innocent, rather than an indictable offense.
My claim that the truth will emerge at trial was, of course, idiomatic. Most indictments don't result in a trial; and most of the facts are on the table well before opening statements or jury selection. I know that, and I know you know that. You must also know that Brady material is not necessarily made part of the public record. Rather, it is released to the Rebbe and to his attorney. We will probably never be privy to actual sound recordings of the tapes, unless someone leaks them. So I stand by my characterizations: the FBI has accomplished an incredible smear against a Rebbe, and in the court of public opinion, it is unlikely that the Rebbe will ever get a fair trial... especially with folks like you willing to skewer him before any evidence is ever presented.
The reason that we are upset about the Jew who acted as a witness against the Rebbe is that he violated halacha by turning a Jew in to the goyish authorities. That is mesirah, and is considered a terrible sin, and a betrayal (guilty or not though the accused and betrayed Jew might be).
I am angry about the lack of respect (in some circles, though not necessarily in Spinka until the government can prove otherwise) for dina d'malchisa dina. Are you angry about the mesirah that undoubtedly occurred here? The brazen violation of halacha?
As an attorney, do you not believe that the Rebbe is entitled to the presumption of innocence, that can only be rebutted through evidence that establishes his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?
				 
				The  Maaseh is  azoi, yiddishe kinder, The Rebbe and his  chevra have already had  their  day  in  court - the  Heavenly  court on  Yomim  Naroim - the  one  we  all recognise - and now they  have  had  their Psak (or qvittel) -  all  40  pages  of  it, and  it  ain't a good one.  Teshuvah  doesn't  come easy  for  Chillul  Hashem - just  look  at  what  the  Rambam  says about  it  in  Hilchos Teshuvah. I  knew  a frumm man,  a  shul  gabba/parnes, pillar  of  the Kehilla, who under stress made a  'mistake' which forced  his  business  to  go  mechula  and he landed up  in  jail.  Folks  said what  a  Chillul  Hashem he  had made. Some  even wouldn't  say  good  shabbos  to  him. What  busha he  and  his  family  suffered ! I  thought  he had  'paid' enough for  his 'Aveira'. Heaven  thought otherwise.  He  spent  the  last  ten years of  his  life  paralysed from  a  car  crash ! I tell  you,  the  Ribbono  Shel  Olom isn't  going  to  let  the Spinkas off  the  hook for  this, innocent  or not in  the American  court. Vehu  Rachum  Yechaper Ovoun Velo Yashchis......
				
				
			
			
				 
				FYI. The "New York Kassirers" are not related to Robert Kasirer, whose name is spelled with one "s". It should be made clear that there is no connection whatsoever.
				
				
			
			
			
			
				 
				Advocat,
Your last paragraph is to me the most important so I’ll take it first.
In the United States of America EVERY criminal defendant is entitled under the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to certain rights. Among them are:
The right to remain silent;
The right to an attorney (free if he cannot afford one);
The right to be confronted with the witnesses against him;
The right to trial by jury;
The right to be presumed innocent; and
The right to have each and every element of each and every charge against him proven beyond a reasonable doubt using legally admissible and constitutionally obtained evidence.
This is true regardless of who you are, so of course, the rebbe has these rights as does the person known as CW-1.
Your statement that “Most indictments don’t result in a trial” is true only because most result in a plea. Rarely are indictments dismissed.
Regarding the questions of Halacha, unlike the “gedolim” who frequent this blog and would like to re-write the Gemara to make us believe that mesirah is “ye’haraig v’al “ya’avor,” I’m going to do something different. I’m going to give CW-1 the same presumption of innocence under Halacha.
Here’s my question for you: do you know what the government said to this man in order to get him to cooperate? If, assuming arguendo, his family was threatened, does that not make his sin b’shogayg?
What is crystal clear here is that all of this is a colossal Chilul HaShem. The last time I checked Chilul HaShem was an aveirah for which you could not be forgiven with a karban, no?
The tax year is ending today and the Form 1040 is due by April 15. A certain number of tax returns are always “kicked out” for manual examination. How would you like to be a taxpayer whose return is selected and then have the IRS auditor see that it comes from ZIP Code 11219?
If the individual defendants are all found not guilty, great. Until such time, the over-emphasis on this blog of mesirah over Chilul HaShem is unseemly, to say the least.
				
				
			
			Your last paragraph is to me the most important so I’ll take it first.
In the United States of America EVERY criminal defendant is entitled under the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to certain rights. Among them are:
The right to remain silent;
The right to an attorney (free if he cannot afford one);
The right to be confronted with the witnesses against him;
The right to trial by jury;
The right to be presumed innocent; and
The right to have each and every element of each and every charge against him proven beyond a reasonable doubt using legally admissible and constitutionally obtained evidence.
This is true regardless of who you are, so of course, the rebbe has these rights as does the person known as CW-1.
Your statement that “Most indictments don’t result in a trial” is true only because most result in a plea. Rarely are indictments dismissed.
Regarding the questions of Halacha, unlike the “gedolim” who frequent this blog and would like to re-write the Gemara to make us believe that mesirah is “ye’haraig v’al “ya’avor,” I’m going to do something different. I’m going to give CW-1 the same presumption of innocence under Halacha.
Here’s my question for you: do you know what the government said to this man in order to get him to cooperate? If, assuming arguendo, his family was threatened, does that not make his sin b’shogayg?
What is crystal clear here is that all of this is a colossal Chilul HaShem. The last time I checked Chilul HaShem was an aveirah for which you could not be forgiven with a karban, no?
The tax year is ending today and the Form 1040 is due by April 15. A certain number of tax returns are always “kicked out” for manual examination. How would you like to be a taxpayer whose return is selected and then have the IRS auditor see that it comes from ZIP Code 11219?
If the individual defendants are all found not guilty, great. Until such time, the over-emphasis on this blog of mesirah over Chilul HaShem is unseemly, to say the least.
				 
				To all the experts posting such absolute bull as halacha:
We understand that for you, lawyers especially, felonies and mdm's trump halacha all the time, but for a frum Jew the opposite is true. By 'frum' I mean the Shulchan Aruch (c'm 388) and poskim, who are quite explicit in categorizing mesirah as pretty much 'yehareg ve'al yaavor'. Whether somebody's behaviour constitutes a chillul-hashem is for...Hashem to judge, not you. And btw, 'dina demalchussa' is an extremely limited concept - nice to see all the ignorant experts spouting such ignorance. What happened to dan-lekaf-zechus ? Or is that just lip service, like the rest of your pseudo-orthodoxy ?!
				
				
			
			We understand that for you, lawyers especially, felonies and mdm's trump halacha all the time, but for a frum Jew the opposite is true. By 'frum' I mean the Shulchan Aruch (c'm 388) and poskim, who are quite explicit in categorizing mesirah as pretty much 'yehareg ve'al yaavor'. Whether somebody's behaviour constitutes a chillul-hashem is for...Hashem to judge, not you. And btw, 'dina demalchussa' is an extremely limited concept - nice to see all the ignorant experts spouting such ignorance. What happened to dan-lekaf-zechus ? Or is that just lip service, like the rest of your pseudo-orthodoxy ?!
				 
				JB and  others, are  prepared  to  whitewash the murkiest  of  deeds with  any  smokescreen  or   cover-up that  comes  to  hand. Hence he  invokes, 'dan-lekaf-zechus'  for  the Spinkas (only) and 'yehareg ve'al yaavor' for the  Mosser, whom he  doesn't   leave  to  Hashem  to  judge. All  I  see  in   c"m 388 is the  circumstances  when  a  mosser is  chayyav for  the  monetary loss he  has  caused, and  that  he  loses  Olam  Habo. So which  recognised  authority  holds he  is  a  Rodef ?  Esquire  has  written "If the individual defendants are all found not guilty, great".  Really ? Not  if its  over  a  technicality or lack  of evidence. If  such  were the  outcome, all  it  means is the defendants  get away  with their devious  deeds,  while  Klal  Yisroel foots  the  bill  for  the  Chillul Hashem. We  are  talking here  about the (hopefully  false ) perception of frum,  gelernt Yidden  being a bunch  of cheats  and  swindlers as  well  as, of  course,   tax  dodgers and  fraudsters,  which  is  what I  imagine the  average John Doe makes out  of  this news item being  broadcast  throughout  USA. That  would  be defined  to  be Chillul  Hashem as in  Yoma 86a  and  in the  Sefer  Hachinuch  on  the Possuk "Velo  Sechallalu Es  Shem  Kodshi" (in  Parshas  Emor)  which  it  counts  among the  613. So there are clear prescriptions of  what behaviour constitutes a chillul-hashem and  it  is  for frum Yidden to enlighten  those who are unaware, of  its  severity. And  no,  an  animal  korbon  does  not  atone for  it.  A  Kappara can only  come by  way  of  Missah and Yessurim r"l. Also, frum  Yidden have  no  licence to  sign  false statements -  Midvar  Sheker  Tirchok -  thats  another  Issur  Gomur in  the  Torah,  apart  from  Dinah  DeMalchusah. I recall  when  I  was in  yeshiva,  the  Mashgiach saying  "on  this  money,  you  pay  tax". Do they  teach  that  in  heintige  yeshivos in  BP? The  word  has  to go  out  that as taxpayers, we should  never  be  in  a  position  of being afraid if our returns are selected by  IRS  auditors. Bechol Es, Yihyui Begodechah  LeVonim (Kohelet 9)
				
				
			
			
				 
				Attention JB,
The Gemara says that there are only three things that are “ye’haraig v’al “ya’avor:”
1. Gilui Aroyos (sex offenses, e.g. rape);
2. Shefichas Damim (murder); and
3. Avodah Zarah (idol worship).
Which one of these constitues mesirah? And under what authority?
Put up or shut up.
As for the other idiotic comments you made, no one ever said "felonies and misdemeanors trump halacha." That makes no sense whatsoever probably because YOU made it up.
But tell me, is there a justification under halacha to commit the federal crimes of money laundering, tax evasion, conspiracy, and the other crimes charged?
Incidentally, if you cannot personally figure out when someone is committing a Chilul Hashem then all your Torah learning amounts to Gurnisht.
				
				
			
			Post a Comment
		The Gemara says that there are only three things that are “ye’haraig v’al “ya’avor:”
1. Gilui Aroyos (sex offenses, e.g. rape);
2. Shefichas Damim (murder); and
3. Avodah Zarah (idol worship).
Which one of these constitues mesirah? And under what authority?
Put up or shut up.
As for the other idiotic comments you made, no one ever said "felonies and misdemeanors trump halacha." That makes no sense whatsoever probably because YOU made it up.
But tell me, is there a justification under halacha to commit the federal crimes of money laundering, tax evasion, conspiracy, and the other crimes charged?
Incidentally, if you cannot personally figure out when someone is committing a Chilul Hashem then all your Torah learning amounts to Gurnisht.



