mentalblog.com comments:
What does it mean? Is he saying that this meat is Treif and all other Rabbis call it kosher for political reasons ?
zvi, you have been exposed to the fluorescent light for too long, you are starting to see things in black and white only...
Gee, I didn't realize you beat me to this. That's what I get for going out …
There is nothing at all shocking about Yehuda Shain's resignation. Yehuda Shain says that he is fearless in speaking the truth. If he is genuine then he will surely appreciate my fearlessness too.
Yehuda Shain is a rabble rouser who will stop short at nothing in his crusades. I remember as clear as day when following a visit by Rabbi Avrohom Rubin to Empire, Yehuda Shain circulated a letter around Lakewood purportedly from Rabbi Rubin attacking the kashrus at Empire. How embarassing when Rabbi Rubin himself issued a denial that he was the author of the letter. Did Yehuda Shain fearlessly insist that the letter was genuine? No, he skipped town for a week until he felt that he felt that he had safely rode out the storm...
I do not claim to know whether Yehuda Shain is malicious or just misguided and I do not say that he never has a point but I know with certainty that he is totally unreliable and he has often manipulated the truth to suit the purposes of his campaigns. Is he leshem shomayim? If he is then he is even more dangerous...
In the Rubashkin case he has repeatedly attacked Rabbi Weissmandel with a tenuous and unproven mix of speculation and conjecture and it has finally come home to bite him. He is not resigning out of protest he knows that after all his bomb throwing he no longer has a job.
Lets set the record straight!
Wachman claims that I am not reliable in Kashrus. I challenge anyone to come out and show anything in kashrus over the past 20 years that I was not correct.
Rabbi Rubin did not write a report on EMPIRE, he wrote a report on GALIL under Star-K Rabbi Moshe Heinemann.
Rabbi Rubin was brought in after I challenged Rabbi Heineman that his GALIL shechita system is very suceptable to neveilos & treifos.
Rabbi Rubins report back up all of my charges plus many more.
Ultimately Rabbi Heineman faxed to Rabbi Rubin a FORGED copy of his report, which to that Rabbi Rubin wrote that it's a forgery.
I am sorry that "Timtum Halev" has really gotten the better part of you.
I remain,
Since we both claim to be interested in the truth this should be very easy.
Let's first sift out the fact from the rhetoric by an analysis of where we agree and where we disagree and then I believe we can get agreement on how to establish the truth.
1) Fact. Rabbi Rubin visited a poultry shechita under Rabbi Heinemann's hashgocho.
You seem to be saying that it was a Galil plant not co-located with Empire that only later moved to Empire. I say that while you are correct that it was Galil it was always co-located at an Empire plant.
2) Fact. You circulated a report in Lakewood that seemed to be Rabbi Rubin's report on the Galil shechita.
Here we are in total agreement.
3) Fact. Rabbi Rubin issued a public and written denial of a report that he said was issued in his name. This denial was posted in the Lakewood Yeshiva.
You say that you had circulated the original report and not a forgery but that Rabbi Heinemann faxed Rabbi Rubin an altered copy of the genuine report and claimed that you had been circulating the altered version. I say that if this is true then you ought to have gone back to Rabbi Rubin proved your version of events and have him publicly retract his earlier statement. As we both know he never retracted his statement.
3) Fact. After the publication of Rabbi Rubin's statement you were not in Lakewood. The oilem said that you left because you could not face the music.
You say that you left town for other reasons. I say that if you are right about your involvement in the Rubin report then even if, contrary to your assertion, you really left Lakewood because you couldn't stand the heat I'll fully retract what I said about your involvement in the Rubin report but if you are wrong about your involvement then it won't help you even if you can prove that you left town for other reasons.
In other words the key question in the affair of the Rubin affair is did you or did you not circulate an accurate version of the Rubin report. I am convinced that you circulated a forged report and that it's public knowledge that you did and that there was nothing to check with you because the facts are as clear as day. However, if as you contend you are right and I am wrong it should be relatively easy for you to prove. I challenge you for the sake of truth to go ahead and prove it.
Even more important is the issue of how reliable your judgement is on kashrus issues. I am not saying that you are an am ho'oretz. I am saying that you don't know how to accurately assess a situation and how to accurately represent it.
I am so convinced that this is the case that I challenge you to email me the name and contact information of even one widely respected Kashrus authority who believes that your characterizations are anything more than exaggeration and misrepresentation. If you can meet this challenge I will fully retract everything I have said about your reliability.
Lastly and not least I have nothing at all personally aga
Lastly and not least I have nothing at all personally against you and I believe that if you were in my position you would be doing the same thing. I am absolutely convinced that I am right but, I am not G-d, and I can make mistakes. Take me at my word, I am ready to listen and I am ready to fully retract everything I have said. Ho'emes toir darkoh.
RE: Dov Wachman's response.
I don't know where your information originates from but it's not correct.
1- Galil Schechita was located in NY State and had absolutely nothing to do with EMPIRE.
2- Rabbi Rubin did NOT issue any public denial, and there couldn't habe been one posted in Lakewood Yeshiva.
The correct facts are as follows:
Rabbi Rubin wrote to Rabbi M. Genack (head of OU)"Tell Rabbi Heineman that I am very upset that certain individuals "diloi maali" are making forgeries of my reports & there are at least..."
and that was sent to Rabbi Genack privately.
3- Rabbi Heineman couldn't say that I was circulating a forged copy as # 1 Rabbi Heineman was the one sent the original forged copy to Rabbi Rubin with a pretext of can you Rabbi Rubin please water down your report as it is too strong against the Star-K. 2nd of all I didn't get the forged copy till a few months later, so I couldn't circulate it.
4- Rabbi Rubin said I can't write anymore about the correct and the forged version 'cause they (Star-K) will have another document to do as the please( forgeries).
5- I checked on the dates of Rabbi Rubin's report and as far as I can remember I was in Lakewood after Rabbi Rubin's report was written and did not leave town per se, perhaps for a 1-3 day Hashgocha trip which I commonly do.
You can call Rabbi Rubin at his office in Eretz Yisroel and make your own verifications 011-972-89-390-816.
In response to your numbered comments:
1) I will accept the burden of proof for my assertion that Galil was at the same plant as Empire. If I discover that I am wrong I will say so.
2) I remember seeing the letter posted publicly on the walls of the Yeshiva which is not contradicted in any way by your claim that it was initially a private letter. As you well know there are many ways that a private correspondence (for example the report itself) becomes public. I remember clearly that the understanding of those reading it at the time was that "inshi dlo maali" was referring to you.
3) I misunderstood you. I thought that you were saying that Rabbi Heinemann had blamed you for the forgery. You are really alleging, as you clarify, that Rabbi Heinemann cleverly and seemingly innocently sent Rabbi Rubin a forgery without blaming you directly in any way. Subsequently Rabbi Rubin condemned that forgery which made you look bad because everyone assumed that you were guilty of forgery. I agree with you that I should be able to verify this with Rabbi Rubin.
4) I should be able to verify this too with Rabbi Rubin.
5) As I said the greater issue than why or even whether you were absent is whether the report you circulated was genuine or forged. I was convinced that it was forged but you insist that it was genuine and you assert that I can verify that by discussing it with Rabbi Rubin.
In deference to your comments I will observe a time-out until I can verify what is true here. If I am wrong as I wrote earlier I will get back to wherever I have posted my comments and I will retract any and all inaccuracies.
I posting the concluding comment that I got via email from R. Shain.
Tzemach
_______________
R. Shain writes:
Further to Dov Wachmann's comments and wrong information;
A little bit of common sense would be in order,
Rabbi Rubin's original report was the stronger version and the forged one was the watered down copy.
Why in the world would I have an interest in publicizing a watered down version, when I was the one that started the whole thing "that it's an unacceptable system at Galil?
Second of all if I had anything to do with the forged production why would Rabbi Rubin have me represent him & direct his office in the USA & S. America for all these years?
It's not a secret that Rabbi Rubin doesn't use Star-K ingredients or products all these years, you can even ask Rabbi Heineman. If The Star-K is the innocent one Rabbi Rubin would feel comfortable with their products.
It's time to wake up and smell the coffee. I can imagine your let down when you'll realize you were living b'tois all these years, like Reb Chaim Shmuelivetz explains the Posuk "va'yechrad Yitzchok choradah gedolah ad mi'oid", 'cause he lived bi'tois all his life in regard to Eisav.
Yehuda Shain
via
On reflection one thing I am guilty of is the hypocrisy of using Yehuda Shain's own bomb throwing tactics while at the same time attacking him for using such tactics. Only G-d has a right to use midoh k'neged midoh and so in retrospect I have to say that a more level-headed approach would have been more consistent with the point I am making.
I stand by all of what I have said other than the forgeries. Yehuda Shain of course senses correctly that I have been cautious and deliberate in my retractions and there is a reason for it.
The essential problem with Yehuda Shain is that he is very cunning and manipulative but somehow convinces himself all the while that he's nevertheless telling the truth or at least using a means to a greater end.
The real topic of this thread was his alleged resignation from Badatz to protect the US Kosher consumer. If you look at my last sentence in my original posting it read, "He is not resigning out of protest he knows that after all his bomb throwing he no longer has a job." It's no accident that he studiously avoided responding to that part of my post instead making a mountain out of the molehill of where the Galil plant was located. Then when he thought he had me on the run he insisted on manipulating the discussion solely towards the Rubashkin video. He probably thought that he'd get away with it.
Well, he won't. I have a copy of Rabbi Rubin's letter dismissing Yehuda Shain. I can send it to you and any and all that are interested. He is distorting the truth when he says that he resigned. Or in plain English lying.
Not only that I have much more to add and soon I will. He was innocent on forging the Galil letter but he is guilty of so many other distortions of truth.
However, that said I am temporarily making a compromise between a renewed attack without giving much acknowledgement to my own mistakes and a whole hearted retraction which he does not deserve and so I am giving my posts some pause in recognition that I myself made a factual error. But I will be back.
Dov, please address the issues raised in my A plea to Dov Wachmann post.
Tzemach,
I have a lot to say about that and it's not what you want me to say.
Understanding the complexity of what is at stake here requires both an accurate assessment of PETA’s goal and an accurate assessment of the lengths it will go to in pursuit of that goal.
I am mystified that there has been much argument about PETA’s agenda when it is so clearly spelled out in an action alert on a website they have devoted to this campaign.
PETA wants US regulations on shechita to match government regulations in Australia, Canada, and the European Union, countries where shechita is under threat. PETA urges its members to petition the USDA “The United States should follow the lead of Australia, Canada, and the European Union in developing guidelines for religious slaughter” http://www.peta.org/alert/Automa...tem.asp?
id=1193
This has been PETA’s aim all along and explains why in PETA’s initial letter to Rubashkin in June 18 2003, PETA insisted involving Dr Temple Grandin since she was in fact the architect of the compliance of UK shechita to UK government and European Union guidelines where use of the rotating pens is banned.
The issue at stake as stated by PETA is clearly not limited to humane conditions in this or the other plant rather it is the much bigger issue of government regulation of religious practice. Religious freedom here in the US surpasses that in all of Australia, Canada, and the European Union and as religious Jews we should have sharp antennae for all attempts, even well-meaning attempts, to bring the US in line with those countries under whatever pretext.
I am not a member of Agudah and I have engaged in many a heated e-mail thread with Agudah’s Rabbi Shafran. However, in this case, Agudah is the only organization that gets it, that has the big picture and is articulating it.
Tzemach, I do have a problem with the O-U but it is quite different than the problem you and others who are happy to jump on the animal rights bandwagon without giving pause to the ultimate effect. No-one could have predicated where legal gay marriage was heading ten years ago and I can tell you that very few anticipate today how animal rights threaten all shechita in ten years the way it is already in the UK. I'll post more on this if you want but for now I'll just make the point.
The O-U and others have been dangerously equivocating between accepting that there is a problem and then declaring that there is no longer any problem. The O-U and other organizations in their shortsightedness may be threatening not only shechita but religious liberty here in the US.
I could go on and if you insist I will but I think that this "taste" may cause you to reconsider your plea. If you insist you might get what you originally wanted and not like the result
Commenting by HaloScan
