RSS
Approximately 1,500 residents of Beit Shemesh gathered late Monday to protest the recent wave of Frum violence in the city, calling on police and municipality officials to take stronger action against Chareidi extremists.
As Haaretz reported: “The protesters, many of them Anglo residents of the city’s modern Orthodox neighborhoods, demonstrated against what they call growing religious intimidation and coercion on behalf of Haredi fringe elements.”
Two weeks ago, a woman and an IDF soldier were assaulted on a Beit Shemesh bus for sitting next to each other - as reported HERE on YW.
BRAVO! It’s about time…
Rabbi Yaakov Horowitz of AGUDAH also is helping in the protest via an online petition through his website. (So it’s not just a ‘modern’ orthodox protest)
Comment by torahis1 — November 6, 2007 @ 11:26 am
ABOUT TIME
Comment by TOMIM — November 6, 2007 @ 12:02 pm
Good for them, and G-d speed, cause they’ll probably need it…
Comment by illini07 — November 6, 2007 @ 12:18 pm
How sad
Comment by Fiften raidel — November 6, 2007 @ 12:31 pm
Good for them. The protesters were not “Modern Orthodox”, though; they were largely Dati Leumi Torani - very Frum Dati Leumi, a group that for the most part does not exist in the US. Their Tznius and Halachic standards are generally on a par with “American Yeshivish” standards, but their Hashkafa is based on the teachings of Rav Kook Z”L.
an Israeli Yid
Comment by IsraeliYid — November 6, 2007 @ 12:53 pm
FINALLY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
“You don’t have to be modern to hate violence ”
Wish I was there.
Comment by z — November 6, 2007 @ 1:02 pm
torahis1 Where did you come to the conclusion that this is a ‘modern’ protest? Anglos in RBS are found within all groups of frumkeit, except ‘violent extremists’!! Hurray, anglos, BTW this includes Americans, South Africans, and British residents..
Comment by zionflag — November 6, 2007 @ 1:56 pm
The ONLY way the violence stops is if the Israeli Gedolim unequivocally state that it is a Chillul Hashem and put into cherem anyone who engages in it. Unfortunately, I do not have much hope that they will act.
Comment by coachred613 — November 6, 2007 @ 2:30 pm
zionflag, the Haaretz article used the word ‘modern’ when describing the neighborhood.
I dont want anyone thinking for one second that it’s only the modern orthodox who are protesting, and that is why I brought up the bit about R’ Horowitz and the petition.
Unfortunately, there are posters / commenters who have stated plainly (on this site) their support for the violence (or defense of the vilence, or weak condemnations like “its wrong, BUT…”) in the interests of furthering their form Yiddishkeit. I feel it necessary to battle these apologists at every turn. As they do not represent the Torah in anyway shape or form, rather they are part of a fringe (an extreme) that is killing Yiddishkeit, causing massive Chillul Hashem unseen in our days and ultimately causing people to hate Chareidim.
Comment by torahis1 — November 6, 2007 @ 3:16 pm
“but their Hashkafa is based on the teachings of Rav Kook Z”L.”
I think you meant AND their hashkafa, rather than BUT.
Comment by cityofgold — November 6, 2007 @ 3:20 pm
i didn’t attend - i just saw the location on the fliers (which was in a very modern place) and automatically ruled it out. maybe soon they’ll make hafganot against me
Comment by kitzur_dot_net — November 6, 2007 @ 3:41 pm
I’m an old reader but never commented but I wanna express my view on Y.W. it looks to me that you love putting in negative news on CHASIDIM I don’t know why but it could be because your a LITVISHER or an other reason but its not right there is a lot of chasidim who are reading your news and like it but won’t stand up and oppose you either cuz you YW start screaming on them or your friends start calling them with all kind of words, PLEASE STOP THE “SINAS CHINOM”
Editors Response: YW never puts negative news about Chasidim. In this particular incident, there are people who dress like Frum Yidden who are not acting like they should. Attacking a woman on a bus? Pouring bleach on a woman’s head in Meah Shearim?
Which Chassidus do they belong to? The answer is NONE. They represent themselves - and have no Rebbe.
For the record, Yeshivaworld has a large section on the website with all chasidishe news taking place. Did you ever find YW writing negative there? Click HERE, start reading - and let us know.
All the best
Comment by jeter — November 6, 2007 @ 4:19 pm
coachred613, It is real chutzpadik for you to talk about the Gedolim like that. You should seek mechila.
Also, these people should be prosecuted if they committed any violence. Nevertheless, that does not negate the chilul hashem and public sinfulness of the people who instigate the public with their lewd public behavior.
Comment by Cherry Hill — November 6, 2007 @ 4:59 pm
Cherry Hill - you are exactly who I am talking about in my earlier post as an ‘apologist’ for these thugs.
A) you made a statement “if” they committed an violence. Well, they did and they do (nice attempt to deny it)
B) Who exactly is being ’sinful’ and what is the ‘lewd public behavior’ you are referring to? Or do you mean anyone who dresses and looks different, or follows another mehalech or perhaps not as machmir (and extreme) as you are. So therefore you accuse them of such things?
C) I dont find anything offensive at all in what Coachred613 said regarding the Gedolim not taking action. I find his remark speculative and he may have to eat his words if he is proven wrong…
Comment by torahis1 — November 6, 2007 @ 5:57 pm
torahis1,
I would be very wary of accepting as fact the reporting of rags like haaretz, ynet, or jpost. So it remains to be determined if the accused (if their identify ever be known) committed any acts of violence.
Secondly, if someone walks or acts in the public pritzusdik, that is lewd behavior.
Comment by Joseph — November 6, 2007 @ 6:27 pm
I was I was at the rally, I just want to straighten out a few facts.
- It took place in the Sheinfeld neighborhood of Beit Shemesh which is predominately Dati Leumi and secular. This neighborhood directly abuts RBS B.
- I don’t think there were 1500 people. I’m not an expert at this, but I’d say around 700-800.
- Almost everyone was either DL or Secular. I did not notice any people that outwardly could be described as Chareidi. The one person I knew that came from RBS A is herself DL.
- Aside from the horrible fact that many (100’s) of the Chareidim in RBS B do behave as described, knowing they have these predilictions, the Mayor and Town Council are equally responsible for building RBS B along the only route to RBS A and with several Apt buildings facing the Sheinfeld neighborhood.
- Maybe some of our secular neighbors don’t dress to highest of Tznius standards, but ironically it’s frum, tzniously dressed women, who have been verbally and physically harrased by these cretins.
- Whatever you read in the papers, no matter how anti-Chareidi you believe it is, is only a fraction of the horrors that many of these criminals perpetrate in the name of our religion. To many of use there is little difference between them and Muslim fundamentalists who also use violence to achieve their “goals”.
- These people do not respect “gedolim”. They have their own “Rabbis” who certainly don’t discourage this behavior.
Comment by msl613 — November 6, 2007 @ 7:02 pm
Although what these people are doing is NOT right (that is, if you have 100% clear , unrefutable proof of their actions, as very often a lot of gravy is added to stories like that), I still feel that YW should not be the shofar tooting the horn against them. And adding fuel to a fire that a lot of “sonei hatorah” want to stoke is NOT what a Torahdige NEWS outlet like you should be getting involved in.
However, if you do, you should always present the other side. With that I mean NOT the perpetrators of violence, but the people who hurt the pain of Hashem Yisborach when his name is desecrated by the gross immodesty unfortunately displayed all too often on Israeli public transportation vehicles.
Comment by DaasTorahWtchdg — November 6, 2007 @ 7:16 pm
Joseph, numerous eyewitnesses have come forward to verify, including someone I know personally. Don’t try to deny that it happened by pointing out how “anti-frum” every single news source other than the Charedi ones obviously are (sarcasm intended).
Second, there has been nothing to indicate that there was ANY pritzus involved whatsoever. Numerous well-regarded poskim hold that there is no problem with a man and a woman sitting next to each other on a bus.
Third (toward Cherry Hill as well), the fact that someone is acting in a way that you view as lewd or incorrect is NOT an instigation, especially to violent acts, in situations like the one at hand. Otherwise, I’m sure I could find plenty of “instigations” to hit you as well…
Comment by illini07 — November 6, 2007 @ 7:50 pm
illini,
My comment regarding the great and terrible problem trying our generation and indeed society regarding pritzus, was general in nature and not regarding any particular situation or occurrence.
Secondly, I completely stand by my assertion that rags like haaretz, ynet, and jpost are completely unreliable and untrustworthy (in addition to being anti-frum and anti-Torah), that anything printed in them that happens to have even a shred of truth to it is certainly purely coincidental and unintentional.
Finally, nowhere in my comment have I insinuated that public lewdness is a license for anyone to engage in violence or is justified by it. The term ‘’instigation'’ is yours, not mine. The problem posed by rampant pritzus in our society must be dealt with by the proper Torah authorities, not by each man on his own.
Comment by Joseph — November 6, 2007 @ 8:37 pm
Actually, the term instigation was used by Cherry Hill, I did not intend to imply that it was yours (”as well” should have been replaced by “primarily”)
Comment by illini07 — November 6, 2007 @ 8:43 pm
Alright, that clarifies that. (The ‘’as well'’ — in paranthesis — made it sound like it was primarily addressed to me.)
Comment by Joseph — November 6, 2007 @ 9:12 pm
“Israeli public transportation vehicles”
When driving in public transportation anywhere in the world, the modesty level leaves alot to be desired. NO ONE forces a person to travel on public transportation,,,,don’t like it, travel a different mode of transportation. Don’t like how someone dresses, stay inside. Stop protecting the bullies and acquiesing to their tactics, ZERO TOLERANCE for bullying. (anywhere and anyone)
Comment by bklynmom — November 6, 2007 @ 9:14 pm
bklynmom - ‘’Don’t like how someone dresses, stay inside'’ is simply wrong. Pritzus needs to be addressed, not ignored. A lowest common denminator approach never works and always backfires.
Comment by Joseph — November 6, 2007 @ 9:42 pm
To Joseph and cherry hill- Have you heard of “Rasha, Lamah sakeh es raeecha”?
1)Since when does prizus allow them to then touch the woman by HITTING THEM? (YES it is a fact thatit occurred)
2) It had nothing to do with how the woman was dressed but that she was sitting in the front of the bus.
3)I do not know of any case where somone does teshuva when they are treated in this manner or stones thrown at their car. I know of no Godol or no “DAAS Torah” that have ever done such a thing.
Please remember as an example the famous story of the Chofetz Chaim who hen speaking to a bochur who had been smoking on Shabbos just held and strked his hand and cried.
It is time we stop putting our geiva in front and think we are so much more superior and look down on those whom we consider as less frum! We have lost our way and allowed Crumkite to replace frumkite and geiva to replace true anivus
Comment by Goodmidos — November 6, 2007 @ 10:21 pm
Goodmidos, act your name and think twice before speaking.
P.S. Re-read my comment #19 FIRST SENTENCE, particularly the last 7 words of that sentance.
.
Comment by Joseph — November 6, 2007 @ 10:31 pm
The very fact that frum Jews acting like animal can even be a subject of debate is the saddest fact of the day.
I am embarrased that this rally wasn’t lead by Gedolim
Comment by z — November 6, 2007 @ 11:40 pm
Who is any one of us to denounce the Gedolim for not supporting this rally? Obviously they had their reasons. Perhaps the modern orthodox / dati leumi layman crowd that organized this rally had ulterior motives. Just a possiblity, and not an unreasonable one at that.
But whatever the reason, NO ONE here has any right to question the Gedolim for not supporting this rally. We must accept their judgement. Period. We may question THEM (not yenta about it here) respectfully and ask why they didn’t support this rally. But we must accept their decision as final.
Comment by Cherry Hill — November 7, 2007 @ 2:21 am
Goodmiddos, thanks for sayingitasitis for a change.
Comment by sayitlikeitis — November 7, 2007 @ 8:50 am
Thank you, YW Editor, for not printing loshon hara and help the ‘campaign’ against chareidim. Our neshamos thank you!!
Comment by tatti — November 7, 2007 @ 9:37 am
Am I correct in remembering that there is a GeMaRa where a prominent sage saw a presumably Jewish woman walking on the street in a bright red dress, and he tore it off of her, only to find out that she was a gentile, and he was forced to indemnigy her 400 Zuzim? Does this GeMaRa legitimize direct action in the case of pritzus? Is Pritzus itself a form of assault on Frum society?
Comment by deepthinker — November 7, 2007 @ 11:50 am
Cherry Hill- NO ONE has the right….
That’s your most humble opinion so speak for yourself. The rest of us will call a spade and in this case, “the Emperor has no clothes”
Comment by torahis1 — November 7, 2007 @ 11:51 am
#30. “Masan Masan, daled meios zuzi shaveh.” (It is in Brachos in the 30s or 40s, on an amud alef about 2/3 of the way down. I don’t have access to a gemara here. I’ll supply the exact marei makom later, if you’re still interested. Unless someone knows a website where i can find Shas in a .pdf or similar format and I’ll find it on line.) The action was legitimate there. The Knas was only because it was a gentile women. And the Amora’s reaction is that he had made the correct decision. (Many different deios there as to how much of his decision he felt was correct.)
Comment by midwesterner — November 7, 2007 @ 1:13 pm
Thank You deepthinker and midwesteterner for that point from the Gemorah. It proves that pritzus IS a form of assault on Frum society.
And torahis1, #27 is correct. We lowly nothings have no right to doubt the actions of our Chachomim.
Comment by Joseph — November 7, 2007 @ 1:31 pm
“Just a possiblity, and not an unreasonable one at that”, What’s your agenda, working for the mosad as an undercover agent, want to share all the POSSIBILITIES that you can come up with?.
Comment by bklynmom — November 7, 2007 @ 2:11 pm
TO MIDWESTERNER:
Thank you for the corroboration. It seems to me that the GeMarAh implies that PritZus is a form of violence against the spiritual and physical welfare of the community, and that, therefore, a true Kanoi is entitled to use force to eliminate the threat.
The spiritual threat needs no further explanation. The physical threat is spelled-out in the Torah: “VeLo SaKee Haaretz EsChem BeTamaaChem OSah!”–the Holy Land will vomit you out!
Comment by deepthinker — November 7, 2007 @ 4:38 pm
to (not so) “deepthinker”
These terrorists are attacking frum women who are dressed tzniously by any normal standard. They cannot superimpose their extreme chumras on everyone else and call it “pritzus”.
Comment by msl613 — November 7, 2007 @ 5:46 pm
The same boys who claim to be nothings, as per 33, and do not dare doubt the actions of the Chachamim, suddenly, just 2 posts down, actually have the gall to claim Kanous? Did anyone here read, let alone learn, either the Mishna in Sotah, or the Mesilas Yesharim, to realize that TRUE Kanous isn’t something one picks on the Egged bus ? That madreiga takes decades to achieve, if at all. Please don’t fool yourselves with thinking that those animals who perpetrated such despicable acts in the buses, in Mea Shearim had ANY connection with Kanous, for they have, probably, never even started with the first level - Torah Lishma.
Comment by sammygol — November 7, 2007 @ 6:05 pm
sammy, 33 is my post but two post down it is not. So first get your names straight and don’t attempt to portray it as one.
Not that there is any ‘’kanous'’ in 35, but that is a seperate issue.
Comment by Joseph — November 7, 2007 @ 8:15 pm
I shouldn’t speak for the author of 35, so I’ll retract the comment whether it is advocating “kanous” and let him speak for himself.
If 37 wishes to debate 35 whether kanous is appropriate or not, be my guest — but you’ll first have to agree what the actual circumstances that occurred were — a fact that remains unclear despite unreliable press reports to this day.
But again, don’t attempt to drag my comment into something I never said.
Comment by Joseph — November 7, 2007 @ 10:13 pm
No way, Jose
if someone walks or acts in the public pritzusdik, that is lewd behavior - aren’t those your words?
So, kindly tell us all, why do the reports of the violent acts not to be believed, since they came from “trash media”, yet, you do not have a problem trusting the same sources regarding the mixed sitting that occured, and even posting your editorials that it is lewd. What determines the reliability of the source? Who determines which part of the story is to be trusted? By the way, aren’t you the author of the notion that the “frum” Jews sitting in jails are innocent? Why, then, not presume the same lack of guilt regarding the woman who refused to sit in the back? Is it because she isn’t “heimish”?
Comment by sammygol — November 8, 2007 @ 1:03 am
to MSL613:
Why the ad-hominym attack?
Comment by deepthinker — November 8, 2007 @ 11:46 am
I apologize, usually try to avoid that. Unfortunately, it’s much easier to do when people are Anon.
Comment by msl613 — November 8, 2007 @ 12:13 pm
to msl613:
You are forgiven!
I have no idea what the facts are in this case, but I tend to assume that people are rational, not crazy.
Where there is smoke, there is usually fire.
So, I assume that there are people who are concerned for their children, who moved to Beit Shemesh to get away from the degenerate Israeli secular society, and who are alarmed that this society is creeping in once again in their newfound sanctuary.
Comment by deepthinker — November 8, 2007 @ 2:11 pm
sammy - I don’t trust the zionist press for the weather. Anything printed in their rags is more likely false than true. I have presumed nothing on anyones part in this incident, them or her. And why drag drag heimish into something that has nothing to do with it.
And yes I said that if someone walks or acts in the public pritzusdik, that is lewd behavior. Do you disagree? It was a general statement, not specific to any case.
Comment by Joseph — November 8, 2007 @ 2:43 pm
deepthinker,
“So, I assume that there are people who are concerned for their children, who moved to Beit Shemesh to get away from the degenerate Israeli secular society, and who are alarmed that this society is creeping in once again in their newfound sanctuary.”
Not really. These Yerushalmi Chassidim are being forced to buy outside of their traditional neighborhoods in Jerusalem due to lack of space and high costs.
Even so. Being “alarmed” is one things. Physically attacking others is quite another. I sat near a woman from neighborhood on the bus the other day. She recounted for me how one Shabbos afternoon she was walking on “our side” of the street, dressed with sleeves to her wrists and a skirt to ankles, what one of these cretins walked up to her and spit in her face.
This has nothing to do with “degenerate” Israeli secular society. This has everything to do with treating Yiddishkeit as a zero-sum-game, i.e. if I’m right, you have to be wrong.
Ironically, the chareidi behavior we are seeing more and more of is really no different than the broader “degenerate” secular society. There was just and editorial today in the Jerusalem, related to the behavior of soccer fans, that points this out. Living a Torah life should allow people to be on a higher level than maniacal soccer fans. Its quite a proglem that it’s not.
Comment by msl613 — November 8, 2007 @ 4:12 pm
# 44
Let’s not exaggerate now. If one of those newspapers predicted rain, even you, Joseph, would take your umbrella along. I do not know what you do for a living, but I do assume that you would run to the sales printed in those papers, and avoid driving to places where construction is, according to the same sources. Will you still be sceptical? Perhaps. So who does a doubter do? He checks his information. Consider then, that the attacks MAY have occured, and you need to verify that, in order to prevent future ones, as a concerned citizen, and a religious Jew.
Comment by sammygol — November 8, 2007 @ 5:40 pm
Well Sammy, The point I am making is I wouldn’t spend a penny purchasing those zionist rags considering I have a strong interest in insuring that I do not support their cause even minutely. So I wouldn’t even know their weather prediction. (And no, I would not care less to look at someone elses copy either.) Certainly anything related to religious people printed in those rags have been edited with falsehoods to bring on a bad light.
In any event I do concur thay the attacks MAY have occured and were absolutely wrong IF they did. And they must be prevented.
The above is an absolute given. Seperately, and just as importantly, pritzus — which too MAY have occured by dress or action — is also absolutely wrong and must be prevented.
Of course preventing pritzus is not done with physical violence (certainly not decided by vigilants themselves).
Comment by Joseph — November 8, 2007 @ 8:13 pm
To msl613:
What do you mean by “our side of the street?”
What was the presumed “aveira?”
Comment by deepthinker — November 9, 2007 @ 12:32 pm