Home › Forums › In The News › Lev Tahor – what now? › Reply To: Lev Tahor – what now?
The were only in Quebec because they had the same issues in Monsey! No Rabbonim or askonim stood up for them and several were very outspoken against them. Unless the “notoriously anti-Semitic Monseyites” were out to get them too? Explain that contradiction: How come Monsey has no problem with the thousands of Chassidim that live within its borders but gave endless tzores to this small group of a few dozen? Why does Montreal not treat Tosh the same way they treated LT?
You are ignoring most of my objections and comments instead repeating the same falsehoods and half-truths over and over again.
I repeat myself. Most of the articles written against LT came from frum authors in frum news sources who actually went and spoke with LT members themselves. Although there were some off the derech frum-hating people that accused them, they were the minority.
I repeat again. One of the reasons I stopped reading Ami magazine was because of how they addressed two of the major allegations against Lev Tahor. The teen marriages and taking kids from their parents. Both were brushed aside. My memory isn’t perfect, but it sure isn’t that faulty. If you have the article in front of you (as you claim) then read those parts again and explain them.
I repeat noch veiter. There is no Da’as Torah in the LT cult. Everything is dictated by their guru who is a Ba’al Teshuva that spent less time in Yeshiva than most people in CR. The members grow up barely knowing how to read a gemara, yet they spend all day reciting the words of this mans books.
I repeat for the last time. They have no support of gedolim. Only a small handful of Rabbonim have spoken in support of them. And said support usually consists of “Don’t be so harsh to them, you don’t know all the details.” But that’s eclipsed by all the Rabbonim who have publicly spoken out against them.
If you could answer those objections, I will see your argument as having merit. As it stands, all you’ve been doing is repeating the same thing: that my sources can’t be trusted as you don’t think that they are frum enough.