How To Use Twitter

I sometimes look over my new followers and wonder if they want to date me.

DCThrowback writes to Steve Sailer:

1.) Utilize the mute button for people whom you follow but who do not tweet much of value. They’ll never know they’ve been muted.

2.) Using other people’s lists enables you to be able to read people w/o following them. If you create a list, you can mute people in your main timeline, but you read them when you want. For example, let’s say you’re a fan of UCLA football. You can follow some national and local writers to get up to date info on the team, but you don’t want it clogging up your tweets from @glaivester on the national question, so you can mute them regularly if you don’t want to hear about some UCLA beat guy complaining about airport coffee.

Follow all the writers, mute ‘em, then put them on a Sailer UCLA CFB list. Then on Saturday night, you click over after/during the game, you see the instant reactions, but they don’t clog up your timeline on Wed at midnight.

3.) I follow an absurd amount of people, some of whom rarely tweet. The karmic followback is a nice touch. Bottom line: people who tweet out personal stuff, unless humorous or interesting rarely do well. It’s mostly a meritocracy among the high IQ set. And they give their nuggets or ideas away for free, which is amazing to me. If the price of that is a link to their latest article, I am totally okay with that trade.

4.) Must follows from the Sailer comment threads include @danfromdc, @dpinsen, @sobl1, @heartiste, @glaivester, @mangan150 etc. There are likely more, esp among the NRx set, but that’s a great start.

Posted in Twitter | Comments Off

Are R. Barry Freundel’s Orthodox Conversions Still Valid?

I ask historian Marc B. Shapiro: “What do you think of the RCA coming out with a quick statement that all of R. Freundel’s conversions are valid? I suspect haredim now have even more reason to dismiss all MO conversions.”

Marc responds: “Why shouldn’t they be valid. He was not a public violator of Jewish law, so as far as halakhah is concerned, what is done remains valid.”

Selwyn: “We should encourage converts – and welcome them in. Judaism is global (all peoples prayed at the Temple in Jerusalem), pro-peace (we pray for it constantly – in every service), the original environmentalists (Tu Bishvat ) and we have much to offer adherents and society. We also believe sincerely that any path to a legitimate peace-loving God is to be embraced.”

Chaim Amalek: Instead of calling this a “conversion,” I think we ought to follow modern idioms and call it a “neshama reassignment.” We would then call “converts” “TransYidden”.

Posted in Conversion, R. Barry Freundel | Comments Off

I Want To Understand How Los Angeles Orthodox Jews Use The Bankruptcy Game

A week ago, I posted about the $7.25 million fraud judgment against Antony Gordon (attorney, hedge fund king, motivational speaker, Orthodox rabbi) and his Chapter Seven bankruptcy.

I’ve never had any money and given my WASP background, I’ve never been comfortable with the buccaneering approach to finance so I’m totally out to sea when I try to understand how Orthodox Jews roll.

My interest here is primarily poetic. I want to know the Orthodox Jewish bankruptcy filing as a literary genre. You don’t read a love note the same way you read a gas bill and you don’t analyze a rabbi’s Chapter Seven filing the same way you would a black man’s filing.

Before I begin, let me just say that it would be for the best if the goyim read no further.

Now, let’s say you have five kids in Jewish day school and you roll up $400,000 in credit card debt living like a mentch. You find yourself in a bit of bother and you’d like a clean slate. As a God-fearing Orthodox Jew, you have a divine obligation to live as well as you can, to provide for your family and friends, to donate to Torah and to express the light of HaShem wherever you go. This costs a pretty shekel and business does not always go well and so you might find yourself on a sticky wicket with 18 runs to chase and just three balls to go before the end of the match.

So you pray to God, you meditate, you get in touch with your feelings, you find your conscience, you consult with the wisdom of your ancestors, you seek guidance from the sacred text and you talk to the various rabbis you’ve supported over the years and you begin to see that you did not accumulate this outrageous amount of debt, God did. You’re the victim! Now the heavens part and you see opportunities in a well-done bankruptcy. The gematria of “bankruptcy” is “redemption.”

You have assets but you want to be rid of your creditors. What’s a Yid to do?

Let’s say you have $500,000 in assets but $1,000,000 in debts and you want to keep some of the good things you own. So when you report your debts, you list off all these Orthodox Jews you owe money to so that you inflate your debts to, say, $6,000,000. Now your goyisha creditors think, “Ohmygod, this guy is really upside down. We’ll take any deal he offers us.” So you defraud your creditors by inventing debts you hold to friends.

You’ll notice on Antony Gordon’s bankruptcy filing that many of his creditors are Othodox Jewish friends such as attorney David Schwarcz, Richard Horowitz, Tony Namvar. I am sure Rabbi Gordon is on the up and up, but less ethical people are prone to abuse this process.

The judge in his case is named “Deborah J. Saltzman.” How wonderful are the ways of God!

The one thing, however, that bankruptcy cannot discharge is a fraud judgment.

Rabbi Menachem Gottesman of Harkham Hillel fame has a son who declared a bankruptcy about a four years (with credit card debt around $300,000) that was a thing of poetic beauty only equaled in the Jewish tradition by the prophet Isaiah.

In the late 1990s, accountant and real estate developer Brian Dror, an Orthodox Jew in Fairfax – La Brea, was rocking and rolling. He ran in the David Rubin crowd. He put his house in a special trust in the late 1990s. Then he went bankrupt in circa 2008 and creditors were not able to get his home. There was a big pharmacist in the Los Angeles Orthodox community who was arrested in 2011 and Brian Dror put up his home for her bail.

Chaim Amalek writes:

When Moshiach comes, all the goyim we owed money to will bankrupt themselves for the honor of cancelling that debt and repaying double it to us. Just so that they might boast to the goyim they know, “I gave money to a Jew.”

Posted in bankruptcy, Orthodoxy | Comments Off

Because Portland Is White

This Washington Post articles fails to mention that Portland has the highest percentage of white people of any American city. That’s the only way it can sustain all these cool quirky collaborative ventures. Imagine public vegetable gardens in the downtown of a city filled with blacks? Imagine a tool sharing economy? A bike sharing economy in Detroit? It would not work.

America’s new sharing economy will only work as long as it remains the overwhelming province of whites and asians. If blacks begin using Uber and AirBNB in high numbers, the sharing economy will go to hell.

The Washington Post reports: “Of all the Very Portland things that exist in Portland, there is a plot of land next to City Hall, right outside the building’s front portico, where the city is growing its own Swiss chard.”

How much respect would downtown black youth give a Swiss chard garden?

America was a country of neighborliness when it was 90% white (the 1950s and earlier).

There’s not a whisper about race in this Washington Post story. I guess it is too obvious and too boring of an angle.

In another article, the Post writes: “Racial discrimination in housing wasn’t merely commonplace in the 1940s and ’50s; it was government policy. The Federal Housing Administration helped finance the construction of many suburban places like Levittown on the condition that they exclude blacks. And it underwrote mortgages to white families there with the expectation that their property values would only hold if blacks did not move in.”

Now we know better of course about how much the presence of blacks enhances property values and that kindly neighborly feeling.

Jason Richwine writes about Harvard Political Scientist Robert Putnam‘s finding that racial diversity, in particular the presence of blacks and latinos, is inversely proportionate to a neighborhood’s social capital:

Putnam walked us through how he came to his conclusion. At first, it was just a simple correlation. Looking at his list of the most trusting places, Putnam found whole states such as New Hampshire and Montana, rural areas in West Virginia and East Tennessee, and cities such as Bismarck, North Dakota and Fremont, Michigan. Among the least trusting places were the cities of Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Houston. The most trusting places tended to be homogenously white, while the least trusting places were highly diverse.

Putnam told us he had been fairly certain the correlation would go away once other factors were taken into account. But it didn’t. He entered a long list of control variables into regression analyses that predict elements of social capital such as neighborly trust and civic participation. Many factors—especially younger age, less education, and higher poverty and crime rates—seem to damage community relations. But none of these factors could explain the robust, negative relationship between ethnic diversity and social capital. Sounding almost defeated, Putnam told us that ethnic diversity is not merely correlated with certain community problems—it causes them.

After finishing his presentation of the data, Putnam began a class discussion. He asked us whether we thought that all relevant scientific findings, no matter how disagreeable, deserve a public airing. Perhaps he was just trying to get us to think about difficult issues, but Putnam seemed genuinely conflicted himself. His concerns were rooted, understandably, in his personal politics. A man of the Left, he told us that he was deeply worried about being seen as advocating some form of “ethnic cleansing,” or being associated with the far Right in general.

From Robert Putnam’s Wikipedia entry:

In recent years, Putnam has been engaged in a comprehensive study of the relationship between trust within communities and their ethnic diversity. His conclusion based on over 40 cases and 30 000 people within the United States is that, other things being equal, more diversity in a community is associated with less trust both between and within ethnic groups. Although limited to American data, it puts into question both the contact hypothesis and conflict theory in inter-ethnic relations. According to conflict theory, distrust between the ethnic groups will rise with diversity, but not within a group. In contrast, contact theory proposes that distrust will decline as members of different ethnic groups get to know and interact with each other. Putnam describes people of all races, sex, socioeconomic statuses, and ages as “hunkering down,” avoiding engagement with their local community—both among different ethnic groups and within their own ethnic group. Even when controlling for income inequality and crime rates, two factors which conflict theory states should be the prime causal factors in declining inter-ethnic group trust, more diversity is still associated with less communal trust.

Lowered trust in areas with high diversity is also associated with:

Lower confidence in local government, local leaders and the local news media.
Lower political efficacy – that is, confidence in one’s own influence.
Lower frequency of registering to vote, but more interest and knowledge about politics and more participation in protest marches and social reform groups.
Higher political advocacy, but lower expectations that it will bring about a desirable result.
Less expectation that others will cooperate to solve dilemmas of collective action (e.g., voluntary conservation to ease a water or energy shortage).
Less likelihood of working on a community project.
Less likelihood of giving to charity or volunteering.
Fewer close friends and confidants.
Less happiness and lower perceived quality of life.
More time spent watching television and more agreement that “television is my most important form of entertainment”.
Putnam published his data set from this study in 2001[4][5] and subsequently published the full paper in 2007.[6]

Putnam has been criticized for the lag between his initial study and his publication of his article. In 2006, Putnam was quoted in the Financial Times as saying he had delayed publishing the article until he could “develop proposals to compensate for the negative effects of diversity” (quote from John Lloyd of Financial Times).[7] In 2007, writing in City Journal, John Leo questioned whether this suppression of publication was ethical behavior for a scholar, noting that “Academics aren’t supposed to withhold negative data until they can suggest antidotes to their findings.”[8] On the other hand, Putnam did release the data in 2001 and publicized this fact.[9] The proposals that the paper contains are located in a section called “Becoming Comfortable with Diversity” at the end of his article. This section has been criticized for lacking the rigor of the preceding sections. According to Ilana Mercer “Putnam concludes the gloomy facts with a stern pep talk”.[10]

In 2007 he briefly met Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi to discuss the role of civil society in the Libyan political context.

Posted in Blacks, Portland, Whites | Comments Off

Who Are The Victims Of Domestic Violence?

From the blog Just Not Said:

Glen Filthie said:

A cop friend summed up domestic abuse beautifully, as far as I am concerned. He says, and I quote almost verbatim – that domestic violence is almost always a case of two idiots fighting, and the smaller or weaker idiot losing.

Having been ‘volunteered’ for charity work at the local battered women’s shelter on occasion – I wholeheartedly agree. 99% of those ‘abused women’ are anything but victims.

And Andrew said:

I recently spoke to girl who worked at a battered women’s shelter and she said exactly this:

“After half a day working there I wanted to go and get drunk and beat the shit out of them.”

Posted in Crime | Comments Off

Call Chabad

I’m reading Rabbi Joseph Telushkin’s biography (Rebbe: The Life and Teachings of Menachem M. Schneerson, the Most Influential Rabbi in Modern History) and he writes on pages 451:

The head of one of the largest Jewish federations in the United States told R. Telushkin that upon assuming leadership, he made a dozen phone calls to a variety of synagogues, posing as a married man in his early 30s with two children who had been unemployed for more than a year. He was broke and wanted a synagogue home for the holidays. The range of responses and the level of sympathy extended varied, but there was only one bit of advice that was uniformly offered by all twelve institutions.

“Call Chabad.”

Posted in Chabad | Comments Off

Protestant Countries Are Particularly Vulnerable To Political Correctness

British thinker Derek Turner says: “Political correctness derives from the 1960s and the University of California Berkeley campus and then extended across the Western world. Protestant countries are particularly susceptible to it because of the guilt complex built into Calvinism and Presbyterianism. It is more deep-seated in Northern Europe, America, Canada, and Australia than Italy and Spain. I understand the term was first used by Trotsky in the 1920s.”

“There’s a great temptation among conservatives to want to have lost. There’s a gothic sensibility, that I am the last of my type. It’s an exciting romantic image, a want to be defeated. I’m drawn that way myself.”

“Conservatives are naturally melancholic and want to believe the worst. The neo-conservatives tend to be more upbeat and utopian. That’s one of the reasons we dislike them so much because they’re extraordinarily naive.”

“Islam is already under siege [in Europe]. I see nothing wrong with Islam in its own right but it poses difficulties to Christendom (aka the West). The history of our confrontation is an unfortunate one.”

“Every European country has a folk memory of Islamic subjugation… I don’t think Islam belongs in Europe.”

Posted in Conservatives, Islam | Comments Off

Aish Ha Torah New York Vs Jacob Fetman

Jacob Fetman petitioned the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Kings County, to hear his appeal and it was denied by Justice Demarest.

Jacob Fetman maintains he is innocent. He says on an invite-only blog that “Aish NY used a sham ‘rabbinical arbitration’ that after 3 meetings decided I owe 20 million dollars!”

On May 28, 2014, Jacob Fetman wrote:

On May 27, 2014 I gave the court an affidavit showing the truth – the extreme duress of this ‘arbitration’ process, the illegalities of it (Ex Parte communication etc.) I hope and pray that Judge Demarest will take the time to review my affidavit and the suggestion I was making in the very last paragraph.

Rabbi Cohen made a huge mistake – the fact is I did not steal money from Aish! not $2.4 million and certainly not $20,000,000

I hope that an investigation will commence and I hope that the guilty parties will pay for what they did, the TERROR they put me and my family thru, the heartache, literary blackmailing me – abusing me, emotionally and physically to such an extent that I can no longer function properly.

In his appeal, Jacob Fetman asked: “Your Honor — I request that you refer this case to the NYS Attorney General Charities Bureau and the US Attorney General — I welcome and full and complete investigation. I have nothing to hide.”

Here are excerpts from Jacob Fetman’s appeal:

Aish HaTorah NY is a wonderful organization with a very important mission statement, headed by a thoroughly corrupt individual, Rabbi Kenneth Yitz Greenman. I knew of the myriad ways that he literally had his hands in donors pockets, but I felt that I could not protest because my job was on the line. I knew that this was the way things were run and if I didn’t go along with it, someone else would do this for him.

…Aish New York consistently and for years has reported Rabbi Greenman’s salary at a fraction of what it was. I was instructed by him to report his salary this way because he felt that donors will not give him money if they would know that his salary was between $350,000 and $400,000 per annum. His last reported W2 compensation was $101,409 which was about 25% of his real cost to the organization. Shielded from this report are tuition payments to his kids’ schools, his house mortgage which was paid direct from the Aish accounts, various trips and bills…that were paid directly by Aish and not reported. Perhaps the most egregious way of him shielding his income was by putting his wife Lauren on payroll for $50,000 a year.

For years I have felt that Rabbi Greenman was only holding on to me because I just knew too much. I knew of his corrupt ways of getting donations from his donors. Aish had an annual budget of approximately three and a half million dollars, but you cannot solicit a donor for a seven figure donation if your budget is relatively small, as no one wants to sponsor half of your annual budget. Rabbi Greenman came up with the idea of affiliates; unrelated parts of the organization which will be managed by us but will have nothing to do with us really. They would be wholly managed and run by outside directors, but Aish NY will run their budgets through Aish NY accounting books; thereby creating the net effect to show as if our budget is far greater than it really is…

Screenshot (1)

Screenshot (2)

Screenshot (3)

Screenshot (4)

Screenshot (5)

Screenshot (6)

Screenshot (7)

Screenshot (8)

Screenshot (9)

Posted in Aish HaTorah | Comments Off

Are Wives Grateful For Their Husbands?

I never go to Orthodox homes for a meal where the husband expresses contempt for the wife but about a third of the time (though never in Chabad), I see the wife express her contempt for her husband’s looks, his kiddush, his clumsy way making the table, etc.

Do wives today ever say to their husbands, “Please, I have a headache tonight, please take the Guatemalan maid servant?” Or are they less understanding than during Torah times?

Darren: “That’s a great fantasy, but the Jewish wives pick the most hideous help, so that there isn’t even that urge.”

I’ve noticed that. Latinos women are often hot in their teens but rarely afterward.

* Now that Jack Lew, Linda Greenhouse and Joseph Lieberman need a new moral leader, I would like to humbly submit myself (given that I’ve never hidden a camera in a mikveh).

Posted in Jews | Comments Off

The Rebbe Vs The Organized Jewish Community

I sometimes think, and here I must gulp before I can summon the courage to express my shameful thought, and I am sure I must be wrong here and I should not even say this out loud, but between you and me, I sometimes think that the organized Jewish community (largely run by Ashkenazim of East European origin) is the biggest danger to America today. Blacks and Muslims, who many would say are the biggest danger to America today are simply not intelligent enough, on average, to destroy the country. Ashkenazi Jews, by contrast, are the smartest group around and therefore they are the most capable of doing great good and great harm.

Here’s the primary reason I hate the mainstream Jewish organizations — they all (including the Orthodox Union and Agudas Yisrael) support immigration amnesty, which will destroy America.

Here are more reasons I despise the big Jewish groups (and, by contrast, love the Rebbe and Chabad and the typical hard-working law-abiding Orthodox Jew who loathes third-world immigration and does not care about civil rights for blacks, trannies, and sodomites). I’m reading Rabbi Joseph Telushkin’s biography (Rebbe: The Life and Teachings of Menachem M. Schneerson, the Most Influential Rabbi in Modern History) and he writes on pages 255-258:

Public opposition to the prayer [in public schools] came largely, though by no means exclusively, from the organized Jewish community; secular organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union, which had a disproportionately high percentage of Jewish members, were heavily involved in this battle as well. A brief urging the Court to outlaw all such prayers in public schools was submitted by the Synagogue Council of America, a national organization representing rabbis in the different denominations, and the National Jewish Community Relations Council, representing Jewish communities throughout the United States. The brief’s essential argument was that although the New York State prayer did not advocate a specific religion — it spoke rather of “Almighty God” — it still violated the First Amendment, which ordains that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” Although this constitutional provision is popularly understood as meaning that Congress is forbidden to establish a state religion, the Jewish organizations argued that a prayer promoting an “acknowledgment of dependence upon God and the invocation of his blessings” constitutes a preference for theistic religions that affirm a personal God, over nontheistic religions, such as Buddhism, which do not. In the view of these organizations, such a prayer has no place in a public school. The government, they argued, is obliged not only to be neutral among competing faiths “but also between religion and non-religion.” The state, quite simply, has no business participating in any way in religious affairs. The signatories emphasized that their opposition to prayer in public schools had nothing to do with opposition to religion. Indeed, they had submitted this brief “on behalf of the coordinating bodies of 70 Jewish organizations, including the national bodies representing congregations and rabbis of Orthodox, Conservative and Reform Judaism….
The [1962] ruling [of the US Supreme Court prohibiting prayer in public schools] was widely hailed throughout the American Jewish community, many of whose older members recalled a time when readings from the New Testament were commonly conducted in public schools. The fact that the New York State prayer was decidedly nondenominational had not allayed the common Jewish fear that any opening in the wall between religion and state could eventually lead to the favoring of Christianity over other religions.
The most noted leader within the Jewish community who stood out almost alone in opposition to this commonly enunciated Jewish position was the Rebbe.

The Rebbe also pushed for government support of religious schools, something the organized Jewish community opposed (pg. 266-268).

The Rebbe started Chabad’s public celebrations of Hanukkah in the early 1970s, again opposing the Jewish establishment.

The head of the Reform rabbinate in America, Joseph Glaser, wrote to the Rebbe:

It has come to my attention that Lubavitcher Chasidim are erecting Hanukkiot and holding religious services in connection therewith on public property in various locations throughout the United States.

This is as much a violation of the constitutional principle of separation of church and state as is the erection of Christmas trees and creches depicting the birth of Jesus. It weakens our hand when we protest this intrusion of Christian doctrine into the public life of American citizens and thus, it is really not worth the value received…

On pg. 264, R. Telushkin wrote:

…Glaser offered a rationale rooted in Jewish law for his position: Since the obligation to light Chanukah candles is fulfilled when the menorah is lit on Jewish property, there is “no halachic necessity for doing so on public property.” Glaser insisted, therefore, that in addition to being unnecessary, such an act also is undesirable. Jewish comfort in the United States has resulted in large part from the constitutionally guaranteed separation of church and state… If Jews do not want to be exposed to Christian observances that they find “offensive”…then it is equally wrong for them to carry out Jewish religious rituals in the public square.

The Rebbe was unmoved.

Posted in agudath israel, Chabad, Haredi, Hasidim, Jews, orthodox union | Comments Off