A Message from Jonathan Pollard – You Better Come Home Now

G-d willing, this coming July, my wife and I (and our six oldest kids) will be able to celebrate 30 years since our Aliyah to Eretz Yisrael. The details are in my book and in this post (Tova Haaretz also see update HERE).

One feature of the story is that, before we committed, I asked advice from three Gedolim in Eretz Yisrael. One was HRHG Rav Chaim Kanievsky, ZTL, one was the Gerrer Rebbe, Shlita, and one was HRHG Rav Chaim Pinchus Sheinberg, ZTL. They all encouraged us to come. But I want to repeat the words of Rav Scheinberg, ZTL. He said (in English), “I am pro Eretz Yisrael. You can’t go wrong in Eretz Yisrael.”

We came in July 1997 and our first stop was Har Nof, Jerusalem. We’ve been here ever since. In the early stages, before we actually bought an apartment, we considered settling outside of Jerusalem. When one such option was serious enough for a decision, we went back to some of our previous Rabbinic advisors. 

The first one was Rav Chaim Kanievsky. He said, “You’re not happy in Jerusalem?”. I responded that the conditions were a bit crowded for a large family. He told me that I should make peace with it. He added, “חבל לצאת מירושלים” – It would be a shame to leave Jerusalem. Rav Scheinberg agreed with that. And so, we stayed.

We now have thirty years of living not only in Eretz Yisrael, but in Yerushalayim, to boot. What a tremendous zechus!

Doubtless, it comes with it’s set of yisurim and challenges. I am still fighting with the municipality over my arnona bill and am currently facing hotzaah l’poel (execution of civil judgement). You can see the whole story HERE. The case is currently in District Court and we are anticipating a ruling by the end of the year. I hope to be able to give a full update (a favorable one, IYH) at that time. Yet, for the moment, my bank accounts and my Israeli credit are all frozen. It’s very hard to live this way (cash only), but at least for us, it’s the price of staying in Yerushalayim. 

Needless to say, there are other olim who have paid way higher prices in terms of distress and anguish and they wouldn’t have it any other way.

So, guess what happened to me last week (I think it was the day after the US elections)?

I needed to go to the main post office on Yaffo street to pick up a package. I went over on the light rail and picked up the package and commenced walking down Yaffo to the upcoming train stop to go back home. I reached the next corner, I believe Shlomzion, and there were about four people gathered around and shmoozing. I glanced at them in passing and saw they were two couples. Of whom, one of the menfolk was none other than Jonathan Pollard in all his glory – white shirt and suspenders with his pot belly, wavy white beard and loose peyos on his bald pate crowned by his signature knit yarmulke. The real McCoy.

I have no personal connection to him but I didn’t want to just pass by without any kind of greeting. I smiled at him and said “How are you?” as if he is a fellow worshiper at my shul. He isn’t really, but he could be. He responded, “Fine, thank you.”

For some reason I had mistakenly thought that he was originally from Michigan so I made a comment about the election results there. He told me hasn’t been there and that was the end of our “meeting”. I checked up afterward to learn he is originally from Texas. Oops. 

In any case, I thought it was a zechus to even just meet him and to speak two sentences to him. Aside from his being a fellow Anglo-Israeli Jew from my generation, he is a sincere Baal Teshuva. You know what Chazal tell us about where Baalei Teshuva stand. In addition, people like me consider him a hero who stood up to the US intelligence community for the sake of the Jewish nation and is still here to tell us about it.

Which brings me to the podcast that I came across just this past Sunday. The podcast is on a channel called Moral Edge and one of the moderators is a fellow named Michael Gerbitz. This episode was a one-on-one interview with Jonathan Pollard in which he finally “spills the beans”. The interview goes for almost two hours. I watched the entire interview (double-speed) and I was totally captivated.

I believe that every English-speaking Jewish person, no matter how “frum”, should watch this podcast. So I am writing this post to recommend it. I will embed it and link to it at the end of this post.

Just to summarize, although he was born in Texas to parents who were in the US for some time, many of his extended family were still living in Europe until the war. He tells about an uncle who he says was the only one from a large wealthy assimilated German Jewish family “that had enough brains to run when the Nazis took over.” This uncle made it to America and was a part of Jonathan’s upbringing. 

He says about this uncle (7:40):

And he kept telling me growing up what it was like to sit on the stern of the ship with a packet of letters from his relatives, my relatives from New York. The packet had been thrown onto the ship as they departed trying to justify their reluctance to help him land. ‘You know, we're under scrutiny. You know, we don't want to be seen as, you know, wanting us in war, you know,’ whatever…But what he kept impressing on me was the need for me to be 101% loyal to the Jewish people and to the state of Israel, our true homeland. I grew up with that.

We can see where this took him to.

He goes on to describe a little bit of his career as a spy. I had always thought that he was not an official Israeli spy but rather a patriotic Jew serving in the US Navy who unilaterally volunteered to provide sensitive information to Israel. This is what Israel claimed over the first ten years after his arrest. But it seems that he, and his first wife, were actual paid spies of Israel. 

He said that he fully knew the risks and dangers and, when the axe dropped, he was not the least surprised. He was however, taken aback at how little support he received from the State of Israel and from Bibi. Despite this, he claimed that he had no regrets and would do it again, but cover himself better.

He discusses his arrest and ordeals of 30 years in the federal prison system. He talks about the askanim who fought for him, primarily HRHG Rav Mordechai Eliyahu, ZTL, Rabbi Pesach Lerner, and, most importantly, his second wife, Esther, A”H. He says he would not have survived it if not for her intervention and that he was madly in love with her and remains so about four years after her death from the “machalah”.

Even though he endured 30 years of absolute Gehinnom, it brought him many gifts. It gave him a clarity of our situation in the world, it gave him a true connection to HKBH and it gave him his connection to his second wife who he was deeply in love with. None of this would have happened if he hadn’t been caught and mistreated. No wonder he has no regrets.

But the amazing thing that everybody needs to hear are the closing three minutes. Here is what he says (1:49:29):

Michael Gerbitz:

[We] Only got through maybe 20% of the things that we wanted to cover, but I do have one final question. Um, and that is this. There are young, proud Jews watching who love Israel and want to help the Jewish people. What should their mission be?

Jonathan Pollard:

They have only one mission, and that's to have faith in God and come home. They're the same. G-d gave us this land, if need be, to fight for. You have to listen to Him. When God said to Avraham Avinu "Lech Lecha". Go home basically. Right now they have to listen to this admonition by God to Avraham to go home.

The galut, the diaspora, the exile is now ending. This version of it is ending. Don't wait till you're going to experience what our European brothers and sisters are experiencing now. Hashem has pulled the curtain back for you to understand what your future is going to be in uh the American diaspora and He's had you have the honor and privilege to come back to your homeland. Yes. And I will use that word, your homeland. It's the only homeland a Jew has.

Let me just leave you with an incident that happened with Esther.

When she was on her way out, I was invited up to Ramat HaGolan to see a sensitive facility there and she insisted on coming with me and I didn't know why. I had to basically carry her up there and she told me to walk, carry her up to the top of a hill. 

We're right on the border of Syria and Lebanon. And uh the soldiers came up with this, you know, they're they don't want to lose me in this case.

 

So uh I put her down and she said looking north to Lebanon and Syria, but mostly Lebanon. She said, "What do you see?" I said, "Hezbollah." And she said, "Okay, look further. Look with your heart and look with your nephesh. Look with your soul as far as you can see. What do you see? I said, “More Hezbollah.” and she said, "No, what you see is Eretz HaZvi. And I won't have the opportunity to see that. But you and many people here now with us will have the zechut to see that happen.”

Well, if you want to see that happen, you better come home now. Standing up, [laughter] not rolling back, but standing up so you can see the might and power and glory of God.

Wow. Everybody needs to hear this.

Hence, I am providing a link to the interview and am embedding it into this post (may not be visible in the email version). Here it is:

‘I Survived 30 Years in Hell’ - Former Israeli Spy Jonathan Pollard BREAKS SILENCE

ויאמר העם אל שאול היונתן ימות אשר עשה הישועה הגדולה הזאת בישראל חלילה חי ה' אם יפל משערת ראשו ארצה כי עם אלקים עשה היום הזה ויפדו העם את יונתן ולא מת.

Sinas Chinam XII – One-Way Correspondence – Final Email: Travesty of Justice

 

When a person kills another human being, this is called an act of homicide. In fact, the very definition of homicide is: causing the death of another human being.

In general, homicide is a very evil act. However, occasionally it is seen as what we call justifiable homicide. Usually, the rare justification is to commit homicide in defense of another human being that is threatened by the deceased or judicial execution. This does not mean it is not an act of homicide. It may not be criminal homicide but it is still homicide. One cannot undefine the meaning of the word and the act is a reality. This is the reason it is not easy to recruit a normal person to pull the lever on a convicted crook. Normal people do not prefer to commit homicide, even when it can be deemed justified.

Mesira (or malshinus), which is another way to harm another person, is exactly the same. The definition of mesira is the act of disclosing the actions or whereabouts of one person, or of his possessions, to a hostile entity (other than to a Jewish Beis Din). Likewise, this is considered a very evil act.

Just as likewise, it can occasionally be seen as a justified mesira. This is solely if it is the only way to save other people from imminent bodily or financial harm. There is no other justification. Just like homicide, even when there is justification for the mesira, it is still, and will always be an act of mesira. Again, we cannot undefine the action. The act is a reality.

There can be no dispute that what Nicole Meyer and her sisters committed is an act of mesira. It is a reality that meets the definition. It is also an act of gonev nefesh m’Yisrael which is a capital crime, and an act of extradition to chutz l’aretz (lo tasgir). There is a much more extensive list in my Kalman the Konsumer post (motzi shem rah, nekama, netira and, of course, chillul Hashem). The only question can be, is it a justified mesira? A justified gonev nefesh? A justified lo tasgir? (A justified chillul Hashem?)

I will start by saying that there is no justification to extradite a Jewish person outside of Eretz Yisrael whatsoever. No matter what! The gonev nefesh we can say is the result of the mesira and, hence, it comes as a package.

I noted countless times that the only justification for mesira is to save other people from imminent harm. And this, per Chofetz Chaim, is if there is no other way to accomplish this. To this, I even have the agreement for Rabbi Shay Schachter on Amudim’s own website (HERE 24:25), even though he mistakenly downplays this for SA cases.

None of this is applicable in the case of Malka Leifer and Nicole Meyer. As such, there can be nothing more despicable than to see a “Chareidi” Jewish organization and a respected Orthodox Rabbi host a forum supporting and idolizing an “Orthodox” woman who proudly and unabashedly boasts about doing all of these severe transgressions, not to mention to ask the room for a “standing ovation”.

What was the excuse used to justify this mesira, gonev nefesh, lo tasgir and chillul Hashem? Was it to save anyone from imminent harm?

Not at all. Nobody was in harm’s way and needed to be saved. Not Nicole, any of her sisters, or anybody in all of Australia. Mrs. Leifer was oceans away.

So why was it done?

It was done in order to get “Justice”.

Zvi Gluck first says it at only 18 seconds:

For years, these three sisters fought for justice. They faced enormous pressure, disbelief, attempts to silence them.

 

Rabbi Daniel Coren at 1 minute 15 seconds:

 

to be able to come and be able to bring much more emes and justice to the world.

 

The presenter Moshe Frankel beginning at 2:25:

the pain the heartache the fight for justice…(3:00) The challenges, the anguish and despair in seeking justice… even the recognition that sometimes justice fails or doesn't fully, isn't fully meted out… The Torah tells us in many places to seek justice…(4:33) On and on, the Torah emphasized the imperative to ensure justice…(10:44) Maybe it won't take 13 years to get justice.

 

Zvi Gluck again at 12:02:

Tonight is about courage. It's about justice.

 

At 13:06:

And later this evening, we will hear from someone whose courage helped bring justice not only for herself but for countless others, Nechama Meyer. Nechama, together with her sisters, Dassi and Ellie, fought a battle that lasted for years in order to bring Malka Leifer to justice.

At 17:00:

For years, these three sisters fought for justice. Not days, not months, years.

And then, there is Nicole (Nechama), herself. At 39:26 she quotes some sage advice from her late sister, A"H:

And whoever says what you're doing is a Chillul Hashem, Malka Leifer is doing a chillul Hashem by escaping justice, not you.

 

Comment - I think her sister (A”H) needed to be schooled on what makes a chillul Hashem. It doesn’t work like in kindergarten – “It’s your chillul Hashem, not my chillul Hashem, na-na-na-na-na”. Chillul Hashem is not mutually exclusive, there is enough opportunity for everyone. But, aside from that, can “Chams” please let us know exactly what Mrs. Leifer did in 2014 or any year since at least 2008 to constitute a chillul Hashem??

Then a little later on we have “obstructing justice”, “avoiding justice”, “fighting for justice”. 

And, at 48:34:

That is something I questioned myself because fighting for justice for so long and at some point, it felt like I was living for justice because of the pain of the delays and all the hardships that my sisters and I went through to try and get that justice.

Evidently, it’s all about justice.

Sounds nice (which is why they said it) except for two glaring problems.

Problem 1 – Even if it is authentic valid justice, it still does not legitimize mesira to goyim, gonev nefesh, extradition to chu”l, Nicole’s chillul Hashem and a host of other transgressions.

Problem 2 – This is not valid Torah justice. This is counterfeit “justice”. I have said it many times. Torah justice is appropriate monetary compensation to the injured party as per Bava Kamma 83b. This is what HKBH wants to see. Punishment and retribution, which they are seeking and dressing up as justice, is what the Torah calls nekama and is strictly forbidden.

Ergo, it’s not all about justice. It’s not about justice, at all. It’s about nekama.

Let’s review some of the statements and insert the true intentions, shall we?

Zvi Gluck:

Tonight is about courage. It's about justice nekama… we will hear from someone whose courage helped bring justice nekama… For years, these three sisters fought for justice nekama. Not days, not months, years.

Rabbi Coren:

to be able to come and be able to bring much more emes and justice nekama to the world.

Moshe Frankel:

The challenges, the anguish and despair in seeking justice nekama… even the recognition that sometimes justice nekama fails or doesn't fully, isn't fully meted out…Maybe it won't take 13 years to get justice nekama.

And, Nicole:

Malka Leifer is doing a chillul Hashem by escaping justice nekama, not you… That is something I questioned myself because fighting for justice nekama for so long and at some point, it felt like I was living for justice nekama because of the pain of the delays and all the hardships that my sisters and I went through to try and get that justice nekama.

Doesn’t sound quite as nice, does it?

Incidentally, Nicole actually received monetary compensation (see timeline HERE), but it was from the school that did nothing wrong to her, not from Mrs. Leifer.

Once we acknowledge that all this “justice” is counterfeit, and that we are talking about nekama sugar-coated to look respectable, the entire 1-hour 52-minute presentation falls like a house of cards. As such, let us review these remarks:

42:40

and finally we heard that Yaakov Litzman was involved in obstructing justice in telling the psychiatrists to falsify records and that is what we were fighting against that we did not even know that level of corruption.

If it were really justice, this conduct would be very "corrupt". But he wasn’t obstructing “justice”. He was obstructing nekama. He was obstructing unwarranted mesira, gonev nefesh, lo tasgir, and additional chillul Hashem. Falsifying records is usually a corrupt, loathsome enterprise, but to save a Jew from mesira, extradition and unjustified shame and incarceration, it becomes a mitzvah. This is where לא תעמוד על דם רעיך  truly applies.

Rabbi Litzman put his career and good name on the line to do it and he suffered for it. But, to me and to HKBH, he is a hero.

Of course, to Nicole Meyer, Rabbi Coren, Moshe Frankel, to Zvi Gluck, and to most of the Jewish consumer world, he is a miscreant worthy of shame and humiliation. And so, they make sure to spew out as much sinas chinam as possible in the name of nekama justice.

Again, in my frenzy to be dan l’kaf zechus, I gave them all an opportunity to explain themselves and to educate me. Maybe I am the one in the wrong. So, I asked them. I also told Zvi Gluck that if he cannot justify his sinas chinam, he needs to publicly apologize to Rabbi Litzman and to whomever else.

Here is the 5^th and last email (to date). It is dated May 6, 2026. I am pasting it with all the trimmings. Note the subject line “Please End the Sinas Chinam”. I used this subject line on all of the emails.

 

 

 

Please End the Sinas Chinam Cont'd - Grand Finale

 

 May 6, 2026, 2:25 PM

 

Yechezkel Hirshman <1a7b.author@gmail.com>
to Zvi, zgluck, info@18forshay.com, necmeyer, info, rabbidac@gmail.com

BSD

 

Hello Reb Zvi, LOY”T

 

Shalom u’bracha.

Once again, thank you for your swift non-reply. I see this entire exchange as a clear display of your lack of backbone and avoidance of accountability.

We now reach the crux of this entire series of emails. I saw your talks and I was thoroughly appalled by the cynical motzi laaz and sinas chinam that you displayed. I hold that you need to take accountability for it.

From our previous emails we have established the following.

• We have established that false accusations really happen. There is no dispute on this.

• We have established that Malka Leifer never confessed to any wrongdoing. Further, that the court did not establish that the alleged crimes actually occurred (HERE).

• You failed to present any reason why any objective outsider should be convinced that she is guilty, even though I asked you to do so.

• We established that if there is no case of rodef in the Leifer episode and, as such, there are no grounds to permit any mesira.

• We established that extradition of any Jewish person away from EY is totally forbidden without exception.

• We established that pursuit of punishment is not pursuing “justice”. As such, the “obstruction” of punishment [especially when unwarranted] cannot be called an “obstruction of justice”.

• Now let me add another fact. There is no allegation that Rabbi Yaakov Litzman made any attempt whatsoever to obstruct any kind of justice. He only attempted to obstruct extradition which is forbidden by Jewish law.

In light of all of the above, can you please explain to the world what Rabbi Yaakov Litzman did wrong???

Rabbi Yaakov Litzman., in his legitimate effort to save a Jewish Israeli citizen who had not been convicted of any wrongdoing from extradition, wrongful mesira, and wrongful goyishe “justice”, not only did nothing wrong, but did what any Torah observant Jew is obligated, not permitted, but obligated to do. What he did is the epitome of לא תעמוד על דם רעיך.

Am I wrong?

If I am wrong, now is the time to grow a backbone and to explain to me, and to the world, why I am wrong and why it is acceptable to publicly slander, shame and crucify a G-d fearing Jew such as Rav Yaakov Litzman for doing the right thing?

If you cannot do this, I think you owe a public retraction and apology and [public] entreaty for mechila to Rav Yaakov Litzman for being מוציא לעז and מוציא שם רע against him.

So, at this time, you have three choices:

1. Explain exactly what Yaakov Litzman did wrong in the eyes of the Torah and yashrut. IOW, prove me wrong.
   
   
2. Publicly renounce your vicious slander and ask mechila from those affected.
   
   
3. Do nothing and continue promulgating your motzi shem rah and sinas chinam עד מאה ועשרים  and beyond.
   
   

Which will it be?

While you are at it, I think it behooves you to also make a public entreaty of mechila to all the anonymous Rabbanim that you collectively shamed despite the fact that the Torah really does restrict our options to prosecute accused offenders. You callously stated that their use of the Torah is meant “to silence victims”. Can you please explain why a posture to uphold the rights of an accused person needs to be maliciously couched as an endeavor “to silence the victims” (who are really only alleged victims)?

Once again awaiting your prompt response.

If you reply to me promptly and directly, we may be able to avoid posting these letters on the Internet.

Hatzlacha rabba v’kol tuv, sela.

Very sincerely yours,

 

Yechezkel Hirshman

  

Please note - This correspondence and all responses and subsequent ones are not confidential. You may show them to whoever you like and I may do the same including discussing them on my blog if the need arises.

 

No, he did not respond. He did not save me the trouble of posting these letters on the Internet. Accordingly, his choice in my multiple choice challenge is choice 3 – Do nothing and continue promulgating your motzi shem rah and sinas chinam עד מאה ועשרים  and beyond.

 

I cannot respect his cowardly choice and I can no longer respect him.

Nicole Meyer is full of hatred and it is contagious. She has infected some very sincere, well-meaning people. She has infected all of Amudim and Beis Medrash Ohr HaChaim and anyone else who gives her 'a standing ovation'.

Nicole can do it properly, if she wants. She can be a mentor and inspiration to victims of SA, but only if she teaches them to heal and not to hate. She could talk about her episodes of alleged abuse in an educational way, but not in a personal way. There is no need to identify the abuser and certainly no need to demonize her and certainly to demonize G-d fearing people who see things differently than she does and who tried to prevent her from doing all the damage that she caused.

Zvi Gluck claims that Amudim has helped over 20,000 people. I think that number sounds a bit exaggerated, but I cannot dispute it. Amudim comes across as a wonderful life-saving organization that does great work and it should continue to do so. But it can all be done without the sinas chinam and without idolizing hate-filled, vengeance seeking, mosrim. The entire March 8 presentation is one colossal chillul Hashem. It needs to be taken off their website.

For those who like to preach ובערת הרע מקרבך, the word מקרבך actually means the evil that is in one’s own heart and soul. And the first place to look is where it says: לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך.

Sinas Chinam XI – One-way Correspondence – Emails 3 and 4: Mesira, Extradition, and Justice

We are back to comparing notes with Zvi Gluck, director of Amudim, for his remarks on March 8, 2026. As I have mentioned, he does not look to be on the same page as I am and as is the Torah perspective that I present as the integral mission of One Above and Seven Below (Achas L’Maala V’Sheva L’Matta). I am attempting to clarify which of us is the misguided one.

In the previous two posts we were first seeking clarity about the significance of false allegations and then on his lack of presumption of innocence. After sending him two emails for this purpose, we received clarity on neither.

In this post, I want to cover the next two emails. In them, I wanted to get some clarity on his perspective of mesira, his stand on extradition from Eretz Yisrael, and the Jewish definition of "Justice".

The 3rd Email - Mesira

Reb Zvi Gluck, in his “educational” talk on March 8, 2026, makes a very bold statement (19:00):

The number one tool used to silence victims is the Torah

He may be correct. After all, for frum Jews, the number one tool to guide us in any task is supposed to the Torah. This should be seen as a great compliment. Alas, it doesn’t look like he meant it as a compliment. I inferred this from his inciteful choice of words, “to silence victims”. He is of the opinion that victims are not to be “silenced”. So, with his statement, he is making an indictment on using the Torah as a tool.

He could have been a lot more honest. He could have used more respectful and earnest terminology. He could have said, “The number one tool used to restrain victims from doing things that will cause more harm than good and doing things that they may later regret doing is the Torah”. But he chose otherwise for the sake of self-righteously making a spurious and callous indictment against people who are really yarei Shamayim and know what the Torah really says.

Where I come from, we call such spurious indictments motzi shem rah.

Of course, he is correct that the Torah is a tool and any tool can be misused. One needs to know how to use it and, in extreme cases, even, challila, read the instructions. Yes, indeed, the Torah is sometimes misused but, in my opinion, it is not misused nearly as much as he is implying nor as much as he is misusing it.

It goes the other direction. The purpose of the Torah is to protect people from being wrongly persecuted. There is no pirush of לא תעמוד על דם רעיך that is presented as a hetter to harm anybody, unless it is the ONLY way to save somebody. There is no place in the Torah where we can do anything that hurts another person whether financially, socially, or physically, without a din Torah and a psak din that allows it. 

One thing I have witnessed repeatedly, is that this preposterous, open-ended, bogus, hetter to ignore the Torah, which Zvi Gluck not only advocates but also justifies by misrepresenting the words of Gedolim, is the number one “tool” used to create, support, and perpetuate false accusations and all the needless irreversible damage that they cause.

The Torah is our guide and we need to follow it faithfully. But, first, we need to know what it says. It seems that the 181 signatories of the celebrated Kol Koreh, including Rabbi Daniel Coren, missed a few sedarim in Yeshiva. To fill in the gaps, I wrote my post about Blood Labels almost exactly 11 years ago.

I also wrote for the public a 2-part post titled A Concise Guide to the Laws of Mesira (see Part 1 and Part 2). This was in 2017. Part 1 were several prerequisites before being able to permit to “lawful” mesira and it was called The 3 "P"s. Part 2 were mandatory conditions of actually carrying out this “lawful” mesira and it was called The 3 "C"s. I believe a brief review of The 3 "P"s will be very helpful at this time.

The 3 "P"s are three steps to implement so as to protect a real or potential victim. Only, they must only be done one at a time and in order. The 3 "P"s are:

1. Proximity – Keeping the abuser and the victim away from each other.

2. Publicity – Alerting the public that a certain person is a threat

3. Punishment – Applying forceful means to prevent an abuser from abusing which may include legal sanctions and incarceration.

As I emphasized at the time, our goal is protecting the victim. We are not allowed to punish or take nekama. If step 1 by itself gets the job done, there is no hetter to go any steps further. In many cases, step 2 needs to be added to step 1 to protect unwary individuals from becoming victims. In these cases, we can advance to step 2 and no further. Only in extreme cases where steps 1 and 2 are clearly not sufficient, can we advance to step 3. This is all explained in detail in its place.

It is imperative that any person who voluntarily takes on the mantle of being a Child Abuse Advocate must be in sync with the 3"P"s (and 3 "C"s). This includes people such as Reb Zvi Gluck. 

All of this is expressed in the email that I sent to Zvi Gluck dated April 30, 2026. I asked him if he ever heard of the 3 Ps and 3 Cs in any type of variation. As usual, he refused to respond or to acknowledge it. 

Here is the full text of the email:

Hello Reb Zvi, LOY"T

Shalom u'bracha

Once again, it is a pleasure to see how you eagerly acknowledge and respond to my emails. I feel like I am getting special treatment.

 

To move on, you stated in your presentation (19:00):

The number one tool used to silence victims is the Torah

I hate to tell you that the number one tool used by CSA advocates to overstep their boundaries and enact unwarranted mesira and prosecution and to deny accused people of their defense mechanisms is also the Torah. 

This comes from implementing the exact same methods - misquoting Gedolim and teshuvos (such as Rav Elyashiv and Tzitz Eliezer) and modifying them for your goals.

Yep, כמים פנים אל פנים, this corrupt world is a two-way street. And there is corruption on both sides of the equation.

So, I need to know if you really have a grasp on the Halachos of rodef, lo taamod, and mesira. As such, I implore you to read these two posts and to spell out to me, what, if anything you do not agree with (and why?).

Achas L'Maala V'Sheva L'Matta: Mesira XVIII(a): A Concise Guide to the Laws of Mesira (1) - Mind Your “P”s and “C”s

Achas L'Maala V'Sheva L'Matta: Mesira XVIII(b): A Concise Guide to the Laws of Mesira (2) - Mind Your “P”s and “C”s

I maintain that if one cannot relate to the 3 Ps and 3 Cs, he is not qualified for your line of work.

It sadly looks like you have entrenched yourself into the left-wing secular-minded camp together with other secular minded Jews such as David Stav and the RCANZ  who believe that our Torah - as written with no misquotes -  is expendable, not the right path, and need not be obeyed. According to them and you, anybody who calls themselves a victim, is a verified victim, and is automatically believed, no questions asked, and anyone who is accused is automatically not to be believed and must be silenced. The "Torah" says so. 

Tell this to the fellow you grew up with. (I did not see this in the Tzitz Eliezer.)

Please tell me if I am correct or not.

Once again awaiting your prompt response.

Hatzlacha rabba v’kol tuv, sela.

Very sincerely yours, 

Yechezkel Hirshman

To Reb Zvi Gluck who claims to know something about what it says in the Torah, I have one last question:

Reb Zvi Gluck, have you once in your life opened up Choshen Mishpat 388 and studied the entire siman? Have you once in your life actually studied Sanhedrin 73a? (I don’t mean Daf Yomi, I mean learned it for real.) How about Rambam Hilchos Rotzeach 1:12,13?

It doesn’t look very likely to me.

The 4th Email – Extradition and the Jewish meaning of Justice

Zvi Gluck’s presentation on March 8, 2026 was given as a call of support to Nicole Meyer. This means to say that he fully supports Nicole’s actions and has no problems with them. 

• He has no uncertainty about the possibility of a false allegation.

• He has no doubts about her status of guilt.

• He has no qualms about being moser another Jew to non-Jewish authorities for punishment.

• And, evidently, he is also in full support of extraditing Jews outside of Eretz Yisroel.

• He also subscribes to the mistaken belief that in Judaism, punishment is what is called “justice” just like in the secular world.

עובד כל העבודה זרות.

But I will not abandon my penchant for being dan l’kaf zechus. Maybe he just wasn’t coached in the rules of extradition. Maybe he had the flu when they reached Gittin 45a and Bava Kamma 83a. After all, it comes from the same Torah that is used as “a tool to silence victims”.

So I thought I should ask him. On May 3, 2026, I sent him another email. Here it is in full:

Hello Reb Zvi, LOY”T 

Shalom u’bracha.

It looks like we are on a roll with our mutual dialog.

Let’s just move on and we’ll keep this one short. Two quick questions:

1. Here is a statement – It is strictly forbidden in Halacha to extradite a Jew out of  Eretz Yisrael to any other land under any circumstances whatsoever.

Do you agree or disagree?

If you are uncertain about this please see all the attached mareh mekomos and teshuvos.

2. Are you aware that in Judaism – which you claim to practice – the term “justice” (צדק) does not apply to any form of criminal prosecution, imprisonment or corporal punishment? It means paying compensation.

Agree or disagree?

Note – If you have trouble with this concept, please see Bava Kamma 83b and what I wrote in this post (HERE).

Once again awaiting your prompt response.

Hatzlacha rabba v’kol tuv, sela.

Very sincerely yours, 

Yechezkel Hirshman 

Please note - This correspondence and all responses and subsequent ones are not confidential. You may show them to whoever you like and I may do the same including discussing them on my blog if the need arises.

You can bet that I attached a number of mareh mekomos and teshuvos. 

Once again, no response and no acknowledgement. One cannot have dialog with these people.

The final email was the Shevet Dan email. מאסף כל המחנות. The caboose on the freight train.

We’ll check it out next, G-d willing.

 

Sinas Chinam X – One-Way Correspondence – Email 2: Presumption of Guilt

 

I opened this series about sinas chinam in early May, more than five months ago. The opening post explains the current events that triggered it. Please see it HERE. 

As noted, I was totally appalled at seeing self-proclaimed perpetual victim Nicole Meyer going on the publicity circuits (podcasts, documentaries, shul appearances, etc.) spewing to ingenuous Jews the sinas chinam and malshinus she’s been doing for years and spewing blood libels to the non-Jews.

What appalled me even more was seeing supposed Jewish influencers and “role models” like Rabbi Daniel Coren and Zvi Gluck giving her a platform to continue doing so. By doing so they are legitimizing her mesira, malshinus and sinas chinam. To make it worse, they are joining in and doing it themselves.   

This is disgraceful and totally unacceptable and I cannot condone it.

I gather that I might be coming across as self-righteous. It’s hard not to be self-righteous when one has a whole anthology of Shas and poskim supporting their position which is something that I have and Reb Zvi Gluck does not. 

Still and all, one Jewish attribute that I like to apply is to be dan l’kaf zechus. To consider the possibility that maybe I am missing something and to allow the other party to explain themselves and to substantiate their position. I would like to know what it is that Zvi Gluck and Rabbi Daniel Coren see in this episode that justifies their unmitigated presumption of guilt and public sinas chinam that I don’t see.

 

So I asked them.

As I wrote in previous posts, I wrote Zvi Gluck a series of 5 emails. Each one had a CC to Rabbi Coren. The first email was a request for clarity in the false allegation story that he related in his March 8 discourse. I discussed this in detail in my previous Sinas Chinam post.

The second email was to request clarity about his presumption of guilt regarding Mrs. Leifer who never admitted to any guilt to this day. This is boosted by his story of dealing with a false accusation “many, many years ago”. I find this to be paradoxical at best and hypocritical at worst.

The email is totally self-explanatory. Here it is in full: 

Hello Reb Zvi, LOY”T

 

Shalom u’bracha.

It was quite gratifying to see your prompt and courteous response to my previous email. I hope that all people who contact you receive the same courtesy. [Note – I was being a bit sarcastic with this. There is no sarcasm in the rest of this email. – YH]

To move on, a few questions about the Malka Leifer episode.

Whereas:

• I am sure you are aware that to this day Mrs. Leifer has not admitted to any guilt and has not confessed to anything.

• The story that you told about the false accusations and the unanswered questions to my previous email indicate that you are likewise fully aware that false accusations are a real phenomenon.

• You also claim to be a man of truth and integrity. At least this is what your friend who you knew growing up said about you, he believes you look for the truth and not for an agenda. You did not dispute this accolade.

• You are probably also aware that Mrs. Leifer was acquitted of all charges that pertain to Nicole Meyer.

• You may also be aware that throughout the entire trial, it was never proven or established that a crime actually took place. (Please see my post on the subject: Achas L'Maala V'Sheva L'Matta: The Malka Leifer Verdict - Guilty!...or not?)

 

In light of all the above:

1. How can you be certain without any doubt that Mrs. Leifer is guilty at all?

2. I assume that her case fits the profile of a typical offender and the [alleged] victims fit the profile of typical victims. Is this your entire basis? Is there anything more substantial than that?

3. Is it because of your philosophy to “believe the victims”?

4. On the [off] chance that Mrs. Leifer is not guilty, would that not make her the victim?

5. Since this has been her claim throughout, aren’t we supposed to believe the victim? (As it should apply to the friend you knew growing up.)

6. Ergo, when you told us to “believe the victim” were you not really telling us to “believe the accuser”?

Again, if all these questions are too much, I would appreciate it if you could at least just answer the first one.

Once again awaiting your prompt response.

Hatzlacha rabba v’kol tuv, sela.

Very sincerely yours,

 

Yechezkel Hirshman

 

 

Please note - This correspondence and all responses and subsequent ones are not confidential. You may show them to whoever you like and I may do the same including discussing them on my blog if the need arises.

As per the first email, I did not receive a response to this, nor any kind of acknowledgement, whether polite or impolite, whatsoever. Zvi Gluck must be a very busy person. I can’t imagine he would be intentionally avoidant. (Again, I like to be dan l’kaf zechus.)

At this point I wasn’t finished. I still had a few more questions for when he can find a spare minute to reply. There were more emails.

Stay tuned…