Sinas Chinam IV – A Trail[er] of Blood [Libels]

 

Clearly, I maintain that there is no toelles to perpetuate the Malka Leifer episode even if it were done in a truthful manner. All it can do is harm. How much more so when the picture is deliberately distorted to this end? Then, not only does it become motzi shem rah, but an actual blood libel.

In my previous post, I discussed a documentary about the Malka Leifer episode that was produced for an entertainment provider exclusively in Australia. Nicole Meyer came all the way to Monsey to peddle the documentary even though all she could show is the trailer. But the trailer says a lot. 

She actually first came to Atlanta in late February for an Atlanta Jewish Film Festival showing on Feb. 26. Her trip was sponsored by some organization so she did not come to Monsey special or on her own dime. She was here anyway.

In any case the trailer is about 1 minute 50 seconds long. Any trailer is meant to make a strong impression. It is meant to draw our interest with a few highly dramatic clips. Hence, any statement that was chosen for display in the trailer has to be there to make a quick impact and to serve as a draw. We call this "shock value".

Here is the trailer:

At 0:30 the narrator poses a question:

Why did it take 15 years to bring her to justice?

I believe the respondent is Nicole Meyer. She starts with these words:

In our community, sexual abuse is stigmatized. 

This, I can accept as a true statement. Nothing wrong with it. But then, she follows it with this:

They don't see an abuser. They see a person who needs to be saved.

What is she saying? What is she telling her clueless impressionable viewers?

Before we “micro”-analyze her precise words, let’s “macro”-analyze her intent. Bear in mind that she is talking about her very own “community” and is informing people who know little to nothing about it. 

Is she saying something nice about this unfamiliar “community” or is she criticizing it? Is this a compliment or an indictment?

I did not see the documentary, just the trailer, but it is hard to say that the documentary is trying to say anything positive about anybody except the victims survivors. The impression I got, is that she is saying something very negative about the community. 'The community is not supposed to be this way, but it is'.

So, she is vilifying her entire community. And she is doing it as an impact point (shock value) on the trailer, which anybody can access. Even those who do not or cannot see the documentary can view the trailer in under two minutes.

If what she is saying is the unequivocal truth, then we can downplay it as a simple case of truthful lashon hara and maybe even come up with some toelles to make it permissible. Call it “constructive criticism”. I could live with that. But if there is anything about it which is false and misleading, then it is slander and libel. And, when the target audience isn’t even Jewish, it becomes a blood libel.

So now, let us micro-analyze her second sentence.

They don’t see an abuser. They see a person who needs to be saved.

Who is “They”? 

In the previous sentence she names an entity called “the community”. Then she says “They…”. Evidently, “They” are the community. Are “They” some of the community? The entire community? Specific members of the community? 

She equates the community as “They” so she must mean everybody. This includes the commoners and it includes the leaders. She makes no distinction, so the viewer will make no distinction, either. 

First, let’s talk specifically about the Malka Leifer case. In my previous post, I noted that Dassi Ehrlich’s book was peppered with some blatant lies. To qualify this claim, I put into parentheses two of the most noteworthy ones. I wrote: that (1) the Adass community supported Malka Leifer and (2) that the women who heard the rumors took no action.

I debunked both these lies in at least two of my book review posts. In this post I wrote:

There is no evidence at all that the community in any way supported Mrs. Leifer’s alleged activities. Dassi herself attested (31:30) that they were not even aware of it. And, as soon as they got wind of it, they promptly shipped her out of Australia back to where she came from despite her denials and objections. I will note, as I have done numerous times, that Mrs. Leifer was not a wanted criminal at the time and there were not even any police complaints on file about her.

When I wrote “they promptly shipped her out”, by “they” I meant the exact same “they” as Nicole means here. But it does not confirm Nicole's claim that they don't see an abuser. (I debunked the second lie as well in that post.)

So, it’s now two years after Dassi’s poisonous book was released, and after I critiqued it (don’t think for a moment that Nicole does not know what I wrote – and she has never disputed it), and now, Nicole, not Dassi, is back up there proliferating the same lies. To this day. For the entertainment industry.

Let’s move on: They don’t see an abuser.

They don’t see who as an abuser?

Does she mean a person who confessed to being an abuser? A person who was caught in the act? A person who was convicted of abuse by virtue of hard irrefutable evidence? 

This a bold claim. What is her proof of this? How many such abusers are there?

Or, does she mean, someone who is accused of being an abuser yet denies it? Somebody on whom there are no objective witnesses and no forensic proof?

Ah-h-h. An alleged abuser. Sadly, there are plenty of those. I would contend this really covers most of them. If they are merely alleged abusers, why should the community see them as confirmed abusers?

Again, she makes no distinction. And, here is the crux of the issue. According to Nicole Sapper, and Dassi Ehrlich, and, as we shall see, Zvi Gluck, there is no such thing as an alleged abuser. Anybody accused to be an “abuser” is a full-fledged abuser. He/she has no rights and has no voice. Conversely, in their tunnel vision world, there is no such thing as an alleged victim, as well. Anyone who claims to be a victim is full-fledged victim with automatic immutable integrity. They have full immunity and cannot be challenged or questioned. 

This entire subject is driven by a universal, intrinsic presumption of guilt. Rabbi Fuerst, Dovid Lichtentstein, David J. Nyer and about 180 Rabbanim live by it. Zvi Gluck and Rabbi Daniel Coren live by it, and the Jewish and non-Jewish masses live by it. It could be that the Sapper sisters are genuine victims and, in their case, there is no presumption, but they are feeding it to the uninvolved masses and riding on its coattails for their personal aggrandizement. 

The Torah doesn’t live by it, the Rambam doesn’t live by it, the Chafetz Chaim doesn’t live by it, Rav Elyashiv, ZTL, doesn’t live by it, and…I don’t live by it.

With this in mind, let’s go on: They see a person who needs to be saved.

What does “saved” mean?

Does she mean they need to be placed in a freezer or storage unit and saved for later use? I don’t think so. Does she mean saved from a sinking ship? It’s a bit closer, but somehow, I don’t think this is what she is saying.

I checked the Thesaurus in MS Word and the first synonym for “saved” is protected. I think there is another appropriate synonym that I was shocked that it did not appear in the list in MS Thesaurus – rescued. I looked up rescued in the MS Thesaurus and the first suggested synonym was “saved”. How about that?

So, let’s go with the meanings of “protected” or “rescued” or maybe “shielded”. 

Protected from what? Rescued from what? No, not from a sinking ship.

The lead question gives away the answer. “Why did it take 15 years to bring her to justice?”

I guess she needs to be saved from justice. By the way, this does not apply only to Mrs. Leifer. This applies to all “abusers”. Evidently, it’s a “community thing”. You know, son cosa nostra. She is telling the world that the “community” maintains that all abusers should be “saved”, i.e., protected from justice.

What is justice? 

It is certain that any normal viewer (I am certainly not normal) will define justice as the wrath of the law and valid prosecution, retribution, and punishment. This is an inalienable virtue and social necessity.

Again, before we micro-analyze the truthfulness of her statement, let us macro-analyze what she is broadcasting to the average viewer.

The average viewer is hearing an indictment against the entire ultra-Orthodox Jewish community, which is very unfamiliar to him or her as it is. He/she is hearing a standing member of the community saying that when there is a molester in their midst, presumably even a confirmed molester, the community believes this evil molester is somebody who needs to be saved from “justice” which is the virtuous application of the law. The "community" is against this idea.

Doesn’t this sound illogical, irrational, absurd, and downright diabolical?

It does to me, and I bet to the vast majority of typical viewers. So, firstly, this is the impression that will be made. And since most people cannot really think, it will be swallowed whole. 

But, to a critical thinker, it opens up a whole slew of questions:

• Why do they not see an abuser?

• Why do they think this is somebody who needs to be saved?

• Why are they not rational like I am or everyone else?  Don’t we all know that justice is a virtuous ideal?

• How can an entire community of people, who are supposed to be religious, moral and highly intelligent, be so immoral, corrupt, diabolical and irrational? Don’t they have any common sense?

Hence, such a thinker should come to the conclusion that something is not adding up here. What the respondent is saying doesn’t make sense. Thus, either this entire community is wacky and off the deep end, or there is something about them that is not being accurately portrayed.

This is the place where a responsible journalist gives pushback and asks the respondent: Why? You say “They don’t see an abuser, they see a person who needs to be saved” – why do they see that??

Nobody asked Nicole this fundamental question. If they did, it surely didn’t make it into the trailer. So, the question was either totally omitted (most probable), or it was asked but cut out of the trailer (highly unlikely). So, whether by omission or by deletion, the viewer is shown an unchallenged claim of an entire community being irrational and corrupt.

This confirms that it is a “Propagandist” documentary, not a factual "Journalistic" one.

Now, let us see if there is any truth to her claim.

Before we discuss the nitty-gritty about how the "community" sees things, let’s take a big step back and look at the giant lie.

Nicole was asked: “Why did it take 15 years to bring her to justice?” and her answer was: “Stigma in the community…need to be saved…”. Nicole is publicly blaming her own community for 15 years of lack of “justice”. Nobody else, it’s her community’s fault. For 15 years!

Really? Let’s do some math.

The 15 years must be the span from when the allegations first broke out in 2008 until the court verdict in April 2023. That’s 15 years. What happened over those 15 years?

Even though the allegations broke out in 2008 and Mrs. Leifer was immediately sent packing, there were no charges filed in any law enforcement agency until 2011. Until 2011, there was no quest for “justice”. Period. This has nothing to do with the “community” because Mrs. Leifer was not wanted by any law enforcement when they sent her home. These three years don’t count, so we are down to twelve.

The Australian authorities did not process the charges and request extradition until 2014. That’s another three years that have nothing to do with anybody’s community.

The extradition was approved at the end of 2020 and carried out in January 2021. From then it was all the Australian justice system until the verdict in April 2023. So this is close to another 2.5 years that are just standard procedural issues.

This basically leaves about a six-year window wherein Mrs. Leifer was fighting a halachically illegitimate extradition. It goes without saying that any human being who is faced with extradition to a faraway country will do whatever they can to scuttle it by hook or by crook. Again, this does not have much to do with anybody’s “community”.

Indeed, there are confirmed allegations that Health Minister Yaakov Litzman meddled with the process by obtaining adverse reports on Mrs. Leifer’s mental condition, and he is certainly a member of the ultra-Orthodox community. However, he only assumed the office of Health Minister in 2015. Even then, it appears that his involvement to get these adverse reports were carried out only after Mrs. Leifer was re-arrested in 2018. This puts a limit on his involvement to maybe as much as four years. That’s a lot less than 15.

So here is Nicole Leifer agreeing with the interviewer that it took 15 years to bring Mrs. Leifer to justice when the maximum was twelve. She  blames all 15 years on her community and nobody else.

Now, after the giant lie, let’s check out all the other lies and half-truths. Bear in mind that what she said about the “community” and “abusers” is in the context of Mrs. Leifer.

Nicole says “They don’t see an abuser” as if to imply that they have a genuine, bona fide, Grade A abuser in front of them but they don't see him (her). Either they are blind, or they choose to look 'the other direction'. Again, the abuser in question is Mrs. Leifer. So, let me ask: over the 15 years did Mrs. Leifer ever confess to doing anything wrong? Did the accusers present any objective evidence or witnesses to prove their accusations?

The answer to these questions is an emphatic No. Hence, they did not see an abuser. They weren’t supposed to see an abuser. They saw an alleged abuser. They saw an alleged abuser who denied abusing. Even if a confirmed abuser has no “rights” (a topic in itself), an alleged abuser has all the rights any accused person must have. This is the presumption of innocence in the eyes of the “community” and the right to avoid being unjustly persecuted (and extradited). 

Nicole does not have the integrity or courage to acknowledge this. 

This has nothing to do with “stigma”.

She continues, “They see a person who needs to be saved.” This is as if to say that they are wrongly saving people who should not be saved.

Saved from what? Why, saved from justice, of course. We all know that an abuser must not be saved from “justice”. These community people are diabolical fiends, just like the “abuser” herself, busy saving people (i.e., abusers) from justice. This is sure to create more victims, and the community loves making lots of victims.

Now, I wrote above that most viewers define “justice” as: the wrath of the law and valid prosecution, retribution, and punishment and that this is an inalienable virtue and social necessity. There is no question that Nicole Meyer is sold out to this definition.

But the community is Jewish. Not just Jewish but Torah observant. And in Torah Judaism “justice” has a different definition. The Torah’s definition of justice is compensation to one who was wronged. It is not retribution and punishment. In Torah Judaism we have a different term for those who pursue punishment and retribution. It is called “nekama” – vengeance. In fact, the primary synonym to “retribution” in the MS Word Thesaurus is “vengeance”.

In Torah Judaism, vengeance among Jews is forbidden. Nicole forgot to mention that.

And, do you know what else is forbidden (as I have cried out endless times)? 

That’s right. Extradition out from Eretz Israel. And it doesn’t matter if we are dealing with a confirmed abuser or an alleged abuser. It is always forbidden.

Nicole knows this. But somehow, it doesn’t make it into the trailer.

I will add one other thing about the “community”. The community is a community. This means that it is a network of people who are friends, neighbors, providers and clients, and relatives of each other. They don’t see an “abuser”. They see one of their own who may or may not be acting out. And community members do not just act out. Something triggers it. It may be mental illness and it may be trauma.

That’s right, I am told that most abusers were abused themselves. This means that, most of the time, they are not just abusers, they are also [ex-]victims. 

If this is the case, as it so often is, then punishment and retribution, i.e. “justice”, is not being just. It is destruction. And in my “community”, our relatives and neighbors do need to be saved, i.e., rescued or shielded, from unjustified destruction.

I have said this many times in many ways in many posts. Nicole cannot accept this. I will explain why in an upcoming post.

The last thing I need to point out is Nicole’s choice of words. “A person who needs to be saved.”

As I wrote earlier, there are more accurate terms to use – protected, rescued, shielded, maybe even spared. But the term “saved” has another connotation. 

Yoshke saves! As in to save one’s soul from h-ll and damnation. 

This conjures to us the idea of the Catholic Church and the “celibate” priests who were caught performing organized ritual pedophilia. We are talking about real pedophilia with real children and real sexual activity, not the pattycake stuff that Mrs. Leifer is accused of. And all those holy clergymen who covered up for each other to actively perpetuate this debauchery. These are holy men who need to be saved.

This is corruption in the name of religion. And Nicole is telling the non-Jewish world that it’s not just them. It’s us as well. Even though there is no actual pedophilia, there is no corrupt network, there is no ritualism, there is no cronyism, there is no coverup; even though the Malka Leifer case is driven by mental illness or trauma and not by lust and Satanic worship, the viewer will not see any of these distinctions. He will say “The chosen people are just as depraved.”

Blood libel. For all the world to see.

It’s not just me that sees this way. Check out this documentary from last October 18 at 1:02:27. 

Three Sisters Expose the Darkest Secret - YouTube

Here is the transcript:

1:02:27  The actions of the school board have been compared to the way the Catholic Church has been found to transfer pedophile priests to new parishes when allegations were made against them.

All told, with her untruthful and antagonistic response, Nicole is watering two poisonous weeds: (1) The poison of presumption of guilt and (2) the suggestion that the Chareidi community, her community, is as debased and corrupt as the Catholic Church.

The sad thing is that she had the opportunity to extol our community simply by telling the truth. She could have painted a truer and more upbeat and realistic (i.e., rational) picture of our community: 

• She could first set the record straight that her quest for “justice” only extended 12 years and that there were numerous contributing factors to the delays. 

• She could have told the truth that the community “doesn’t see an abuser”, but at worst, they see an alleged abuser who may actually be innocent. And even if not, they see them as broken human beings who are friends, neighbors and relatives who may be suffering from abuse or trauma.

• She could have told the truth that we actually believe in presumption of innocence and that we need to protect the basic rights of an accused person from misplaced, vigilante “justice”. This is for the benefit of any society.

• She could have told the truth that we are a Torah observant community and the Torah does not allow any Jewish person, miscreant or not, to be extradited away from Israel.

• She could have explained that in Torah Judaism, “justice” is defined as compensation to an injured party. Punishment and retribution are not our style of “justice”. If it is done for the sake of vengeance, it is forbidden.

• She could show that our community is different and special and a cut above. We have our share of miscreants, but we are more moral and compassionate about how to deal with them. And none of this needs to come at the expense of the alleged victims.

[For good measure, she could acknowledge that she spent 12 years defying her own Torah values to obtain her false secular "justice", but this would require serious soul searching and honesty. These seem to be in low supply. Besides, it certainly doesn't fit the narrative of the inflammatory documentary.]

She could have made a quasi-Kiddush Hashem and salvage something positive from the perpetual sheker and chillul Hashem that she is generating. But she can’t do that. Instead of elevating her own community, she uses the tropes of the goyim to falsely bring them down to their level. She continues to fan the flames of sinas chinam and chillul Hashem.

Why can’t she do that?

Because it doesn’t serve her purpose. The more she humanizes the alleged abuser and the more she commends her upstanding community, the less of a victim she is. And she needs to be a life-long victim.

All this is apparent from one remark in a short trailer that, like all movie trailers, is here for shock value. It is designed to artificially sensationalize the feature and to lure the viewer. 

Just imagine what the rest of the documentary has to say.

Arrur Makkah Re'eihu B'Seter - Part 2c: Good Intentions

Author's Note - Please see the original post on this topic HERE and the two previous parts to this post HERE and HERE.

We know the old saying – The path to Gehinnom is paved with good intentions. 

This is how the Yetzer Hara operates. He convinces us to undertake virtuous projects for the good of Mankind or society or the downtrodden or whatever, and then he bundles it with sinister and damaging consequences which are naively condoned for “the greater good”. 

I’ve written a lot about this especially regarding mesira and the venomous Kol Koreh of 181 “Rabbis”.

The Yetzer Hara has a very easy time when the “Good Samaritans” are low on scruples such as with the Tea Dating Advice app. The official narrative about the Tea Dating Advice app, which inspired these posts, was that it is meant to help vulnerable women vet out potential predators from the dating pool. But the critics note that this is no reason to hide the posted information from the eyes of the male population. Regardless, the site has been called out for being the cesspool of gossip and slander that it always was.

Likewise, Jewish Community Watch, with their despicable Wall of Shame, has a similar history. This is what they write on their About Us page:

Jewish Community Watch (JCW) never set out to be a major organization. In 2006, Meyer Seewald’s best friend died tragically at age 17. The young man’s father set up a youth group in his late son’s honor where young teens gathered for camaraderie and support. In 2011, Seewald, himself a survivor of child sexual abuse (CSA), began receiving reports that the father was molesting boys who attended this program. Further enquiries revealed that this person had a long history of abuse dating back decades earlier to Israel. As is so often the case, community leaders and rabbis in New York who were aware of his dangerous history preferred to handle it “internally,” never considering how many more lives would be put in jeopardy.

After a website was set up to expose the molester and warn others of the danger he posed, hundreds of reports of abuse began flooding in from Jewish communities around the world. JCW’s scope of services quickly expanded to include victim support services, mass awareness events, staff screening for schools and camps, a website with hundreds of pages of resources, and much more. The staff grew from a handful of volunteers working out of a 10 x 10 bedroom to over a dozen professional employees. A virtual “safe place” has been created for victims to come forward, tell their stories, and receive the help and support they need.

All of this sounds great, but there was one fundamental flaw. JCW decided that the best way to help victims is to hunt down and prosecute perpetrators regardless of whether it really helps victims or causes more harm than good. Also, regardless of whether these perpetrators were as guilty as presumed to be, whether they were past victims themselves, and even not guilty at all. 

JCW became a vigilante posse and kangaroo court. Hurting the people they didn’t like was more important than helping the ones that they did. You know the saying – When all you have is a hammer, everything you see starts to look like a nail.

As an update, I noted in my previous post that JCW mercifully went offline about a year ago. Well, amazingly, in the beginning of September, their web site came back to life. It doesn’t look like the organization came back, just their 2022 web site with all it’s gory. 

Once again, Rabbi Yosef Blau is accountable for all useless motzi shem rah that it displays. As such, on Sept. 11, 2025, I sent an email to rabbi Yosef Blau informing him – if he didn’t already know – that the web site is back online and shouldn’t be. One remark I made was: “At this point of time, now that JCW is no longer active and all the information is outdated, there cannot possibly be any toelles for it to be on display. There is no good that it can accomplish, only harm.”

I did not receive any direct response from Rabbi Blau. A few days later, I checked the site, and lo and behind, it was gone again. But, as I post this, I checked again and it's back. Go figure! 

Let’s get back to other Yetzer Hara trap, imamother.com. 

Apparently, it was launched in 2004 by a woman who calls herself Yael Cozocaru. Here is what she writes:

I, Yael, together with my husband, created Imamother in 2004 because I felt that there was a need for a website geared to frum Jewish women and mothers.

This website was born after I went searching in the vast expanses of the internet for some advice about raising our kids. I looked at the Jewish forums of numerous parenting websites, but there just wasn't anything relevant to me, as a frum woman. Again I left my computer feeling like there was just a blank area where there should have been a place where I could share my thoughts and worries. I was looking for a place where I could meet more women just like me. I wanted a spot where my friends and I could go to share stories about our day.

So far, so good. Let’s continue:

I wanted a website just like all the others but with a very important difference. I wanted it to be relevant to me as a married woman and as a frum mother. I wanted a place where there would be information about topics that are important to me, and where I could get advice from other frum women about whatever issue was bothering me at the moment.

Notice the phrase “like all the others”? What does it have that “all the others” have?

That’s right. All of them are gossip mills.

I wanted to check how consistent their MRB issues are. Have they improved at all since 2008? So, I tried an experiment. I scrolled through the Reading Room forum to see if there is a more recent case of women discussing the activities of people who cannot participate in the discussions. I came across a totally useless discussion dating to March of 2025. 

Apparently, two Jewish humorists, both male, one named Mendy and one named Jake, were kibbitzing with each other about writing styles. All this was printed in Ami Magazine. It looks like some kind of Purim satire, though it may have come across somewhat flat. 

Well, an imamother.com poster felt it was necessary to open a thread about this nonsensical exchange and criticize it for no good reason. She did not represent it as a Purim satire although other posters did make a point of it. Bottom line, the thread, which serves no earthly (or heavenly) purpose whatsoever, didn’t say a word of praise to Mendy or Jake, not to mention Ami or Mishpacha magazine, nor was it intended to. And, it is self evident that so much of the nasty criticisms are based on assumptions and misconceptions.

Now, this appears in their Reading Room forum where anybody can see it to this day. But doesn’t one have to already be in the site to access it?

So, I googled up Mendy P. No appearance of this Imamother post in numerous index pages. Then I googled Jake T. Same thing. Then I googled Mendy P. and Jake T. in a single lookup. 

Bingo! It was right there as the second index item. When I googled Mendy P. and Ami Magazine together, I got the listing for the post toward the bottom of page 1.

This tells me that any imamother.com post, or at least those in the open forums, may be found in Google searches, just like I found mine in 2008. And it means that one doesn’t need to be on the site, a member of the site, or even looking for it specifically to come across it. Anybody who looks for a given combination of keywords can stumble across these chatroom threads, learn things that he doesn’t need to know, and get impressions about people and establishments which may not be constructive or even true or accurate.

What happens in Vegas, doesn’t always stay in Vegas.

Were any of the parties involved ever notified of this distasteful discussion on imamother.com? And, if they were, or came across it themselves, were they in any position to get on the site and straighten out the misconceptions?

Makkah Re’eihu B’Seter at the advanced level.

So, I spent the past two posts calling out two Orthodox Jewish chat rooms, one of which can be considered Chareidi and, as is my policy, I did indeed notify both venues to check out my posts. Is there any progress report?

Neither Yeshiva World News nor Imamother.com contacted me directly to “clear the air”. Neither one had the decency to say, “Dear Mr. Hirshman, although we think you are over the top and should get a life or find better things to write about, we apologize for the distress that you claim we caused you so long ago. If there is anything we can do to sooth your ego, do not hesitate to let us know…”

There were no changes that I could notice, hence, to me it looks like they are not very interested in cleaning up their act. 

It does indeed look like Mrs. Cozocaru looked up my wife’s account and disabled it. Although I probably would have done the same thing if I were her, still and all, my wife is a legitimate full-fledged card-carrying Orthodox Jewish mother, so I can't say it was proper.

Well, perhaps she got me off her back, but she didn’t fix anything. All I see is a lack of accountability, which is a standard female trait that goes all the way back to the first Chava. Incidentally, I’m sure there are probably plenty of other male “trolls” and lurkers with much more nefarious motives. 

So now, what steps should imamother.com take to eliminate MRB?

There is no easy answer. Here are some options:

Full Termination

The Mishna in Bava Kamma (4:9) discusses the degree of responsibility an owner has for his rowdy ox after it has been certified as a “repeat offender”. There is a dispute regarding when the owner took reasonable precautions to contain the ox but it damaged anyhow. Rabi Yehuda maintains that any reasonable precautions exempts the owner from full liability (he still has half liability). Rabi Eliezer is more stringent. He says that once an ox is certified as a rowdy ox, no amount of precautions are sufficient. 

אין לו שמירה אלא סכין – there is no way to safeguard this ox except to terminate it at the slaughterhouse.

Even though for oxen we rule like Rabi Yehuda, when it comes to chat groups, there truly is no safeguard except termination. This would be the best remedy, but I suppose it is too much to expect.

Here are some other measures that they can and should implement.

More Vigilant Moderation

This sounds simple enough but is easier said than done. This is self evident since, until now, the moderation is sloppy and porous. Clearly, the moderators do not recognize MRB when they see it and there is no reason to assume that they will get any better at it. So, this isn't really going to work.

Fix their “Contact Us” feature

 

There is absolutely no excuse for anybody with a valid complaint, member or not, to be unable to contact the site and voice themselves. Yet, on this site, the Contact Us feature is anything but user friendly.

The Contact Us feature of most web sites consists either of an embedded form for correspondence and/or a list of options for direct contact be it phone numbers, email addresses, WhatsApp and/or X or Facebook or Instagram nodes. On this site, there is no embedded form. When I click the Contact Us option, it does nothing but call up the user’s Outlook system. This is useful as long as the user actually uses Outlook and has it configured on their computer. For users who have Outlook but don’t use it, the system gets stalled.

I tried the feature on a smartphone which does not have any Microsoft programs and it did open an email to admin@imamother.com. Still, on a Microsoft computer it can easily get blocked and this needs to be fixed. An embedded form would help.

Take the Whole Site Underground

This means making the entire site accessible only to members, even the lighter, domestic forums. This will do absolutely nothing to prevent any LH or MRB and may even make it worse. The only thing it will accomplish is prevent interested parties who are not members from finding it. This is good if the outside person is uninvolved and won’t learn things [s]he doesn’t have to know. Yet, at the same time it will conceal the material from those who may be affected by it – as in my case – and this will turn “innocent” chit chat into MRB. 

I do not recommend this measure.

Open the Site Membership to All

At the other end of the spectrum, they could make the basic forums (site membership) accessible to anybody and only restrict the sensitive forums to women. Although this may lesson the cases of MRB on the basic forums, it won’t do anything for the exclusive female ones. Also. It obviously opens up a new can of worms of other problems, not the least of which is increased communication between men and women along with just plain bitul zman and moshav leitzim. On the other hand, we already have these issues on any other type of social media, Jewish or not, including the Yeshiva World News Coffee Room. There is no gender segregation there, either.

Create a “Male Guest” Feature

Another option is that, even without membership, the site can enable non-members to post as a “guest”, probably subject to prior approval or something, so that they could respond to anything that is posted that affects them.

Again, this would probably only be effective to counter something posted on the open forums but not on the closed ones. Also, if a random person is going to find something objectionable on the site by an arbitrary Google search, will the same person find any potential talkback?

Conclusion

As much as any of the above features may help the problem, I don’t foresee any of it being implemented. This is for two reasons:

(1) Such actions can only come on the heels of accountability. From all my input I see absolutely no signs of accountability whatsoever. Mrs. Corozaco was quick to disable my wife’s account, but, as I wrote above, she did not respond at all to my previous posts (which were sent to her directly). It does not look like she is interested in fixing the problem. The same goes for Yeshiva World News.

(2) Nobody takes me seriously in any case, even when I back my claims with Halachic sources, which is something I always endeavor to do.

It comes out that these sites are dangerous places. They are hefker like the Wild West. Although they can do a lot of positive things, it all comes bundled with a lot of negativity and damage. That’s how the Yetzer Hara works. As such, I have to side with Rabi Eliezer on this one. אין לו שמירה אלא סכין. The best thing is to just close the entire site.

The above applies to the site owners and builders. It goes without saying that all Jewish Internet users should avoid these sites like the plague. After all the pasuk says (Mishlei 22:5):

צנים פחים בדרך עקש, שומר נפשו ירחק מהם.

And the Midrash Yechezkel says:

אל תקרי צנים אלא צ'טים - צ'טים פחים בדרך עקש, שומר נפשו ירחק מהם

Which means:

Chatrooms are traps in a crooked path. All who wish to guard their souls should avoid them.

The paths may be paved with the best of intentions, but they are just as crooked. Guard your soul!

May every reader [who made it this far] have a G’mar Chasima Tova!

Arrur Makkah Re'eihu B'Seter - Part 2b: The Mother of All Jewish Chat Groups

 

In our previous post, we noted how prevalent are the dangers of Makkah Re’eihu B’Seter (MRB) in the Jewish chat forums.

We discussed two levels of MRB: (1) Basic – when the “victim” has access to the discussion and is able to participate (2) Advanced – when the “victim” does not have access and cannot participate. The previous post presented one offender at the Basic level. 

The second, and more sinister culprit, fits the bill as Advanced Makkah Re’eihu just like the appalling Tea app. I will refer to this web site as The Mother of all Jewish Chat Forums. Like the Tea app. Only women can be members, and like the Tea app, it isn’t very secure. Unlike Yeshiva World News, this site is nothing but a chat forum.

The site looks to be multi-layered. There are a number of forums on innocuous domestic topics such as Recipes, Shopping, Household Management, YomTov and Shabbos, Hobbies, Social Scene, etc. which are accessible for viewing by anyone on the Internet. One only needs to have membership in order to post on it. Some more sensitive topics like Marriage and Relationship topics, Emotional Health and women’s health and halacha issues are only accessible to members, even just for reading (this makes sense). And it looks like there are some highly sensitive Private topics that even a member needs to apply separately and qualify for. 

On the one hand, the more exclusive the topic, the more it is susceptible to MRB. Yet ironically, on the other hand, the free access forums may be the bigger problem since the material posted there can be found and viewed by anybody – male or female, member or non-member. Thus, anything derogatory about Abe can be found in search engines and be seen by anyone, i.e., a larger population.

To drive the point home, I will repeat the warning that I quoted in the previous post from the Yeshiva World News Coffee Room rulebook:

This is the Internet and everyone sees what you write. Ve’Hameivin Yavin.

So, let’s say, Abe himself happens to stumble across it, and he wants to set the record straight, he is not allowed to do it on this site – at least, not on his own. This was my predicament back in March 2008. 

 

Incidentally, it looks like the site is moderated for offensive or damaging content by some senior members, but there is no indication that there is any Rabbinic (or even Rebetzinic) supervision.

My book was initially released in October 2007, and I did not decide to start a blog until July 2008. As is normal for a new author of a new book, over the first year I was googling it up on a regular basis to see if it was getting any attention and publicity, good or bad. Hence, one day in March of 2008, my google search displayed a hit from a site called www.imamother.com. The link led to a free-access chat forum called Reading Room and the topic was about recommended non-fiction books. A poster who I will identify as IOW wrote as follows:

I just finished One Above and Seven below. It is an attempt to explain Charedi outlook to frum, non charedim. Found it pompous, condescending and somewhat off base.

I love compliments. 

Seriously, everyone is entitled to their opinion. Nobody needs to like my book. The question is, should they announce it on an Internet chat board?

Let me point out that this chat thread was a long-running thread. It opened on Jan 7, 2008 and it ran until Aug. of 2011. The Original Poster (OP) opened the thread as such:

Please post those non-fiction books that you think were terrific. If you have the author's name and can write a one-line description of it, that would be great 😊

Thus, the thread began innocently enough, and it was meant for women to post names of books that they like and would recommend. It was not meant to post names of books the reader did not like. Most of the posts were nothing more than the titles of one or more books and sometimes the names of the authors. The majority of the books listed were secular non-Jewish ones. 

As I was reviewing the thread, something caught my eye. One poster early on (that first day) recommended a book titled Freakonomics. 

For context, Freakonomics was published in 2005 and was number 2 on the NYT Best Seller list in 2006. By 2009 it had sold over 4,000,000 copies and turned into a multi-media franchise, with a sequel book, a feature film, a regular radio segment on National Public Radio, and a weekly blog. A friend lent me the book and I read it through and found it very informative and thought-provoking. All good.

Three days and numerous book titles later, a new poster on this thread, who I will identify as CM, got on and wrote only this: 

I did not like Freakonomics.

This poster wasn’t recommending any books, nor was she giving any objective reasons why not to read it. It just didn’t suit her. She did not bother to explain why.

Excuse me? Who asked you? This thread is meant to be a list of books that posters recommend because they liked them. It is not meant to be a thread of critical reviews on books. 

I wondered, what could be her whole purpose even to post this comment? It’s a foregone conclusion that some people won’t like any given book. This could apply to any book that is recommended. Why does she have to tell the world that she didn’t like this one? Especially without explaining why. Who on earth is she helping? What we need to know is that the one who brought it up did like it. And it happens to be quite a popular book. What is she trying to accomplish?

Now, this book is a totally secular book but there is a good chance that author 1 – Steven David Levitt is Jewish. Author 2 – Stephen Joseph Dubner is definitely Jewish although his Jewish parents left Judaism. I strongly suspect that he is related to Ethel Rosenberg. 

When the author is clearly Jewish, regardless of whether he is observant or not, there is certainly a prohibition of LH if true, SR if not, and MRB in all cases. Even in the case of an upstanding non-Jew, it’s not clear that there is no issue of Lashon Hara (I know, the pasuk says לא תלך רכיל בעמך.) Even if there isn’t, it's not a good habit.

Likely that CM wasn’t aware that at least one author is Jewish, but it didn’t end there. Sometime in April of 2008, the original poster (OP) of the thread, recommended a book by an openly Jewish male who I will identify as DK. He was not just a Jewish male, but also a convert who is entitled to special consideration. The OP liked the book. Comes back CM and she writes:

I stopped reading him, I found him very Not Jewish 

Careful, now, we are talking about a convert.

B”H, the OP called her out and said:

Stopped reading him or this particular book? He's Jewish. Doesn't seem right to say that about him.

CM responded:

but his books were so NOt Jewish, dh [dear husband] requested I not bring them home anymore.

Hold on, the majority of books recommended on this thread are not Jewish. And didn’t she read Freakonomics? Did her “dh” approve of that?

Let’s be dan l’kaf zechus and say there is validity and toelles to what she is saying. Maybe readers should be forewarned that she thinks the book is not so “Jewish”. (Don’t forget, we are talking about a convert who wasn’t brought up Jewish, for Heaven’s sake!) And it’s certainly important to obey one’s husband. Besides, her information is firsthand and to the point, so it may meet the basic conditions. But still, what about condition number 3?  Was this male convert ever informed about this comment. Was he given the opportunity to get onto an exclusive women’s forum and defend his work?

Makka R’eihu B’seter – L’Mehadrin.

Now, let’s return to my case.

There is one slight difference between the infractions of poster CM and that of poster IOW who criticized my book. CM’s subjective comments were in reference to books that other posters had previously mentioned as recommended books. Once they were mentioned, she wanted to give her personal critical opinion. Balance.

In the case of poster IOW, nobody mentioned my book (only 5 months off the press) earlier in the thread. She is not responding to anybody’s recommendation. She brought up my book all by herself in order to dis-recommend it. This, on a thread intended for recommending books.

I am proud to say that my book was the only book mentioned in the entire thread to earn this distinction.

Before I continue, it is time for a quick summary of what One Above and Seven Below is all about.

In Vayikra 26, HKBH sets up two camps. One is the One Above or Im Bechukosai Telechu camp which is the camp of those who follow His commandments (and study Torah). This camp gets His blessings.

The second camp is the Seven Below or V’Im Bechukosai Timasu camp. This is the place for everybody who does not live up to the Im Bechukosai Telechu directive. This camp is cursed.

I must stress that HKBH set up these camps. I did not. I am only disclosing what it says here. At the end of the book, I comment that I am not placing anybody into either camp. Each individual needs to understand the definitions and determine on their own where they stand. The idea is to get everybody into the One Above camp for their own benefit. Nobody is barred from getting into the One Above camp. It just takes a little bit of work (toil).

The inevitable result of this is that, as long as some Jews do not comply, there will be two classes of Jews – the One Above or upper class, and the Seven Below or lower class.

For people who categorize themselves into the One Above camp (upper class), this is a real “feel-good” book. And it’s right on target. For those who categorize themselves into the Seven Below lower class, the book will obviously make them feel inadequate. It’s a “feel-horrible” book. But the idea is not to make anyone feel horrible. It is to motivate them to get themselves into the upper class. The doors are open. Tickets are available to all. They are not beyond anybody’s budget but they are not cheap. One needs to pay the price.

It's like a physical fitness book. First it tells you what is called physically fit (in shape) and what is not. Then it tells you how to get physically fit. It clearly let’s you know that you are out of shape, but it is not meant to make you feel bad, rather to motivate you to get into better shape. My book is the same thing in Spiritual fitness.

So, now, let’s look again at IOW’s post:

I just finished One Above and Seven below. It is an attempt to explain Charedi outlook to frum, non charedim. Found it pompous, condescending and somewhat off base.

As of now, Sept. 2025, my book has been out for almost 18 years, and I can confidently say that nobody who identifies with the One Above camp thinks that my book is pompous, condescending, or off base. If anybody thinks that way it is a clear announcement that they see themselves in the Seven Below, lower class, camp.

Mighty sad.

So here comes a poster who tortured herself through my [whole?] book and, in a thread about recommendations, needs to say that she felt the book is pompous and condescending. She feels that the book is telling her that she is “out of shape”. She doesn’t seem to realize that this is what it is supposed to do.

I read this in the women’s forum and felt “emasculated”. Nobody previously recommended the book so there was no opposing “One Above” viewpoint. There was no indication that anyone else on the thread had read my book at all, so there was no chance to get a counter opinion from inside the group. 

I felt the reader was misrepresenting what the book is really about and was presenting a distorted picture. The purpose of the book is to help people understand Judaism, and if one discourages reading it, this will deny that benefit from anyone who would otherwise gain from it. She was hurting not just me but also any potential “satisfied customers”. And, as a male, I was locked out from be able to come to the rescue.

Makka R’eihu B’Seter.

May I comment that I discovered the post by a simple innocent Google search. Outside of my discovery, not one human being – male or female – ever, ever contacted me to notify me that this post was written. Thus, technically, the MRB is in effect to this very day!

Anyhow, I was lamenting my poor predicament when it dawned on me that I just happened to be married to somebody who has all the qualifications to be a full-fledged member. What a coincidence. Here, we call it “proteksia”.

I decided to take advantage of my proteksia and had my ezer kenegdi sign up as a member. Then we formulated a response. Let’s just say it was a joint effort. Here is the response:

I also read One Above and Seven Below and I thought it is an eye-opening book. I know what you mean about being pompous and condescending, I mean the author wrote on the first page that some of it is patronizing and in his forward he calls his role as a Rabbi and preacher "pretentious" so I suppose we should expect that but why do you think that it is a little off base? I thought it was right on the money.

Her response:

It is right on the money if you are the same type of Charedi he is - Anglo yeshivish. Not true about the other 95%.

Okay, so now it is on base but only for 5% of the chareidim (Anglo-yeshivish?) but not the “other 95%”.  

The funny thing is that I defined a Chareidi as one who buys into G-d’s One Above camp. And 95% of “chareidim” don’t do it? So, it’s been 18 years, and I have yet to meet the devout chareidi, of any “stripe", who does not buy in to Im Bechukosai Telechu as defined by Rashi.

Subsequent remarks by this poster revealed that she missed the whole point of the book (she probably just skimmed through it), but the same revelation meant it was useless to get into a debate on a women’s chat thread.

This is not really the first time that I called out the transgressions of this particular web site. I referenced it in my 2023 post Irreversible Damage. Here is what I wrote:

I am aware of an online chat forum strictly for frum women. I became aware of it many years ago when one member critiqued my book. (That part of the forum was accessible to anyone). I promptly directed my wife to become a legitimate member. Ever since, if I needed to, I could find out what the “ladies” have to say on a topic that I might be dealing with. You can bet that I “peeked” into the threads about Malka Leifer.

Regarding Malka Leifer, there was a protracted thread about the involvement of Rabbi Litzman, after that there was a more recent one celebrating the extradition and now one celebrating the conviction. As expected, the prevalent attitude is approving, celebratory and even vindictive although there are always some lone level-headed posters who may challenge some points and say this is not something to celebrate. Those few usually get gang tackled. The titles of the two last threads are indicative of the mood: “Finally! Extradited” “Finally! Guilty.”

In all of these threads, the most prominent victim of the LH, SR and, for sure, a lot of MRB, is Mrs. Leifer herself. Technically, she could join the forum and respond for herself, so it would only constitute the more Basic MRB – as if it’s no big deal. But we note also that Rabbi Litzman was singled out in one thread and honored to be named in the title. This is Advance MRB L’Mehadrin.

I reviewed that thread and, small consolation, very little of it actually discussed Rabbi Litzman, although any amount is too much. But the posters of that thread also mentioned another Rav in Ashdod and it was not to compliment him. Moreover, one poster even referenced a few of my blog posts on the topic and those didn’t get much praise, either. 

These are the transgressions that I am familiar with but there are constantly topics on the site that deal with “recommending” books and other products, restaurants, schools, camps, yeshivos, Rabbanim, lawyers, toanim, therapists and other professionals. I am sure it is primarily well intended and most of the reporting is positive, but as the saying goes: where there’s a will, there’s a won’t. This is another way of saying that whenever someone has something nice to say there is usually someone else who has an axe to grind.

It goes without saying that this kind of abuse is occurring on all types of social media especially those with exclusive groups like on WhatsApp or Facebook, but these monetized Web-based sites draw in a lot more unsuspecting customers who inadvertently join the wolf pack. When we are talking about Orthodox Jewish (“frum”) sites, not only does the Satan generate all this Makkah Re’eihu, but it causes a chillul Hashem to boot.

So, what can be done about them?

As usual, I am way past my allotted post length, so it doesn’t pay to discuss it right here. I hope to cover it in a future post. In the meantime, the best thing is to simply stay away from these poisonous chat forums.

ארור מכה רעהו בסתר - ואמר כל העם אמן!