Tuesday, January 19, 2016

Dont blame our neighbors

Repost:
Reader submitted via comment.
How can we have taahnos on the Jackson board for not letting a school, while in a nearby development, a large one actually there are fun unzereh, chasuvim, that are fighting a shul that is looking to expand. Those that are fighting this shul do not daven there and they went to arkaos against this choshuv kehilla. What are they different from the opposition of our neighbors in Jackson? If we dont allow a shul to be built in our own backyard why should we expect any different from others. This is a development where there is a great need for shuls there are not enough places to daven. A few yechidim can farfeer a gantz maaracha.

33 comments:

  1. Please read the minutes of the zoning board meeting before you are motzi shaim rah on people. All they wanted was to go to a din torah to work out issues and they ended up going to a din torah. End of story.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why are they still fighting it than? They had a din to rah and the rabbonim gave it a go ahead. Why are they calling people to demonstrate? They first use the almanac card than mikva than traffic than membership etc.. The matara here is very clear. It's a bigger shame that it's coming from rosehei mosdos and askanim who work in mosdos knowing the urgent need of adequate room for shuls, schools to accommodate the expansion of our kehila.

      Delete
    2. No one is fighting the psak of the din torah. It's motzi shaim rah again and again.

      Delete
    3. Fact: they went to Arkaos first before they went to the Rabbonim even Rav Gavriel Finkel said it was a mistake that they went to arkaos first before the din torah.

      Delete
    4. That's actually not true. There was a Psak Din, the shul then went back to the dayanim with the plans to make sure that they were in accordance with the psak that they gave. ALL the rabbonim involved signed on the plans that they saw the plans and they conform to the psak din. After all of that the opposition still tried to force the rabbonim to reverse themselves. they continue to do everything and anything to prevent the shul from being built. It isn't "motzi shaim rah" it's the truth! Know the facts before you post!

      Delete
    5. "Fact: they went to Arkaos first before they went to the Rabbonim even Rav Gavriel Finkel said it was a mistake that they went to arkaos first before the din torah." Please check your "Facts". Arkaos is a non jewish court of law. This has NEVER gone to court!!!! A township hearing in front of the planning board is not called going to Arkaos. This is especially true when no one expressed any opposition to the shul prior to the hearing. The statement of opposition came at the hearing where Rabbi Helberg was blind-sided by a single individual, who then made the claim that the shul went to arkaos. Rav Gavriel Finkel was told that the shul went to Arkaos and his letter simply stated that Bais Din is the proper place to address their concerns. The fact remains the shul has NEVER gone to arkaos and does not plan on. Know the real FACTS before you post

      Delete
    6. They= went to arkaos first is referring to CMmm who was representing the hisnagdus.. you misunderstood who the comment was about.

      Delete
    7. To Clarify this whole confusion:
      I would not say that Rosh Hamosed (further in referred to as RH) went to Arkoas, he did however send a messanger (shvogger) to go to the board hearing to shter the application.
      By the hearing they requested that it be settled by Rabbonim. Million $ question, if they wanted the Shul to got to Rabbonim, why didn't they do that before the hearing (especially as they were approached by the Shul before the hearing and the RH's response was Behatzlocho). This was an obvious planned out sabotage. And it's beyond hypocrittacal for them to have demanded to go to Bes Din. (The Planning Board should have realized this at the time!)
      The only reason the Shul went to Beis Din was Al Pi Harabonnim in order to avoid a Chilul Hashem that would be caused by an open fight in public.

      Delete
    8. Sheker and sheker and

      Delete
    9. Sheker and sheker and sheker why don't you ask the rosh hamosod his side and you will hear something totally different.

      Delete
  2. This double standard is new to unzere fun lakewood so why do u sound surprised

    ReplyDelete
  3. Why are you so sure? Give our planning board a chance to hear the issue before jumping to conclusions. Surely once the hear from the majority of Westgate that this is a need, they wouldn't oppose it. Imagine the largest orthodox development in America , being forced to daven in basements, in dangerously cramped conditions. I have faith in our board that they will see the urgent need in this project.

    ReplyDelete
  4. People forget that we have a shulchan orach to obey if the opposition wanted to go to a din torah and the shul didn't then the shul is the rodef not the opposition.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The shul never had a problem with going to a Din Torah. The problem was that the shul never knew there was opposition until they showed up at the hearing. If the opposition had a legitimate concern they could and should have approached Rabbi Helberg with their concerns. Instaed they cost she shul enormous expense and time by showing up at the hearing and making false claims (for details read the minutes of the hearing). There is nothing legitimate about their claims. Stop trying to paint the shul in a negative light by calling them a "rodef".To those who know the facts, you look like a fool.

      Delete
  5. Well to be technical, there is a difference, the ones in the community who don't want it built is because they are power hungry.

    Whereas the people in Jackson are against it because of ignorance or anti-semitism, or a mixture of both.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Why would you even put this up?

    ReplyDelete
  7. To all the well meaning individuals who believe that this issue is about halacha. Despite the unanimous psak of all the rabbonim and a letters of support on behalf of the shul, the opposition has hired an attorney to attempt to delay the hearing and ultimately to stop the shul from being built. Community need, halacha, or public opinion none of these things matter to the opposition. The question that begs to be answered is what does matter to them and what motivates their opposition. The ugliest part of this situation is that the opposition tries to remain anonymous. Rav Helberg and his supporters are out in the open. The opposition???

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. the opposition you mention has nothing to do with the rosh hamosod. Please clarify who is the opposition ie. neighbors or whoever. I spoke to Rabbi Zimbal and he said we should have more shuls in westgate. By the way the psak din was given along time ago why did it take so long to go back to the zoning board with the modified plans (al pi din torah).

      Delete
    2. Because the opposition whomever they are are trying to do everything in their power to stop the shul. Therefore the shul took time and spent alot of money on traffic studies environmental and engineering issues to be forewarned of any potential problems that will arise. We know good and well who the opposition is most of them hide behind others its time for them to be exposed.

      Delete
    3. You asked why it took so long to bring it back to the board. The answer is because the shul went to great lengths to make sure they complied with the psak din. Additionally, they brought the revised plans to the Bais Din as well as all the other rabbonim who were involved to ensure they were in accordance with the psak. All the rabbonim involved signed off on the plans.

      Delete
  8. Why is Rabbi Zimbal not writing a letter to stop what is going on?? Now they hired an attorney despite that the Rabbonim and roshei yeshiva approved of the plans.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rabbi Zimbal does not know who the opposition is they're anonymous.

      Delete
    2. Than let him publish the letter he promised to write in support of the shul. Or better let him bring his entire kehila and show support.

      Delete
  9. http://hefkervelt.blogspot.com/2016/01/tonight-hearing-for-bm-of-kelmwoods-at.html

    ReplyDelete
  10. The lawyer for the opposition said there is no case, and wants to return the check. To whom? Can't say.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Sheker and sheker and sheker the rh only got the plans for the shul to close for him to go to rabbanim to work something out before the zoning board meeting. He therefore asked a shayla and was told to go to the zoning board meeting and request rabbinic arbitration. Please read the zoning board meeting minutes. By the way he did not ask Rabbi Zimbal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Totally untrue! Rabbi Zimbal was asked.

      Delete
    2. I have no idea if it was R. Zimbal that was asked. I do know that if a Rav allowed this and is not willing to come out and say so it is worth absolutely nothing.

      Delete
    3. Why doesn't anyone ask the rh who he asked his shayla to ? Hefkervelt are you going to post this comment.

      Delete
    4. so far he did not disclose who the rav was let him own up and say who gave him a heter to go shter the planing board. fast forward why is RH not listening to the psak din of the din torah that he asked for?

      Delete
  12. If you were at the hearing last night there was a letter hanging on the notice board outside the hearing room, signed by rabbonim!

    ReplyDelete
  13. I heared RH said its an anonymous Rav so its on him to say who gave him a heter to stop the building of a shul by going to the planing board. Its unthinkable as a rosh hamosed would stoop to such lows for power and control same reason for not bringing a real menahel control control control... no wonder the rebbeim are leaving is that the chinuch you are giving al taharas hakodesh?

    ReplyDelete
  14. A real roll model. ignore a psak din from a BD, fight a shul from being built, they would say these things about reform yidden not about a Rosh hamosad!!!!

    ReplyDelete