Rubashkin Workers Said Forced To Grant Sexual Favors For Promotions, Shift Changes

I guess Rabbi Weissmandel and his rabbis were not in this room – or, just maybe, they were…

The Des Moines Register reports:

…If a worker wanted, say, a promotion or a shift change, “they’d be brought into a room with three or four men and it was like, ‘Which one do you want? Which one are you going to serve?’” said [Sister Mary] McCauley in an interview today with Des Moines Register editors and reporters.

“Unfortunately, they are grateful for some of their ESL classes, and they knew what some of those words meant,” McCauley said. “If they had the courage, they could refuse it.”

Chaim Abrahams, an Agriprocessors representative, declined to address the allegation of sexual favors in exchange for job-related requests.

“As with any legal matter, Agriprocessors cannot comment about any specific allegation," Abrahams said in a written statement.…

Slavery, Rubashkin style.

[Hat Tips: Michelle, Adam's Third, and Stephen.]

Comments

[formely frum]

Can all of these allegation be true? It seems
thing, allegation, are just flying around.

Or, maybe now that they are not working for rubashkin anymore and are pissed off at him for the very low wages, they figure lets pile it on, lets screw the bastard

[Nigritude Ultramarine]

Slavery, Rubashkin style.

The Torah allows one to have relations with his slave. How is this meat kosher?

[Amused - Not]

Formerly Frum: How dare you! This is FailedShmarya.com!

How dare you suggest that any allegation or accusation, no matter how absurd, against any Jew is not true. And if the accused in this case in an ORTHODOX Jew. Double shame on you.

GET IT STRAIGHT: ANYTHING ANYONE EVER SAYS AGAINST ANY JEW, ESPECIALLY AN ORTHODOX JEW IS TRUE. NOT ONLY UNTL PROVEN FALSE. EVEN AFTER IT HAS BEEN PROVEN FALSE.

That is FailedShmarya's way of punishing the Lubobashkins for whatever he thinks they did to him.

In is what we call petty revenge by petty people on petty people.

[Nigritude Ultramarine]

Oops!

The Torah does not allow one to have relations with his slave. How is this meat kosher?

[formely frum]

Shmarya really did not say anything he is just saying what the papers say. Also one cannot dismiss simply because he is an orthodox Jew

Lets get real, there seemed to be many things going on at Rubaskin, I just think it is getting a little absurd, I hope

[Amused - Not]

Where in the article that makes these allegations does it mention that the alleged sexual abusers were Jewish?

Oh, I forgot. A newspaper reported an accusation so it must be true and if it is true and a crime was committed it must have been by a Jew.

You poor pathetic kvetch's are no better than the Nazis. At least they didn't pretend they were just trying to help the filthy Jews mend their ways.

[steve]

Lubobashkins

Good one.

[steve]

This whole Rubashkin fiasco can now be summed up as "Sex, Lies and Videotape".

[Shmarya]

You poor pathetic kvetch's are no better than the Nazis. At least they didn't pretend they were just trying to help the filthy Jews mend their ways.

And now you're all Nazis.

This is truly the Orthodox problem. Rather than fix their own broken house they attack anyone who points out what needs repair.

[Simon Rose]

I'm incline to believe it's true many, Haredim are known to visit houses of prostitution. I Jewish NYPD Cop friend says it's very common, he usually just chased them away instead of arresting them.

Of course who can blame them look at those frumpy women they have who are all sexually repressed by their crazy Rebbi's.
Where in to torah does it forbid different positions or oral sex, etc...

When they have some cute Latinos Babes all around they don't know how to act their heads are ready to explode.

The Haredim are really a messed up bunch of our people. Someone needs to talk to these knuckle heads they're out of control and getting worse.

[John K. Diamond]

And how long is it going to take the OU to, once and for all, pull it's Kashrut certification on ALL Rubashkin animal "Horror Houses"?

[formely frum]

ou poor pathetic kvetch's are no better than the Nazis. At least they didn't pretend they were just trying to help the filthy Jews mend their ways.

According to some rabbis the nazis where helping the Jews mend there way. We were punished for not being true Jews. If only
there were more frum people the holocaust would not of happend. One should thank the nazis for opening our eyes.

[one of many]

as a matter of fact i was thinkin this very thing yesterday, but was afraid to speak it!!!
Distgusting!!

[Archie Bunker]

Like was pointed out on UOJ, this will be Lubinsky's first foray into covering up sexual crimes. It's just part of the job description when you're a Rubashkin stooge.

[mordecai]

If many on this site assume any allegation against the Rubashkins are true, they are more than compensated by the army of my fellow Jews who refrain from criticizing the transgressions of miscreant Jews.

The shtetl dweller Jew when observing a cross around the neck of a man sees a cossack coming over the very next hill. Because the shtetl Jew still fears the armed Polish peasantry he is against the second amendment.

Because he still lives in the Shtetl of his mind his mantra is: "Jews should never criticize other Jews." Therefore when the Shtetl Jew happens upon Failed Messiah he screeches with mock indignation the greatest insult he can hurl at a fellow Jew: "Anti-semite!"

All of this is quite amusing but has in its roots a sad reality. He continues to feel as a stranger in a strange land. He is never fully at ease. The next pogrom is imminent and the mantra is: "Don't criticize fellow Jews, lest we awaken the behemoth."

When the Catholic Church attempted to protect its disgusting pedophile priests it only served to heap intense contempt for the institution.

Let the chips fall where they may and let the light shine as it will.

[Ariel Sokolovsky www.Moshiach.WS]

B"H
Mordecai
There is a difference between healthy constructive criticism and many of the posts on this site designed to smear entire community for actions of some individuals.

PS. It's nice to know we agree on something, gun control is a counterproductive policy (see www.JPFO.org
:-)

[michael]

this is all bull crap
this is illegal alients now looking for an excuse to stay in the states- as long as they were abused they will be able to seek clemency-

[mordecai]

My Friend Ariel:

I am sure we agree on much more than realized.

If Jeremiah told king Jehoiakim that G-D would roll him up into a little ball and throw him out of Judah, the Rubashkins are not above criticsm.

By the way your post before saying that Jews should make a greater attempt to say hello to the non-Jew was quite fascinating. Are you suggesting the a whole Jewish people do not act in a civil manner to the gentile? Just what are you saying.

I learned in kindergarten to say hellow to people. I do not not inquire if the man or woman is a Jew before so doing. Your own comment reveals your own recognition of the problem.

[Yosef ben Matitya]

GET IT STRAIGHT: ANYTHING ANYONE EVER SAYS AGAINST ANY JEW, ESPECIALLY AN ORTHODOX JEW IS TRUE. NOT ONLY UNTL PROVEN FALSE. EVEN AFTER IT HAS BEEN PROVEN FALSE.
Amused - Not
? really!
let's put things in their right perspective.
those ugly trolls from nikolaiev to (san) franciske and from fairbanks to joburg are neither jewish nor orthodox of any faith. used to think of them as messianists sabbateans.
speak instead of "mem tet shaarei tumoh" in person. each and every one of them.
they broke the scale. keep them out of our city halls, governors mansion. it's a pack of trash that does us no justice.

[Ariel Sokolovsky http://www.Moshiach.ws]

B"H
As far as Rubashkin is concerned I am not bothered so much by various Socialist like irrational laws being broken that hurt the economy by denying legal employment opportunities for unskilled workers including so called illegal aliens.

I'm bothered by the allegations of cruelty towards those workers, beating someone with a hook stealing parts of their wages repeatedly etc. If this is true it needs to be fixed and not repeated in the future in any Jewish company or any company for that matter (my mother was not paid for some of the hours she put in at a Daycare she was working at she had to call AG of Mass office for the owner to relent and do the right thing. The owner was not frum in fact not Jewish in fact she was an African American which proves nothing about either non Jews in general or African American female daycare owners in particular:-)

As far as my earlier post about many Jews saying "hi how are you" to gentiles I'm talking about some frum Jews Chabad and others however it really depends on the community as I said I noticed it in Boston and in some places in NY in both cases I know that non Jews also notice it and are bothered by it based on the conversations I have had with them.
What bothers me is that it doesn't seem consistent with overall Torah teachings including Chabad teachings not to mention the Rebbe's own behavior and various letters and talks on this and related subjects.

[Anon]

--That is FailedShmarya's way of punishing the Lubobashkins for whatever he thinks they did to him.--

To give Shmarya credit, I wouldn't belittle what the Lubobashkins did to him. They were successful while poor Shmarya was a miserable failure as a Luboberg. Can't blame him for feeling badly about that.

[Stephen Mendelsohn]

BS"D

And you shall not profane My holy Name; but I shall be sanctified among the children of Israel: I am HaShem who sanctify you, that brought you out of the land of Egypt, to be your G-d, I am HaShem. Va-Yikra 23:32-33

This pasuk was read the Shabbat before the ICE raid on AgriProcessors and it points to the central issue here. Even if a mere 10% of the allegations against Rubashkin and Agri are true, it represents a monstrous chillul HaShem, rivaling the murder of 29 Arabs in Chevron or the Rabin assasination. Given that ICE had a legal Hispanic immigrant (source #7 in the indictment) go in and tape record Agri management, just as PETA videotaped the trachea ripping, the percent of allegations that are true here is way more than 10% -- probably a majority. It should not be about Ortho-bashing; it is about credibility, and the Rubashkins have very little here.

The Rubashkins could have come to Postville and acted in a manner that was a genuine kiddush HaShem, showing people in the small-town upper Midwest the beauty of traditional Judaism. Instead they have brought shame on us by their violating Torah ethics in their business practices, caring only about ritual mitzvot while being cruel to both animals and non-Jewish employees alike.

[uncle joe mccarthy]

ariel,

i dont know in what field you work, or what your workplace is like, but let me tell you something about those "socialist" laws, and your allegation that denying work to the undocumented....errr...illegals hurt the economy.

the fact that you have an 8 hour day, the fact that you arent fired every erev shabbas because you wont work on shabbas, the fact that you have any benefits at all...are as a result of those "socialist" laws....most of which were gained through the blood of yidden...you need to crack open a history book, and stop using your bitul time listening to the garbage being spewed out on right wing radio.

as for hurting the economy by not allowing for unskilled labor to the illegal....first, where did you ever get that working in a meat packing plant is "unskilled"? second, these were jobs that used to allow for a middle class existence...by allowing plants to employ those that they can take advantage of and pay less than a living, and in many cases less than the minimum wage....hurts the economy, because it drives down income for everyone...for the past 8 years, the income levels in the avg household have remained flat, due in some part to the increase in illegal labor and the outsourcing of many jobs.

the only people who gain from this labor are the plant owners....you think that rubashkin passed the savings onto you the consumer???

oh, but we must stand by him, because he is a frum yid

i dont think so

oh, and as to the sexual harrasment charges....this is par for the course in plants and other places with an illegal alien workforce...they arent legal, so there is no fear of them reporting anything

read, fastfood nation

[Ariel Sokolovsky www.Moshiach.WS]

B"H
uncle joe mccarthy

I was born an grew up in the former Soviet Union perhaps that partialy explains my distaste for irrational Socialist laws and my Libertarian attitude in general.
As far as Jews spilling their own blood fighting to enact such laws and regulations I am fully aware of this and this is not the 1st time the road to hell was paved with good intentions.
And if I may please allow me to recomend you following articles:
Mythology of the Minimum Wage

http://mises.org/story/2130

As far as 40 hour week laws and the like this too harms many of those it was meant to help my mother for example was allowed to work less than fulltime at various places she worked at just so the company would not have to pay her overtime or be forced to buy her health insurance as a fulltime emploee.
The law should not prohibit voluntary contracts nor limit freedom of association.
One cannot force people into brighter future by using the threat of fines and imprisonment to prod them forward for not conforming to the vision of what an ideal Socialist state should look like.
People are often willing to give up many comforts and work long hours and they should have a right to do so.
The market prices flactuate including wages rates and setting artaficial minimums simply hurts people no less so than regulated prices in former Soviet Union created many deficits of essential products and services and the resulting black markets trying to accomadate consumer needs at real market prices.

[Ariel Sokolovsky]

B"H
Making Economic Sense
by Murray Rothbard
(Contents by Publication Date)
http://mises.org/Econsense/ch36.asp
Chapter 36
Outlawing Jobs: The Minimum Wage, Once More
There is no clearer demonstration of the essential identity of the two political parties than their position on the minimum wage. The Democrats proposed to raise the legal minimum wage from $3.35 an hour, to which it had been raised by the Reagan administration during its allegedly free-market salad days in 1981. The Republican counter was to allow a "subminimum" wage for teenagers, who, as marginal workers, are the ones who are indeed hardest hit by any legal minimum.

This stand was quickly modified by the Republicans in Congress, who proceeded to argue for a teenage subminimum that would last only a piddling 90 days, after which the rate would rise to the higher Democratic minimum (of $4.55 an hour.) It was left, ironically enough, for Senator Edward Kennedy to point out the ludicrous economic effect of this proposal: to induce employers to hire teenagers and then fire them after 89 days, to rehire others the day after.

Finally, and characteristically, George Bush got the Republicans out of this hole by throwing in the towel altogether, and plumping for a Democratic plan, period. We were left with the Democrats forthrightly proposing a big increase in the minimum wage, and the Republicans, after a series of illogical waffles, finally going along with the program.

In truth, there is only one way to regard a minimum wage law: it is compulsory unemployment, period. The law says: it is illegal, and therefore criminal, for anyone to hire anyone else below the level of X dollars an hour. This means, plainly and simply, that a large number of free and voluntary wage contracts are now outlawed and hence that there will be a large amount of unemployment. Remember that the minimum wage law provides no jobs; it only outlaws them; and outlawed jobs are the inevitable result.

All demand curves are falling, and the demand for hiring labor is no exception. Hence, laws that prohibit employment at any wage that is relevant to the market (a minimum wage of 10 cents an hour would have little or no impact) must result in outlawing employment and hence causing unemployment.

If the minimum wage is, in short, raised from $3.35 to $4.55 an hour, the consequence is to disemploy, permanently, those who would have been hired at rates in between these two rates. Since the demand curve for any sort of labor (as for any factor of production) is set by the perceived marginal productivity of that labor, this means that the people who will be disemployed and devastated by this prohibition will be precisely the "marginal" (lowest wage) workers, e.g. blacks and teenagers, the very workers whom the advocates of the minimum wage are claiming to foster and protect.

The advocates of the minimum wage and its periodic boosting reply that all this is scare talk and that minimum wage rates do not and never have caused any unemployment. The proper riposte is to raise them one better; all right, if the minimum wage is such a wonderful anti-poverty measure, and can have no unemployment-raising effects, why are you such pikers? Why you are helping the working poor by such piddling amounts? Why stop at $4.55 an hour? Why not $10 an hour? $100? $1,000?

It is obvious that the minimum wage advocates do not pursue their own logic, because if they push it to such heights, virtually the entire labor force will be disemployed. In short, you can have as much unemployment as you want, simply by pushing the legally minimum wage high enough.

It is conventional among economists to be polite, to assume that economic fallacy is solely the result of intellectual error. But there are times when decorousness is seriously misleading, or, as Oscar Wilde once wrote, "when speaking one's mind becomes more than a duty; it becomes a positive pleasure." For if proponents of the higher minimum wage were simply wrongheaded people of good will, they would not stop at $3 or $4 an hour, but indeed would pursue their dimwit logic into the stratosphere.

The fact is that they have always been shrewd enough to stop their minimum wage demands at the point where only marginal workers are affected, and where there is no danger of disemploying, for example, white adult male workers with union seniority. When we see that the most ardent advocates of the minimum wage law have been the AFL-CIO, and that the concrete effect of the minimum wage laws has been to cripple the low-wage competition of the marginal workers as against higher-wage workers with union seniority, the true motivation of the agitation for the minimum wage becomes apparent.

This is only one of a large number of cases where a seemingly purblind persistence in economic fallacy only serves as a mask for special privilege at the expense of those who are supposedly to be "helped."

In the current agitation, inflation--supposedly brought to a halt by the Reagan administration--has eroded the impact of the last minimum wage hike in 1981, reducing the real impact of the minimum wage by 23%. Partially as a result, the unemployment rate has fallen from 11% in 1982 to under six percent in 1988. Possibly chagrined by this drop, the AFL-CIO and its allies are pushing to rectify this condition, and to boost the minimum wage rate by 34%.

Once in a while, AFL-CIO economists and other knowledgeable liberals will drop their mask of economic fallacy and candidly admit that their actions will cause unemployment; they then proceed to justify themselves by claiming that it is more "dignified" for a worker to be on welfare than to work at a low wage. This of course, is the doctrine of many people on welfare themselves. It is truly a strange concept of "dignity" that has been fostered by the interlocking minimum wage-welfare system.

Unfortunately, this system does not give those numerous workers who still prefer to be producers rather than parasites the privilege of making their own free choice.

[one of many]

The Rubashkins could have come to Postville and acted in a manner that was a genuine kiddush HaShem, showing people in the small-town upper Midwest the beauty of traditional Judaism. Instead they have brought shame on us by their violating Torah ethics in their business practices, caring only about ritual mitzvot while being cruel to both animals and non-Jewish employees alike.
so truly spoken Stephen Mendelsohn !!!

[Ariel Sokolovsky www.Moshiach.WS]

B"H

A Free Market in Workplace Regulations

Daily Article | Posted by Ninos Malek

In a free economy, under what conditions may employees be hired and fired? And should discrimination be tolerated in the workplace? The answer to these questions depends upon who is the source of the discrimination.

From a free market perspective, the only factor that matters is whether or not the government is involved in the discrimination. If the government is the entity that forces a company to hire or fire somebody based on whatever criteria it sets forth as official policy, then that is an imposition, a violation of the rights of private property holders, an infraction against the freedom of association.

However, private businesses should have the right to use whatever criteria they want to discriminate against current and potential employees. It is a matter to be settled by contract and choice.

Let's apply this standard to a recent case. Weyco, Inc. has been on the news as an example of workplace discrimination. Located in Michigan, the company specializes in employee benefit plans and benefit management. Their new policy regarding the lifestyle of their employees has led to the firing of seven employees who did not want to quit their smoking habit. Supporters of the workers claim that this is a violation of personal freedom, that an employer has no business to tell its employees what they can or cannot do on their own time.

At first blush, this might seem to be the position of a supporter of free-markets—who favor the freedom of choice—but it is not. In a free-market, property rights come before any claims of "rights" that are said to trump the discretion of owners. A private firm has the right to hire or fire whomever they wish based on whatever criteria they wish. No one has the right to work for a private business under whatever conditions he or she chooses to make.
read the full article here:
http://mises.org/story/1735

No one has the right to work for a private business under whatever conditions he or she chooses to make.

True, but the operative phrase is "work for."

Regarding Weyco:

"Prior to January 1, 2005, smoking or otherwise using tobacco products on company time or property. Effective January 1, 2005, smoking or otherwise using tobacco at any time."

I am an avid anti-smoking person. I hate the habit. I don't buy the idea that it "only involves the smoker" when his/her smoke is blown in my direction. I have never smoked anything in my entire life and never wanted to try it either.

That said . . .

"(No) smoking or otherwise using tobacco at any time."?

HA!

If they want to say that you can't smoke on their property, fine. However, they can't tell you what you can and cannot do at home. Recreational drugs are illegal. That's one thing. However, alcohol and tobacco are perfectly legal, and the company doesn't have a right to tell its employees that they cannot smoke. Why is this? Read on.

"A private firm has the right to hire or fire whomever they wish based on whatever criteria they wish."

No, not really.

If every company exercised this "right" as it is stated in the above sentence, then each and every private firm could make up its own discriminatory rules. Each firm would be different. Some might not take people with dark hair, some might only hire Irish people, some might fire you if you gain ten pounds, some might not hire you if you listen to rock/country/classical/jazz/gamelan/klezmer, etc. If you like comedies, you could be out. What kinds of books do you read? Are you a cat person or a dog person?

If you can hire or fire someone because, on their own time and in their own homes (or other private places they are allowed) they smoke . . . then what is to say that employers won't legally hire or fire based on the above?

With that said, we also come to this - the real, and more important, reason why the company doesn't have the right to tell its employees that they cannot smoke in their private lives.

Smoking is legal. Each adult can smoke if they so wish. It is their legal right to do so.

If the company claims that they can fire someone for smoking in their private life, this means that the rights of the company SUPERCEDE the rights of the individual, the private citizen.

Now, in a land where individual liberty is such a cornerstone, isn't it wrong to give the company rights that intrude on the rights of the private citizen?

That would set a bad precedent.

The company can tell you what to do from 9-5, since you're on their property and they're buying your time. After you leave the office, they have no rights to your life.

[Ariel Sokolovsky http://www.Moshiach.ws]

B"H
Do you have a right to ban smokers from entering your home even if they will not smoke there?
If you do have such right why can't you do the same with people who want to work for you?
By denying a private company should have such right you are saying that company must put up with workers who have this bad habit that will cause them to be sick more often live less cost more in health insurance costs and lost prophets etc.
If I risk my money to start a company I should have a right to offer salaries and working conditions I feel are proper based on what workers will accept depending on my priorities and job market conditions.
So to the workers should have a right (and in fact they do have a right) to refuse taking a job at a company that would make rules they consider unacceptable or to refuse to continue working there and leave to work for a more reasonable competitor or bargain for better terms.
Of course this way of looking at things will put out many federal beuraucrats who enforce idiotic socialist regulations out of job but everything has its own price and perhaps they too will find better opportunities in private sector in a deregulated economy with lower taxes and greater freedom.

[Stephen Mendelsohn]

BS"D

Making Economic Sense
by Murray Rothbard
(Contents by Publication Date)
http://mises.org/Econsense/ch36.asp
Chapter 36
Outlawing Jobs: The Minimum Wage, Once More

Two points here.

Murray Newton Rothbard was a self-hating Jew, and fanatically anti-Israel. While as an anarchist (specifically anarcho-capitalist), he opposed all states, his harshest attacks were on Israel and the United States, and would eagerly ally himself with the New Left in international affairs. He was also good friends with Pat Buchanan, Joseph Sobran, and Llewellyn Rockwell, who was probably the ghostwriter of the racist and antisemitic tirades in Congressman (and Presidential candidate) Ron Paul's newsletters. Toward the end of his life, Rothbard left the Libertarian Party with its Anarchist caucus and allied himself with the far right, racist neo-Confederate movement (see Angry White Man - http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e2f15397-a3c7-4720-ac15-4532a7da84ca)

And in any case, whatever one thinks about the economic harm done by minimum-wage laws, the Talmud requires Jews to obey the civil law; dina d'malchuta dina is mentioned five times as binding. Minimum-wage laws may be bad economics, but they are not antisemitic or inherently immoral to the point that would require or even permit civil disobedience. An observant Jew may work to change the law, but is not permitted to flout it (as Rubashkin did, assuming the affidavit for the search warrant is accurate).

[Sarah]

Why are people surprised at the sexual harassment at this plant? The haredi men do this to their black and Latina female employees (and even to non-frum Jewish women)in the jewelry district on NY's 47th Street and in the garment district. Has been going on for years. But of course we're not allowed to talk about it because they tell us Jewish law prohibits it. So the abusers just keep getting away with it and they call us anti-Semites.

[Yosef ben Matitya]

"And in any case, whatever one thinks about the economic harm done by minimum-wage laws, the Talmud requires Jews to obey the civil law; dina d'malchuta dina is mentioned five times as binding. Minimum-wage laws may be bad economics, ....."

very well put, stephen. trouble is the main interlocutor here is a "fancy messianic escort operation" entrepreneur. who specialises in trading only kosher courtesanes after miqwe but sans 'chupa and qiddushin'.
as to dina demalkhuta, for people like the messianic minim of boston, the only sovereign is alive and well under a headstone in the montefiore cemetery of queens NY, and within the confines of a rectangular cistern used to hold a sea of notes : prayers by the believers to the man who lives in that basement.
as to economics, these trolls are no milton friedmans, they are nothing but self avowed thieves birshus hatheuyre (so they claim).

[Hesh]

I had the opportunity tp stay in Postville on a road trip out to Idaho and must say I know why everything is so screwed up there.

Are you ready?

I was at a friday morning bris and they served chicken wings, meatballs and cholent. I feel that, that much meat is liable to turn anyone into acts of questioning behavior. I know I would just about burst if I was forced to send my kids to a meshichist school and eat cholent for breakfast.

[John K. Diamond]

Thanks Hesh,

You are absolutely correct!!!

Carnivorous gluttony leads to spiritual insensitivity.

[shmuel]

How many laws can one company break?
1. Drug production;
2. Social Security fraud;
3. Hiring of illegals by the hundreds;
4. Physical abuse of workers;
5. Sexual abuse of workers.
Astonishing.
Perhaps all that non-stop meat consumption is what the Ramban meant by being a "Menuval birshus HaTorah." It seems to mitamtem halev.
We can't be sure about who received the sexual favors until the allegations are brought before the bench, but it's a Jewish company, run by Jews.
Did it not occur to anyone over there to behave uprightly, to follow the Torah, to uphold American laws, to act modestly, to be a Kiddush Hashem?

[one of many]

heres a great way to start your day!!
i found a wonderful quote this morning i like to share from aish.com torah portion.
and we can apply this today in these situations that are aparent to us all! in matters of interest!

Life is not about suffering. Life is about growing and making the changes we were put here to make. Difficulties are going to happen. That we cannot change. What we can change is our attitude. Will we view difficulties as a nuisance, or as a message? We may as well make the most of it. We have nothing to lose -- and everything to gain.
Ignoring the message won't help make the problem go away. On the contrary, the wake-up call becomes more intense. The Talmud explains that initially, warning signs will appear on a person's house. If one does not heed the sign, then the spots will move a bit closer - to the clothes. Once again, only if the message is not received, the spots will appear on the body itself.
It's a mistake to try to cover it up. The spots are there for a reason and you have to face it.

Rabbi Avi Geller

this is a great message for us today!
have a wonderful day!
C

[yidandahalf]

Would you please take the holy roller shit somewhere else? Genig with the preaching, OK?

[Rabbi Ariel Sokolovsky http://www.Moshiach.WS]

B"H
Stephen writes:

BS"D

Making Economic Sense
by Murray Rothbard
(Contents by Publication Date)
http://mises.org/Econsense/ch36.asp
Chapter 36
Outlawing Jobs: The Minimum Wage, Once More

Two points here.

Murray Newton Rothbard was a self-hating Jew, and fanatically anti-Israel. While as an anarchist (specifically anarcho-capitalist), he opposed all states, his harshest attacks were on Israel and the United States, and would eagerly ally himself with the New Left in international affairs. He was also good friends with Pat Buchanan, Joseph Sobran, and Llewellyn Rockwell, who was probably the ghostwriter of the racist and antisemitic tirades in Congressman (and Presidential candidate) Ron Paul's newsletters. Toward the end of his life, Rothbard left the Libertarian Party with its Anarchist caucus and allied himself with the far right, racist neo-Confederate movement (see Angry White Man - http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e2f15397-a3c7-4720-ac15-4532a7da84ca)


I doesn't make their economic reasoning wrong.
The very fact that you have to go down to the level of ad homeinem attacks digging up all this history ignoring the substance of the issues addressed shows that you have no real arguments.
The argument is doubly stupid since it is very easy to find self hating Jews among left wing economists too which in itself doesn't discredit left wing economic theories (unlike their lack of logical foundation and disastrous results when applied in real life in especially when done so on a large scale against the will of the people .)

And to quote the Rambam "Kabel emet me mi she omro"-"Accept truth from whoever says it.'

And in any case, whatever one thinks about the economic harm done by minimum-wage laws, the Talmud requires Jews to obey the civil law; dina d'malchuta dina is mentioned five times as binding. Minimum-wage laws may be bad economics, but they are not antisemitic or inherently immoral to the point that would require or even permit civil disobedience. An observant Jew may work to change the law, but is not permitted to flout it (as Rubashkin did, assuming the affidavit for the search warrant is accurate).

Posted by: Stephen Mendelsohn | May 20, 2008 at 01:14 AM


Not every law falls in the category of dina de'malchusa but mostly laws regarding taxes and customs duties.
In any case a country that follows the lead of irrational people and passes idiotic laws and doesn't repeal them for many decades is bound to see them broken by everyone who can get away with it and from time to time use one of these people/companies as scapegoats to cover up inadiquate negligent leadership rising inflation falling $$ crumbling economy etc.
not much differnt than Soviet Union persecuting so called "speculators" perpetrators of "economic crimes" against the state many of whom were also Jewish.
PS. It is a question if Dina Demalchuta even applies here at all:

Ungavar Rov Rabbi Menashe Klein, questions whether dina de=malkhuta dina applies in the United States. He states:

[The applicability of the principle of] dina de'malkhuta dina in our times, when there is no king but rather what is called democracy needs further clarification. As I already explained the position cited in the name of Rivash quoting Rashba, one does not accept dina de'malkhuta dina except where the law originates with the king. But in a case where the law originates in courts, and the judges have discretion to rule as they think proper, or to invent new laws as they see proper, there is no dina d'malkhuta dina, as there is no law of the king ... This is even more true since we have here [in the United States] an institution called a "jury" where the government takes drunks from the market who have never studied law and who establish the law based on a majority vote. Indeed, even the government sometimes creates law and the Supreme Court contradicts it. Certainly in such a system there is no dina de'malkhuta dina according to Rivash and Rashba.

R. Menashe Klein, Mishnah Halakhot 6:277.

so why should you spend so much energy condemning our fellow Jews on sofeik? Especially when all of their competitors in meat industry and those in many other industries are guilty of these same exact so called "crimes" of hiring undocumented aliens and the like?
(As I pointed out before they should be condemned for crimes committed against these workers if that is true beating someone with a meat hook or stealing from paychecks week after week is disgusting.)

[shmuel]

My understanding is that Rabbi Klein is all alone on this matter: the vast majority of poskim agree that there is no denying the concept of "Dina D'Malchuso Dina" in America. What are the criticisms? That the Supreme Court sometimes knocks down a law from Congress? That just proves that this country is great, that checks and balances work. Must a country be a "Malchus" ( an actual "kingdom") for the concept to be in effect? Can Jews just ignore the laws of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, England, France, Germany, Italy, etc., because they're also democracies? Don't quote from one lone posek: admit that he's a voice in the wilderness and noone else is listening to him. Why do you?

[PITA]

HalfAYid - to who was your no-preaching directed?

[one of many]

His no preaching was directed to Aish.com
that i was quoting from a torah portion i read to be inspiring i was sharring

but i believe your chip is not with me or aish.com.
reading Torah daily is not only a requirement for ones spiritual growth and happiness, which you seem to lack but also when you share it with others, it adds a spiritual fufillment of Joy!!
that is a great way to start your day!
Heart and soul!

Would you please take the holy roller shit somewhere else? Genig with the preaching, OK?

Posted by: yidandahalf

[Yochanan Lavie]

Stop this unpatriotic, disloyal shit! No goyishe country has been better to the Jews than the United States. It does have a king: "In God We Trust." Although many of our founders were Deists, some believed, due to their Puritan roots, that the only true king is God- not these flesh and blood idols with ridiculous costumes. Most kings are horrors- so are some presidents, but at least we'll have to put up with King Obama for 4-8 yrs, instead of a lifetime.

My grandfather, z"l, spit on the ground as he left Czarist Russia. God bless America! If you don't like it, join Rev. Wrong and move to Cuba or Iran.

[Rabbi Ariel Sokolovsky http://www.Moshiach.WS]

B"H

My understanding is that Rabbi Klein is all alone on this matter: the vast majority of poskim agree that there is no denying the concept of "Dina D'Malchuso Dina" in America. What are the criticisms? That the Supreme Court sometimes knocks down a law from Congress? That just proves that this country is great, that checks and balances work. Must a country be a "Malchus" ( an actual "kingdom") for the concept to be in effect? Can Jews just ignore the laws of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, England, France, Germany, Italy, etc., because they're also democracies? Don't quote from one lone posek: admit that he's a voice in the wilderness and noone else is listening to him. Why do you?

Posted by: shmuel | May 20, 2008 at 02:44 PM

From a halachik point of view though even those who disagree with R. Klein mostly agree that dina de'malchusa doesn't cover every single law regulation the government comes up with (if it does btw none of us can criticize Rubashkin because we daily break tons of laws even as much as forwarding an article you read online by email may be a copyright violation unless you have a permission from the article source to forward it with giant fines of 100s of thousands of $s that can be aplied to the offender.
Hiring a babysitter for your kids without filling out a bunch of tax forms something very few people do is also against the law etc.
So anyone who has never broken a dinah de'malchusa can attack Rubashkin the rest of us should instead defend Rubashkin and others like him and criticize the state for creating too many laws that violate the letter and spirit of the constitution and the way of life envisioned by the founding fathers of this Great Republic create to allow people to live in liberty and pursue happines not to shake in fear knowing that
everyday government puts out thousands of new nonsensical regulations that give the right to men with guns to come to our homes factories and stores and disturb our life in hope of getting promotions and bonuses for breaking some irrational socialist inspired law while allowing real criminals to walk the streets and attack people since government spends so much resources victimizing innocent citizens that it has not enough money and resources left to pursue real crimes.

[steve]

but at least we'll have to put up with King Obama for 4-8 yrs, instead of a lifetime.

Chas Veshalom!!

[Rabbi Ariel Sokolovsky http://www.Moshiach.WS]

B"H

We're the Government -- and You're Not
What if the U.S. government released an "educational video" to teach today's Americans how to be good citizens?
comedy video click here scroll down and press play to watch.

[Rabbi Ariel Sokolovsky http://www.Moshiach.WS]

B"H
"The gusto with which Congress passes laws also does significant damage to civil liberties. Author Gene Healy writes in the introduction to the new book,

Healy notes that this morass of indecipherable federal law means we could all essentially be criminals because we don't know what's legal and what isn't. That's particularly true of business owners. Healy quotes Harvard law professor William Stuntz, who warns that we're "coming ever closer to a world in which the law on the books makes everyone a felon, and in which prosecutors and police both define the law on the street and decide who has violated it."
from:
http://www.foxnews.com/

story/0,2933,140204,00.html

[Rabbi Ariel Sokolovsky http://www.Moshiach.WS]

B"H
Go Directly to Jail: The Criminalization of Almost Everything.
Edited by Gene Healy

Go Directly to Jail: The Criminalization of Almost Everything.

"There ought to be a law. . . "

Price: $17.95
Publication Date: November 2004
ISBN: 1-930865-63-5
Number of Pages: 192
Hardcover (also available in E-Book)
Categories: Law and Civil Liberties, Regulatory Studies

About the Book
At one time, the sanction of the criminal law was reserved for serious, morally culpable offenders. But during the past 40 years, an unholy alliance of tough-on-crime conservatives and anti-big-business liberals has utterly transformed the criminal law. Today, while violent crime often goes unpunished, Congress continues to add new, trivial offenses to the federal criminal code. With more than 4,000 federal offenses on the statute books, and thousands more buried in the Code of Federal Regulations, it is now frighteningly easy for American citizens to be hauled off to jail for actions that no reasonable person would regard as crimes. At the same time, rampant federalization and mandatory minimum sentencing are making America’s criminal justice system ever more centralized and punitive. The result is a labyrinthine criminal code, a burgeoning prison population, and often real injustice. Go Directly to Jail examines those alarming trends and proposes reforms that could rein in a criminal justice apparatus at war with fairness and common sense.

Contributors include
Erik Luna, Associate Professor of Law, University of Utah
James V. DeLong, Senior Fellow, Progress & Freedom Foundation
Timothy Lynch, Director, Cato Institute’s Project on Criminal Justice
Grace-Marie Turner, Founder and President, Galen Institute, Inc.

[ TOP ]

About the Editor
Gene Healy is senior editor at the Cato Institute. He holds a J.D. from the University of Chicago Law School and is a member of the Virginia and District of Columbia bars. His articles have been published in the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, and elsewhere. He resides in Washington, D.C.

[ TOP ]

What Others Have Said
“Watch out, Mr. or Ms. Businessperson! The federal government can regulate you right into the poorhouse or a jail cell. If you are looking for a scholarly and comprehensive examination of why every businessperson needs to look for a lawyer before seeking customers, this is it.”
--Judge Andrew P. Napolitano, Senior Judicial Analyst, Fox News Channel

“The dramatic expansion of federal criminal law in recent decades has made it distressingly easy for prosecutors to ‘make a federal case’ out of matters more properly handled at the state level or by civil remedies. That phenomenon makes it more likely that ordinary businesspeople risk being jailed for run-of-the-mill commercial dealings that traditionally have been handled by contract and tort law. With this timely volume, Cato draws attention to an important—and too often ignored—legal problem.”
--Miguel Estrada, Co-Chair, Appellate and Constitutional Law Practice Group, Gibson, Dunn, and Crutcher, Washington, D.C.
http://www.catostore.org/

index.asp?fa=ProductDetails

&method=cats&scid=33&pid=1441226

[Sarah]

So what's all this about Jews not having to obey the laws of the land as commanded because we don't have a king (or a sovereign to be p.c.)? We've all heard "Great G-d our king" and similar lyrics being sung and seen G-d's name on currency, in courts and many federal, state and municipal buildings. Bad argument for the frummies to try to use.

[John K. Diamond]

Thanks, Sarah.

Please see below a post I submitted yesterday.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's quite obvious that Reb Ariel's memory of "Pirkei Avos" is lacking, where it says in Chapter Four, verse 5: Rabbi Yochanan ben Beroka said: Whoever desecrates the Name of Heaven in secret, they will exact punishment from Him in public; unintentional or intentional, both are alike regarding desecration of the Name.

This can be found in the Complete ArtScroll Siddur on Page 565.

The commentary on this verse (Pages 565-566) says:

Desecration of the Name involves the sort of conduct that makes onlookers think or say that people who claim to be observant Jews act in an unworthy manner. For some of the great Talmudic sages, even to take a few paces without studying Torah constituted a desecration. For ordinary people, rudeness, dishonesty and the like would be a desecration. One who does such things that bring G-d's Name into disrepute shows contempt for G-d and this is the most serious of all sins, especially because of the effect it has on others.

The longstanding and consistent animal and human abuses by the Rubashkin animal enterprises and their equally consistent refusal to do Teshuvah and mend their ways, fits into exactly what Rabbi Yochanan ben Beroka brought to our attention centuries ago.

Such enterprises do not warrant Kosher certification, period.

Posted by: John K. Diamond | May 21, 2008 at 05:04 PM

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Kishkeman]

The latest from the flip flop flip flop movement.
http://jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/breaking/108713.html