Haredi PR Man, Upset Media Won't Buy His Spin, Quits, Cries Bias
On the record
Peggy Cidor • THE JERUSALEM POSTDudi Zilbershlag has reached the end of his tether. After two decades in which he was one of the outspoken voices of the haredi community, he announced that he has decided to cut his ties with the secular media.
"It was wrong to be nice to the secular media," Zilbershlag says bitterly. "It didn't help and, frankly, today I understand that it was a mistake."
Zilbershlag, a Vizhnitz Hassid who is a successful PR person, famous for his commitment to haredi-secular dialogue, points a finger at what he describes as the outrageous way haredi society has been treated in the secular press in recent weeks. Firstly with regard to the "starving mother affair" and then the backlash aimed at the haredi community following the murder of two members of the homo-lesbian community in Tel Aviv.
In an exclusive interview with In Jerusalem, Zilbershlag takes aim at the press, lambastes the reemergence of the "religious demon," condemns violence and homophobia within haredi society and reveals some surprising facts about his personal history.
"It is very sad to see how easily the Israeli secular press is ready to accuse us of the most horrible things by making vicious comparisons and the use of abhorrent terminology. I sometimes wonder if these reporters and their editors are aware of the use they make of the most typical anti-Semitic terms and expressions," he says.
Zilbershlag invited IJ to his home, located in Ramat Shlomo. After many years in Tel Arza, one of the most ancient haredi neighborhoods in the city (also known as Gush 80), Zilbershlag, like many other relatively well-to-do haredim, moved to the recently built neighborhood.
"Here it is quieter, there's more privacy and, in general, haredim who moved here pay more attention to environmental issues or quality of life - something that is also gaining more attention in our communities."
Zilbershlag sits at a big Shabbat table, surrounded by bookshelves full of religious books. In the hassidic way, he wears his tzitzit over his white shirt, with a black vest on top. During the entire meeting, he will twist his sidelocks again and again. One thing is certain: There can be no feeling of embarrassment of any sort in his presence. Zilbershlag talks very openly, both with men and women, Jews and non-Jews, religious, secular or his haredi peers with the same mixture of vivid interest in his interlocutor and the same extraordinary capacity to talk about almost anything, moving easily from one topic to another.
As he recalls various situations he has been involved in, one cannot ignore the fact that he indeed is well acquainted with the who's who of Israeli society. On the table is a new cellular phone, which rings constantly during the interview - although he just checks to see who's calling and never answers once - and a laptop, on which Zilbershlag intermittently checks the news sites to prove how unfairly haredim are being covered by the media.
At one point, the news breaks that Mayor Nir Barkat has been attacked on his way back from a meeting in Mea She'arim with one of the haredi leaders.
"Look at this!" he exclaims. "This is so typical. Barkat was attacked by a bunch of bullies, extremist zealots from which we, the haredim, are the first to suffer all year long. I appreciate that in the press release from the municipality it was clearly stated that some 'extremist haredim' attacked Barkat. They are just a bunch of people. My son has a clip shot there in real time - about six or eight haredim who make our daily life a hell - but if you check the stories about the incident, you will find terminology like 'haredim brutally attacked the mayor' and such things, as if these guys represent us, despite the fact that there is no reporter on police or haredi affairs who is not aware of that particular fact. Yet nothing of this will appear in the reports! Is it innocent? Of course not!"
IJ: What makes you feel so bitter right now?
Zilbershlag: All the reports go to the same place. Take for example the guy from the Nahal Haredi, who sent threats to members of the homosexual community attending a rally in Tel Aviv. Nobody in the press pays attention to the harsh criticism aimed at him from inside haredi society. All the haredi Web sites have vilified him and his actions, but you will find no evidence of it in the secular press, though all the reporters surf these sites. Personally, I am totally opposed to this. Why should we condemn ourselves? We shouldn't publish such condemnations about our people. The secular press condemns us automatically anyway; we shouldn't volunteer, too.
Listen to this: I had a blog on a Web site of one of the dailies, and sometimes I wrote, in a very respectful way, things that some people evidently didn't like. I once wrote a piece on the compassion and mercy that we Jews have always shown in our tradition. Someone wrote a talkback that I should get a bullet in my head.
And there's more. A friend of mine, totally secular, told me that he found out that the talkbacks to my blog were not filtered, as they should be. I couldn't believe it, but he convinced me to test it, and I had to admit he was right.
I wrote in the past on many Web sites. We all know the amount of violence that can be found in talkbacks, but if you compare the nature of the talkbacks to a haredi writer or a haredi issue to any other issue, you will see the difference. It's as if all the psychos of Israel have gathered there and are allowed to say and do whatever is on their mind.
As you know, it is the editor's job to check and to filter the talkbacks. Well, for my blog there was apparently no filtering at all. I received the worst reactions, usually not even connected to what I wrote, like this one. Though it is no secret that I lost two sons: "We will assist joyfully in the burial of your children" and such horrifying things. Or like this one: " You, the ayatollahs," and all the linkage between haredim and the Iranian regime. I was not given the minimum any blogger is entitled to - a filtering of the most vicious talkbacks, and nobody cared.
I decided to stop writing this blog. And now this young man, he wrote a few nasty words, and immediately he was arrested for two days. The investigation was immediately handed over to the press. Look what they wrote: "Here, we got him. He was preparing such-and-such acts. Thank God, we have arrested the person who threatened all the homo-lesbian community." Nobody mentions that he is an IDF soldier. What matters is that at the opening of the "dancing-rally" of the community, they could announce that a haredi was arrested!
As for that horrible murder in Tel Aviv, why do the haredim have to apologize? Yes, we have a serious and deep problem with this issue. We live according to a very ancient code which, regarding this issue of homosexuality, doesn't allow us to be "liberals" on it. I myself, with all my will to act with consideration toward this community, can't - what can I say? I can't be liberal on this. Our sages issued the most rigorous warnings on this. It is written that the land will vomit us out because of such acts - what can I do? I am committed - nobody can expect me, a haredi Jew, to say, as did some former ministers of education, "we embrace you." Are we short of any other communities in Israel that should be embraced and empowered?
And let's not forget, with all due respect, for the last 20 years this community has achieved an impressive improvement in its status. So for Heaven's sake, why should this murder be attributed to us, the haredim? Is the haredi community famous for its many cases of murders? How did it happen that as soon as the news on the murder began to be aired, all the commentaries, with an unbearable facility, pointed at us?
How many haredim have been arrested and convicted of murder in Israel since its creation? You know, like because of a parking place, an argument in a pub? How many records do we have about young haredim caught with knives at school? This is a community that can easily be accused of various things - but murder somehow just doesn't fit in!
IJ: Well, you can't ignore the vicious tone of MK Nissim Ze'ev on homosexuality issues.
Zilbershlag: I cannot tolerate it either. I think it is foolishness the way he talks. I personally feel very bad about it. I think he is causing us great harm. My position is that haredim would be better off avoiding any commentary or statements on this issue.
It is well known that large segments of the haredi community were opposed to the demonstrations and riots surrounding the Gay Pride parade in Jerusalem. I organized meetings between leaders of our community and representatives of the Open House to seek peaceful ways to avoid riots. We witnessed then a genuine effort to find reasonable solutions, such as avoiding areas of synagogues and so on.
But in any case, my position is that the less we talk about it, the better it is for us - after all, this terrible thing is also happening inside our community. We shouldn't be involved at all. The demonstrations were a mistake. And look at what happened this year: it went smoothly, without any violence or problem. After all, there is no more satisfaction to that community than to be exposed and in the center of attention. It is well known that the exposure of their situation and their problems helps this community, but what does that have to do with us, the haredim? Why do we have to be dragged into that?
Perhaps there are some youth, what we would call a new generation, who are more violent. But let me tell you, this will hurt us first; I have no doubt about that. I am very sorry for these recent outburst of violence. First and foremost for the harm it causes us because there is no doubt that this strengthens the most extremist factions in the community. This use of violence is the worst thing that could happen to us. Remember the struggles of the Eda Haredit and Natorei Karta in the previous century, with its historical leader Amram Blau. Well, we all know that since he died, Natorei Karta faded out; they lost their hegemony. And now again, there are indications that this group, the Sikarikim, are gaining power again. They were responsible for the destruction of the Second Temple, and now they are trying to cause the destruction of the Third Temple.
IJ: Does that mean that for you, a haredi hassidic Jew, the State of Israel has the status of the Third Temple?
Zilbershlag: I call this actual destruction, coming after a long period of calm, which has given us the feeling that even in the press there was a positive change in its attitude toward the haredi community - and now all of a sudden, with this outburst of the "religious demon," this phobia against us - something that endangers our mere existence here, absolutely endangers our chance of survival here, all of us. Because if there is a whole generation of haredim, which have managed over the years to develop a sense of trust toward the establishment and the administrations of the state, and now this same generation finds itself thrown back 20 years in time, well yes, this is a genuine danger.
We all know that the haredi women's womb is seen as a threat to Israeli secular demography, although - and this is good news - even the birthrate of secular Israelis is growing, and for me, though my fellow haredim don't like to hear that from me, I say loud and clear this is good news because I don't think that Israeli society should become exclusively haredi. We need this blending; it is of the utmost importance. If we want to see haredim integrating into Israeli society, it has to take place in a large and strong Israeli society.
As for Jerusalem, there's no question that it is dependent on a successful blending of different communities.
IJ: You are probably aware of the argument that you need secular Jews in Jerusalem to finance your living.
Zilbershlag: I hear that, but today this is a lie because if you look carefully at the data, you will find that today in most haredi families, both spouses work. We already see it in Bnei Brak, according to the national insurance reports.
I am very sorry that inside the haredi society there is still a high level of under-the-table work - for many reasons. First of all, because they cannot serve in the army, so they are not allowed to work openly. That is why I am so in favor of the Tal Law because it brought a real message of hope for the future. Not only for us haredim but for the whole of Israeli society, to allow people to work lawfully and to pay their share of taxes.
My credo is that the key to coexistence goes through sustainable existence. We have witnessed this in the US, where rich haredi Jews help and work together with Muslim Pakistanis in Flatbush and created some associations to improve their quality of life and ensure their civil rights.
To my regret, a part of the Zionist ethos here is based on the ideal of "It is good to die for our country," which is totally anti-Jewish, immoral. After all, the story of Masada has been for years a founding ethos, while in our Jewish heritage it is written that we should always seek and choose life. Over the years, for haredim the Masada ethos was blasphemy, and it is curious that the Zionists, who consider us as obscure, choose an ethos of death. And what does it say? It says that Zionism, which represents most of secular Israeli society, chose such a radical zealot kind of ethos, while we faithfully kept the tradition of life.
IJ: Tell me about your upbringing.
Zilbershlag: My father was a teacher and made aliya from Romania in 1947 (more precisely, Bukovina). In his youth he was a member of the Bnei Akiva youth movement. We lived in a a very hassidic home, but with a strong Zionist orientation. My parents had the blue Jewish National Fund box, and my grandmother spoke fluent Hebrew. They were Rugin Hassidim, well known for their connection with the renaissance movement in the framework of the Zionist awakening. Most of the rabbis of the Rugin Hassidic court also had the blue box at home. It was not easy to keep a haredi way of life. They were surrounded by the German culture, the secular Zionist movement; nevertheless, it was a very strong Hassidic home. When my father and his brothers made aliya on the Knesset Yisrael ship in 1947, they took an oath to keep their Hassidic tradition even in Israel, and they understood that the usual Zionist path upon landing here would jeopardize that pledge. Upon arriving here, they joined a group of Tzeirei Agudat Yisrael. Some of their rabbi leaders ruled that they should all say Hallel on Independence Day, but they asked the Hazon Ish, who ruled that they shouldn't. So in their first year in Israel, they were beaten up by a group of youth from Poalei Agudat Yisrael because they left the synagogue to avoid saying Hallel. Still, my father and his brothers lived a strict Hassidic haredi way of life, with very large families, but they all served in the IDF.
IJ: Did you also serve in the army?
Zilbershlag: Yes, I did my army duty. It was part of my father's faith and legacy because he made a clear distinction between the attitude toward the state and toward Zionism. He used to say, "I came to this country naked and barefoot. I owe it my life." He used to tell us about his feelings in the first years. In those days, the young and successful here were the secular Sabras, and they looked so old-fashioned with their black outfit from the Diaspora. When my first son got married, and he is his first grandchild, he told us that the fact that he succeeded in having a grandchild who looks and behaves exactly like his grandfather back in the old country was a guarantee that we could now start the healing process from the Shoah. We were saved, preserved, and it was the time to take care of this.
IJ: How did you live with the memory of the Shoah on one side and your status facing the ethos of the new Jew, the Zionist movement?
Zilbershlag: I grew up on all these issues. I grew up on the stories told to me about what was done to the Yemenite children, on the stories of my father, who was an outstanding soldier but nevertheless was forbidden to keep his tzitzit out of his trousers in the Hassidic way. I heard about the stories of young Sabras from the kibbutzim who arrived by organized trucks to beat haredim with iron chains who were demonstrating against Shabbat desecration on Rehov Shivtei Yisrael in Jerusalem. I grew up on all these haredi myths and stories. I myself was arrested three times for participating in haredi demonstrations.
IJ: It's hard to believe: Dudi Zilbershlag, the man dedicated to instilling peace between brethren, arrested for rioting.
Zilbershlag: Yes, it happened. I was arrested the first time for demonstrating against the first international book fair because they allowed a group from the mission to have a counter. The second time was against the opening of an Eros sex shop in Tel Aviv. The third time was in 1978, two weeks before my wedding. The last demonstration was against the opposition to close Rehov Hashomer in Bnei Brak on Shabbat. We lived there then. A policeman ran after a woman, and my brother and I jumped from the first floor of the building and fought with him to prevent him from touching the woman. A group of policemen came to rescue him and we were arrested - on Shabbat!
I was photographed upon arriving at the police station, making a V for victory sign. We were released and returned home, but my father didn't appreciate it, to put it mildly. He said to us harshly, "Did I come to this country so that my own sons would be a part of this thing to call policemen Nazis?" He couldn't accept it; it was too much for him. "You have to look for the things that unite us, not the things that tear us apart," he said. From that day on, I began to see things differently and to work in that frame of mind.
IJ: Yet you feel these days that perhaps it's hopeless. You're hurt.
Zilbershlag: I couldn't stand this verdict of the press against this woman [the mother accused of starving her child]. I was getting ready for an interview and the journalist, one of the most respected and well known here, said to me, "Dudi, why are you getting yourself involved in this? So what, another woman from Mea She'arim. Don't do that; you're ruining your image. Israeli society appreciates what you've done, don't jeopardize it now!"
I told him that another one had said to me, "Dudi, how did you let yourself get caught in this trap? It's not for you."
When I helped the Beduin, she applauded me; she thought I was doing the right thing. When I created with that person a clinic for the Darfur refugees, it was okay. And someone who is part of a community so close to me, I am prevented from helping and supporting her? I am ready, today as before, to help an Ethiopian woman, a Beduin woman, anyone who needs support, but a haredi woman? That's not acceptable.
Not one of these beautiful people sees it through my eyes, from where I belong. After all, I am not making any diagnosis. I'm not looking into the criminal aspect. I just don't think that a woman who, according to what has been said and published, is sick with this syndrome should be in prison while she is pregnant, and after two miscarriages. She has her rights, like everybody else, and these rights were trampled. I went to the court. Journalists that I know personally, whom I talk with on a daily basis, treated the family with rudeness, attacked them as if they were dangerous criminals, used crude words toward her family, herself. Who allowed those journalists to address her that way? To write such incitement?
IJ: She was interviewed. Were you satisfied with the results?
Zilbershlag: That was the peak - totally unbelievable. The interview was set up with a certain journalist. From the moment it was known, and these things work quickly, we were under a blitz from the other newspapers. Phone calls, threats, pressures, phone calls from ministers' offices, MKs, SMSs - I can show you one, particularly nasty which I haven't erased - unbelievable: "My newspaper will cause harm to her cause this weekend, so you will not gain anything from breaking the obligation toward us. It will be very bad for the cause you're representing," and so on. And they did harm her with some nasty allusions. And then in another one they published damaging stills from some film footage. In all my experience with the media, nothing prepared me for that.
IJ: Did you feel that the press, after so many years of closeness, betrayed you?
Zilbershlag: The worst were the correspondents for law and police affairs - they showed no restraint. The reporters on haredi affairs saved the situation a little bit. After all, they need us too much. It broke me. I felt as if every part was against us, against that woman. She was just trying to protect herself and her child, as she understood it. Facing this, the media, as if it was something organized, acted to the contrary. If, for example, she came out better from that short interview, the next day the same newspaper would publish pictures of her taken at Hadassah [hospital] that showed her in a bad light.
IJ: The attitude of the press, running after sensational headlines is not so new. Perhaps it bothers you because so far, you have enjoyed a very gentle press.
Zilbershlag: I have already been attacked, when I began to be involved in the managing of Bikur Holim [hospital]. There were some accusations, but the truth came out quickly and meanwhile I was not hurt, I got the same aliyot to the Torah on Shabbat, and the shidduchim of my children were not ruined. I always took such an option in consideration, but don't forget I'm not building my image in the media, I am doing what I am doing out of a sense of shlihut [mission], so I'm not really hurt.
IJ: Using the media as you have been doing can be risky. The rules are that once you use and once they use you. How do you react? Perhaps you're spoiled by the media.
Zilbershlag: No, I have always received a fair attitude. And when I feel the need to, I know how to say to an offensive reporter. "Enough, you're crossing the line," or when pre-arranged agreements are not respected. I know of quite a few journalists who still do a dignified job, but once their articles reach the editors, things change. I am aware of it
[Hat Tip: Seymour.]
Good interview...the only spin I see here is Shmarya's headline, which is utterly belied by the actual interview..Shabbat Shalom!
Posted by: Binyamin | August 14, 2009 at 05:56 PM
its a fascinating interview and he seems like a fair man. what i would like to ask him is whether he accepts that much of the animosity towards the haredim stems from the fact that they wish to impose restrictions on the lives of others. closing streets, parking lots, theaters, sex-shops, stores that sell treife or hametz, gay parades, etc.. is not their right in a free country. the seculars are not trying to close their shuls. the haredi attitude is inherently unfair and hypocritical.
in addition, whereas every boy of age is drafted into the army, and gives up years of their life, followed by meeluim every year, and some die and are maimed for israel, that fate does not apply to the haredi children. does he not see how much animosity this causes?
and i commend him for his army service. did his children go to the army? i would bet not. why did his father expect him to differentiate between zionism and the state and yet the haredi culture seems to have made no such distinction?
maybe if he would push for haredim to respect the state, cease all activities which attempt to limit others rights as citizens of a free country and join the rest of the country in lending their kids to the army,knowing that they may never come back,all the while maintaining their opposition to other aspects of zionism which they oppose, there would be far better relations between the sides, both in the press and in everyday life.
Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | August 14, 2009 at 06:06 PM
Please.
Here's a quote from the flack: "Look at this!" he exclaims. "This is so typical. Barkat was attacked by a bunch of bullies, extremist zealots from which we, the haredim, are the first to suffer all year long. I appreciate that in the press release from the municipality it was clearly stated that some 'extremist haredim' attacked Barkat. They are just a bunch of people. My son has a clip shot there in real time - about six or eight haredim who make our daily life a hell - but if you check the stories about the incident, you will find terminology like 'haredim brutally attacked the mayor' and such things, as if these guys represent us, despite the fact that there is no reporter on police or haredi affairs who is not aware of that particular fact. Yet nothing of this will appear in the reports! Is it innocent? Of course not!"
If the HAREDI press and HAREDI rabbis would PUBLICLY and CLEARLY DENOUNCE these thugs, and do so in a timely fashion, the flack would have a valid point.
But, of course, haredi leaders and the press they control do nothing of the sort.
Posted by: Shmarya | August 14, 2009 at 06:07 PM
"It is very sad to see how easily the Israeli secular press is ready to accuse us of the most horrible things by making vicious comparisons and the use of abhorrent terminology." says Zilbershlag.
It is amaizing to hear from a haredi person. It is also very dishonest, because everything he accuses secular media of is 10 times greater in Haredi media and dogma to which this "good samaritan" clearly fully subscribes.
Posted by: Ben | August 14, 2009 at 06:11 PM
I've read his opinion pieces. He's dishonest and will say whatever he's paid to say.
Posted by: effie | August 14, 2009 at 06:23 PM
this is just very typical of the heridie community
The is not inward reflection. The whole starving mother thing was big news because the herdiem protested and accused the hospital of being Mengele like. The parking lot, because of the violent protests.
As other have stated there is no outcry of condemnation from rabbies about these acts. No outcries that the accusation of a massive conspiracy from the hospital, police, judges and what not.
He want the heridie community to bne treated with kid gloves to late for that. His excuse about underhanded business, hollow. First, many of the fraud was in the USA, and the ones in Israel where not young kollel age people.
The arrested was for massive frauds, not a kollel guy working off the books
after all the protest, he does not mention like maybe we should condemn those hooligans a little more forcefully.
He seems the problem is that the secular media calls out the herideim, and he and others want to wipe all this under the rug and nobody should no that these things happen.
Posted by: seymour | August 14, 2009 at 08:04 PM
rabbi david bibi who wrote the letter "WE ARE ALL SCAPEGOATS" responded to the attacks on him!!!!
http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/failed_messiahcom/2009/08/letter-from-long-beach-we-are-all-scapegoats-sefardic-rabbi-says.html
Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | August 14, 2009 at 08:54 PM
....
Shmarya wrote:
“....If the HAREDI press and HAREDI rabbis would PUBLICLY and CLEARLY DENOUNCE these thugs, and do so in a timely fashion, the flack would have a valid point.But, of course, haredi leaders and the press they control do nothing of the sort...”
I know and understand...but
NEITHER DOES THE SECULAR PRESS. So it works both ways.
You can't blame Zilbershlag for this alone and it far beneath than to state that”..and this man blames the secular press for reporting haredi riots, lies, and child abuse..”
I think he was more pointing out to the fact that also the secular press is pretty bias and not always portraying the situation as it is. As long as the Hareidim & Co come out bad, that's what counts. (Similar in the US-press with f.e. Obama and the Republicans etc.....a worldwide press tactic).
Zilbershlag tries to see both ways and explains quite clearly his stand (and that of his fellow hareidim) on Homosexuality etc.. You can't argue with him on that. That's his religious freedom as long at it doesn't mean that where THEIR freedom starts ours (...) should end. He is clearly making his point just as seculars & Co do.Like it or not. Both sides are bias and both sides love it to make their points. Picking out one man this way is low. Blaming him for not speaking out (which is NOT true) is even lower. IN the article he clearly speaks out on the violence.
“...Take for example the guy from the Nahal Haredi, who sent threats to members of the homosexual community attending a rally in Tel Aviv. Nobody in the press pays attention to the harsh criticism aimed at him from inside haredi society. All the haredi Web sites have vilified him and his actions, but you will find no evidence of it in the secular press, though all the reporters surf these sites...”
AND:
“...Perhaps there are some youth, what we would call a new generation, who are more violent. But let me tell you, this will hurt us first; I have no doubt about that. I am very sorry for these recent outburst of violence. First and foremost for the harm it causes us because there is no doubt that this strengthens the most extremist factions in the community. This use of violence is the worst thing that could happen to us. Remember the struggles of the Eda Haredit and Natorei Karta in the previous century, with its historical leader Amram Blau. Well, we all know that since he died, Natorei Karta faded out; they lost their hegemony. And now again, there are indications that this group, the Sikarikim, are gaining power again...”
There are numerous sects and even more numerous seperate small groups that act on their own but in the press 'stand for all hareidim' just as one of the seculars would stand for all seculars in whatever form.
When he says about the hareidi woman that starved her child: “...After all, I am not making any diagnosis. I'm not looking into the criminal aspect. I just don't think that a woman who, according to what has been said and published, is sick with this syndrome should be in prison while she is pregnant, and after two miscarriages. She has her rights, like everybody else, and these rights were trampled...”
And that's true! She IS USED as an example of Hareidi women. Again..the secular press is also guilty of this. That doesn't take away of her guilt. As he says..he doesn't look into the criminal aspect. Merely the presentation of it in the media. And this woman SHOULD have treatment for her syndrome ; everybody agrees on that. Prison alone is not the solution here. Secular or hareidi.
What's going on here is a 'war' between religious (...) and secular (...). And every tool is used to make a point. Furthermore, I think I made my views on certain matters and where my symphathy lies pretty clear in my writings but I also like to see both sides, where people come from and where there is some kind of a solution/middel of the road. I'm not hareidi and not secular. I'm pissed off by both and understand stands of both sides and see clearly where one's freedom starts and the other's ends... End both is sickening.
Now, trying to be as objective as I can be..I volunteer every week for Meïr Paniem and Koach Latet. That's besides my own work. I've worked on several projects to get the money in to feed numerous needy people every day. Hareidi, Ultra Orthodox etc.. AND secular come there, ask for help and get it and get their free meals as much as they want. And they are all treated the same way. I know Zilbershlag & family & Co..for many years and I know the inside and out. I I can work with the Ultra ultra and the secular. And I know both sides are extremely hard to work with. You need a lot of good 'shmooz', gloves, knowledge of both worlds to find the right words and solutions/middle of the road, a LOT of patience , an even longer breath and a poker face. I know how extremely difficult it is to work from within the Hareidi system and to get things done. AND at the same time to function as a bridge as Zilbershlag is trying to be. To shuff a man aside with “he's dishonest”.. etc.. comes fromt he 'shaft' of people who have no idea of the problem nor do they have insight in BOTH SIDES (secular and hareidi/orthodox..) nor of Israëli society as a whole.
I can easily say with pride that I am probably a pantheïst , a pagan at times and a heretic when I'm in a bad mood. As a matter of fact, I've even told Zilberslag in the many conversations I had with him. These were 'no bullshit' conversation; those were conversations to get things done. And the man is completely honest in his answers; and he expects the others to be that as well. And I certaintly do not agree with all his opinions and actions. And I told him so.
He is a man 'alone in the desert' that doesn't deserve a kick in the balls but should be taken as a bridge to solve problems that can cause distruction within Israëli Society. BOTH sides need to do that and both sides need to be pushed to be more honest in their publications. Better work ON it than against it when you have a tool at hand to do so!
Posted by: Dorian | August 15, 2009 at 06:11 AM
Dorian -
the haredim have claimed that there is a big conspiracy among the non-haredim to do evil towards them. they are promoting a classic blood libel against hadassah and the doctors. these are all bold-faced lies with no substantiating evidence. period.
the secular press has reported the haredi actions pretty darn accurately. please provide some similar examples of where the secular press has made up lies regarding haredim, comparable to the disgusting charges they have leveled against the doctors and hospital. this is not a problem on both sides.
in secular society, it would be much less likely (though not impossible) for a situation like that of the baby starver to go on for a long time, since there is no bias against calling the authorities when something doesnt look right. and if the hospital had video , seculars would correctly believe them, and want to see the other children protected and the mother get help. the haredim are more interested in promoting their anti-secular agenda,and their desire to keep their lives and ways secret, than they are in protecting children from sex-abuse or starvation. we have seen this over and over.
seculars UNDERSTAND and accept haredims rights to eat ,dress, daven, dance any way they like. they do NOT ever try to force haredim to secularize. haredim DO want to tell seculars how and where they may drive, dress, eat, and go to movies and parades. there is NO moral equivalence argument to be made here between the haredi and secular press. the secular press tries to tell it like it is, and might be angry , as they should be , towards the haredi infringements on their rights, and disregard for the laws. haredi press has no regard for the truth. its that simple.
Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | August 15, 2009 at 12:25 PM
Charedei press never really claims to be objective, or even fair. It is a "house organ," promoting a defined and well identified agenda. As long as the secular press claims to be the protector of democracy, and stands for ensuring an informed public necessary for democracy, with a defined code of journalistic ethics Zilbershlag's critique is well justified. It should make all consumers of secular media be as skeptical of what they read in the mainstream media as they are of the Charedi press.
Posted by: Shaya | August 15, 2009 at 01:11 PM
APC wrote:
..please provide some similar examples of where the secular press has made up lies regarding haredim, comparable to the disgusting charges they have leveled against the doctors and hospital. this is not a problem on both sides...”
I haven't used the word 'lies'; what I am talking about is that both presses are bias and emphasize on certain things or not in order to make a point. You can do that by publishing something or for that very reason NOT publish it.
But if you want an example of as you will 'a distortion of the truth', take the following passage:
“..I appreciate that in the press release from the municipality it was clearly stated that some 'extremist haredim' attacked Barkat. They are just a bunch of people. My son has a clip shot there in real time - about six or eight haredim who make our daily life a hell - but if you check the stories about the incident, you will find terminology like 'haredim brutally attacked the mayor' and such things, as if these guys represent us, despite the fact that there is no reporter on police or haredi affairs who is not aware of that particular fact. Yet nothing of this will appear in the reports! Is it innocent? Of course not!" ...
And that is just an example of how the public (all public) get's encited and they lap it up and use it further to make their case against one another. It happends on both sides but I absolute agree with you that the hareidi-press is guilty of not publishing and emphasizing on very important matters like (child) abuse etc etc etc...
The point I am trying to make is that also the secular press has its ways to 'lead the news...' and because both are guilty ( be it in different proportions!) the result is a war between religious (..) and secular(...).
Another example, when Zilbershlag says: (talking about the homosexual comunity..)...”After all, there is no more satisfaction to that community than to be exposed and in the center of attention. It is well known that the exposure of their situation and their problems helps this community, but what does that have to do with us, the haredim? Why do we have to be dragged into that? ...”
I can only agree with him because first of all..we DON'T know who killed these 2 youngsters. And let me save you the things that so called liberals/seculars say about homosexuals. We both know that ain't pretty to. And exposure of these kind of situation (..) would help any community to strenghen their case. But it can't be over the backs of the Hareidim only. Éven when they are more outspoken on homosexuality than maybe so called seculars are. It's the seculars however that openly symphatize where Hareidim cannot because of their religious conviction.
That's also where Zilbershlag says :..My position is that haredim would be better off avoiding any commentary or statements on this issue...” And THAT is also not good according to the secular public....
You wrote: “..seculars UNDERSTAND and accept haredims rights to eat ,dress, daven, dance any way they like. they do NOT ever try to force haredim to secularize. “
YEEEH!!! you wish. I don't know where you live but if it's in Israël I'll invite you gladly to come a few days with me and let you here and see some places where you can change THAT opinion.
When you say: “..haredim DO want to tell seculars how and where they may drive, dress, eat, and go to movies and parades. ..” YES, you are right on this but I must say..mainly in their own neighbourhoods.
Allow me to give an example here: I have 5 children (all boys). I don't know how they do it..but every week I go for new socks, or have shoes repaired , new shirts etc.. IN brief: I always go to Geula area..Why? I can buy in bulk for a good price. Now,.. I can go in a miniskirt, short T-shirt that hardly covers my boobs etc..And believe me..they do. People turn away their heads but WHY should I go somewhere like this when I know I will offend that public. It's somehow like going to a Sjabbes-dish in your pyama because it's comfortable. NO..I am not willing to dress black and burka-like.. But if I wear a long skirt with a long sleeve T-shirt I feel more comfortable and so will they. THEY always dress the same and I don't want to force them to get piercings etc..
Another detail: they multiply like rabbits (..) so many children eyes see half naked women/men going thru their neighbourhood. Freedom..YEEH..where does yours end and mine starts?
I don't like my children to see those things either . Believe me..Israëli women (..) can look like hookers, half naked, sigarette in one hand, pellefoon in the other, hip trousers that show their half naked .ss! No, I don't like it either. If THAT is an example for the secular public? (let go an example for women !?)
Only last week I saw a programm where people were complaining that there were to many religious in their neighbourhood and they don't like the way they look, it looks religious etc etc..
While these religious (..) never demanded any special rules for Sjabbat etc..
It is mainly when we talk about places like Geula and Mea Sheariem. And even there they won't kick me out when I go in a mini-skirt. That is..first of all you get asked by a signboard please to dress appropriate. Then I shouldn't be surprised that when I don't give a flip people ask me please to cover myself or even get annoyed with me.
Lord and behold when someone for whatever get's attacked; and that does happen but it's not all hareidim. They have their gangs as well!
Don't think I don't get APC how you feel on these matters. I get it but it is also more nuanciated than it is presented; either in the media or among the people...
And I cannot agree when Zilbershalg get's portrayed the way he was because he IS a tool that should be used. And he is good in the media; eventhough he has to do it from within HIS world as we have to do it from OURS. And we both want the best for our worlds and preserve our culture as we know it. That right we both have.
The big problem..HOW to break walls where needed and avoid a constant war. We can go back and forth on every issue but it doesn't get us anywhere.
NOW, APC! Something else.....I am going for that large coffee..and so should you after this damned long mail of mine ! (I'm getting accused of child neglect at the moment!) ..
Posted by: Dorian | August 15, 2009 at 01:36 PM
Dorian : hope you enjoyed your coffee.
the example he gave and you quoted is not in any way a case of biased reporting.
a HAREDI woman is accused. HAREDIM deny it. HAREDIM accuse hospital.HAREDIM riot.HAREDIM call police nazis and throw diapers. HAREDI leaders do not assur these protests. HAREDIM riot over parking lot. HAREDI leaders do not call off and prevent protests. a HAREDI rabbi invites the mayor for talks. he accepts and goes to the HAREDI rabbi. upon leaving, he is attacked by some boys. were these random hooligans out for some fun who could just as easily been seculars?!! of course not. if the media had not reported that they were HAREDIM the story makes no sense. they could not leave out that fact. the attack was directly related to all of the prior events involving HAREDIM and these boys or men were HAREDIM.
should they have been referred to as "extremist"? well first of all many would say that by definition haredim are extremists. are there centrist or left wing haredim? secondly, if all of the haredi leaders had come out strongly and forcefully against the riots, then you could say that if a small group defied their leaders, they are extremists. but when these boys/men are simply continuing the type of behavior encouraged by the haredi leaders, it is dishonest and innaccurate to call them extremists.
so if that is his/your shining example of secular news bias, i think his/your point is quite weak, and leaves me completely unconvinced. sorry, dorian. i call them as i see them.
Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | August 15, 2009 at 03:57 PM
as to your other point, i dont ever remember seeing a sign in a secular area asking men to not wear long black coats or fur hats, or for women to please refrain from wearing long sleeves or hair coverings. but even if they did, you should and would be able to IGNORE the sign and dress as you wish. if the seculars spit on or attacked a haredi for how he was dressed, i would support the haredi 100 percent. yet haredim do just that in their neighborhoods. and how is it that seculars complaining about haredim in their neighborhood is any different than the reverse? it is the next step that makes all the difference. acting on your feelings. the haredim DO and the seculars DONT. and it does not matter what you or i think of how israeli women dress or taht you dont want your children seeing it. too bad. that is part of freedom. until you democratically get a law passed banning certain types of dress, your choice is to see it, avert your eyes, or keep your children locked at home. if you want to respect the haredi culture when you visit, that is fine. but it cannot be demanded of anyone. but they do. haredim demand and expect different rules be applied to others than themselves. they can dress as they wish in secular neighborhoods, but you must respect their requirements when you go to a haredi area. its a one way street. so again, i am unconvinced.
Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | August 15, 2009 at 04:14 PM
++The big problem..HOW to break walls where needed and avoid a constant war++
quite simple.
1. seculars do what they want and don't tell haredim what to do.
2. haredim do what they want and don't tell seculars what to do.
which side wont accept this?
Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | August 15, 2009 at 04:19 PM
haredi culture is based on fact that since they KNOW what god wants, they must tell others how to act and nobody can tell them how to act. god is on their side and demands this inequality. THAT is why it is so hard for a PR guy to spin things favorably for the haredim.
Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | August 15, 2009 at 04:42 PM
APC:
“..the example he gave and you quoted is not in any way a case of biased reporting.
a HAREDI woman is accused. HAREDIM deny it etc etc......”
Zilbershlag never denied that and neither am I. However..they were not all hareidim but mainly neturei Karta & Co. From whom most other Hareidim keep far away.
Zilbershlag also doesn't speak favourably of them in the article..
“..Barkat was attacked by a bunch of bullies, extremist zealots from which we, the haredim, are the first to suffer all year long. I appreciate that in the press release from the municipality it was clearly stated that some 'extremist haredim' attacked Barkat...”
You say: “..if the media had not reported that they were HAREDIM the story makes no sense
AND NOW IT DOES??
“.... they could not leave out that fact. the attack was directly related to all of the prior events involving HAREDIM and these boys or men were HAREDIM.
should they have been referred to as "extremist"? well first of all many would say that by definition haredim are extremists. are there centrist or left wing haredim? “..
YES, indeed, EXTREEM, because not all hareidi are extreem (like it or not) and there ARE centrist, left wing (..)hareidim. There ARE a lot of splinter-groups that act on their own that don't do other haredim any favour. The secular press conveniently left that out.
HOWEVER, IT'S THE LACK OF openess in the overall haredi media that desperately needs to be improved. Both secular and hareidi have to work on not to be bias be it that one may be worse in it then the other...in whatever form.
“..They can dress as they wish in secular neighborhoods, but you must respect their requirements when you go to a haredi area. ..”.
Yes..because the seculars don't mind, and the haredim do. What..you want to force them to be like seculars. You and I know you'll never succeed in that.
And the haredim don't force me to dress their way..they request you to consider to wear appropriate cloths when entering the ultra orthodox neighbourhoods (mainly Mea Sheariem etc..), or when visiting a shul etc... You can ask yourself..where does my freedom end where there's starts of?
Or..is freedom to make the appropriate choice? You choose.
You complain about hareidi dresscode; you make the same complaints about restaurants where you only get it with a tie etc... You want to make a point and get in in shorts and a T-Shirt or avoid the restaurant and go to Macdonalds?
And about the dresscode overall in Israel (and in the world for that matter..). .”it does not matter what you or I think of how Israeli women dress or that you dont want your children seeing it. too bad. that is part of freedom. until you democratically get a law passed banning certain types of dress, your choice is to see it, avert your eyes, or keep your children locked at home...”
CHOICE? No, it's not. And it's not freedom either. It's being democratically forced. Take it or leave it. And most haredim avert their eyes and keep their children away from it.
So why go into those areas when you know that and only go there to show disrespect? Because it cannot be DEMANDED from you?
YOU don't mind in the first place what they look like anyway. They do. So what do you want to prove? If anything?
But al that aside, Zilbershag stated clearly: “...even the birthrate of secular Israelis is growing, and for me, though my fellow haredim don't like to hear that from me, I say loud and clear this is good news because I don't think that Israeli society should become exclusively haredi. We need this blending; it is of the utmost importance. If we want to see haredim integrating into Israeli society, it has to take place in a large and strong Israeli society. ..”
Those 'fellow haredim' is what he/we have to deal with and it won't happen in one night.
And it CAN only take place in a large and strong Israeli society.
And about your simple solution: a middle of the road at best . Bashing a person like Zilbershlag won't help. Better use him for the better.
PS: My coffee was great.
Posted by: Dorian | August 15, 2009 at 06:20 PM
ON your last post APC: Haredim have to face the fact that the Torah was given to the PEOPLE of Israel and NOT the STATE of Israel. Meaning that every Jew has his own interpretation of how she/he lives his life as a Jew...Some do it in groups and have their subculture..
Posted by: Dorian | August 15, 2009 at 06:27 PM
++The big problem..HOW to break walls where needed and avoid a constant war++
quite simple.
1. seculars do what they want and don't tell haredim what to do.
2. haredim do what they want and don't tell seculars what to do.
which side wont accept this?
Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | August 15, 2009 at 04:19 PM
I think you do not understand
The herideim never tells the secular what to do, on, they would never be so arrogant.
God tell the secular what to do.
Posted by: seymour | August 15, 2009 at 07:49 PM
++However..they were not all hareidim ++
of course not, and nobody said that all haredim did this. if an article says that a man was beaten by 4 hispanic men is that biased because not all hispanic men beat him? and maybe many hispanics are against this beating. it makes no difference. the facts are the facts, and the ones who attacked the mayor WERE HAREDIM. and this was very pertinent to the story. this is clearly not a case of biased reporting.
for it to have been biased, it would have to have said that all haredim support this attack. that would be untrue and biased. still a non-example of any bias.
++there ARE centrist, left wing (..)hareidim.++
please tell me where???
++ Both secular and hareidi have to work on not to be bias be it that one may be worse in it then the other...in whatever form.++
please show an example of secular media bias.
++because the seculars don't mind, and the haredim do++
so if seculars would announce they mind when people cover their heads, then you agree that haredim should respect their neighborhood and remove their yarmulkes.
imagine 2 next door neighbors and each has kids that run on the others lawns. one neighbor prohibits the others kids from going on his lawn, but insists that his neighbor allow his children to keep running on his neighbors lawn since the neighbor doesnt mind kids on his lawn, but he does. that is just silly.
++you want to force them to be like seculars. You and I know you'll never succeed in that.++
i want to force them to realize that neither side can make demands of the other. seculars get it. haredim don't.
Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | August 15, 2009 at 08:34 PM
+++And the haredim don't force me to dress their way..they request you to consider to wear appropriate cloths when entering the ultra orthodox neighbourhoods ++
and they will spit on you or attack you if you dont. that is some request.
++ You can ask yourself..where does my freedom end where there's starts of?++
mine ends when i break the law. theirs begins at the same place. sice there is no law against women exposing their arms and legs, and there is also no law guaranteeing someone that they do not have to see arms and legs if they dont want to, your question does not apply. i am within my rights, and they are not. that is why we have laws.
++You complain about hareidi dresscode; you make the same complaints about restaurants where you only get it with a tie etc... You want to make a point and get in in shorts and a T-Shirt or avoid the restaurant and go to Macdonalds++
a PRIVATE business or residence can make any dress code they like. haredim enforce theirs on PUBLIC streets.
++It's being democratically forced++
the same way someone who hates the color green is forced to see grass when he walks outside whether he likes it or not.
++And about your simple solution: a middle of the road at best++
i dont know what you meant. but please tell me which side can't live by these rules?
you may need more coffee.enjoy.
Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | August 15, 2009 at 08:46 PM
"We have witnessed this in the US, where rich haredi Jews help and work together with Muslim Pakistanis in Flatbush and created some associations "
Chas v'shalom.
Posted by: nobody | August 15, 2009 at 11:04 PM
Funny, the article was nothing even close to Shmarya's contrived headline. I enjoyed the interview. I see where this man is coming from and identify with certain aspects of his personality. His mission is to unite people, he even puts himself on the line where some haredim won't (oy va voy the shidduchim, the aliyot, i'll be outcast) for the sake of principles. I really respect him.
Too bad it sounds like the propagandists in the Israeli media caused him to burn out. He sounds like he was contributing to a good underlying cause in Israel. How this man's role can be misconstrued as anything other than positive, is quite the wonder. Except when hatred is introduced as the explanation. Then it makes sense. If you hate any haredi figure, then of course nothing any haredi can do is positive.
Posted by: nobody | August 15, 2009 at 11:20 PM
I salute Dorian & APC for their exchange on this issue...well done...
Posted by: Binyamin | August 16, 2009 at 01:17 AM
To APC: (I haven't had my coffee yet!);
“..there ARE centrist, left wing (..)hareidim.++
please tell me where???” If you have to ask that question then my question is,”What is it you know of the Haredim; in how far are you bias?”
“..please show an example of secular media bias. “ I gave it to you but you think it doesn't hold any ground...
“..i want to force them to realize that neither side can make demands of the other. seculars get it. haredim don't. “..
But they do; that's why they have 'their neighbourhoods.' Leave them, it's un excepted unwritten fact and with mutual respect we'll come a long way. The haredim cross the line in matters like the parkinglot etc... And even THAT'S not all haredim because many oppose to those actions. Be it that you blame them for not speaking out enough on that in the press (evenso on other matters) and indeed that would be much better. People like Zilbershlag are for years already trying to do that. However, certain elements in the secular press (not all, because he has very good relations with them in general) indeed treat him like garbage which he doesn't deserve. The man also has his limit like everybody else.
And about demanding: EVEN when 'their' streets are public (and indeed they are) they cannot demand how I dress..that's why they REQUEST; like they also request proper clothing when entering what they concider a holy site etc... Why not do that than? Small effort for a big pleasure? So you are getting flipped off because THEY ask that of you but YOU wouldn't ask them? THAT'S what really bothers you right? You feel offended in what you concider your freedom?
You write: “..and they will spit on you or attack you if you don't. that is some request. ..” You make it sound like that's common practice which it's NOT. It's highly exaggerated .
Let me tell you...IN my house nobody get's in with a sigarette; outside I don't have a choice and try to avoid smokey areas. HOWEVER..the stairway is privat/public area. My downstairs neighbour has the habit to smoke once in a while on the stairs which afterwards rises up and hangs around our doors. We fixed the door so the smoke doesn't get in. She CAN do it..but we asked her not to, and she makes the effort only to smoke in the morning and late in the evening. Matter of mutual respect where you CAN force things thru to make a point but which doesn't get you anywhere and creates a gab...OR you take the freedom to make the right choice. (middle of the road..) IN how far freedom excists (and I don't think it does!), it's NOT about 'we all do what we want'...that's verbal abuse. It's something you earn along the way when you learn the results of wrong choices.
Nobody wrote: “..How this man's role (Zilbershlag) can be misconstrued as anything other than positive, is quite the wonder. Except when hatred is introduced as the explanation. Then it makes sense. If you hate any haredi figure, then of course nothing any haredi can do is positive...”
I agree with that completely.
To Benyamin: Join the fun!
..AND now.I'm going for that coffee!
Posted by: Dorian | August 16, 2009 at 04:25 AM
Binyamin : thnx
Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | August 16, 2009 at 10:58 AM
Dorian : it seems we are now getting into area of repetition, so i will leave your comments as the last, and on this issue we will have to agree to disagree.
erev tov!
Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | August 16, 2009 at 11:01 AM
i do want to clarify that i have no bad feelings towards Zilbershlag. he may be a wonderful person. and i am all for people respecting their neighbors wishes if they can.
Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | August 16, 2009 at 11:21 AM
APC:
"...we will have to agree to disagree..."
PARTYPOOPER!!!!
Posted by: Dorian | August 16, 2009 at 02:49 PM
Dorian : there will be other issues we can clash on.
Posted by: ah-pee-chorus | August 16, 2009 at 03:59 PM