« Report: Chief Rabbi Of Kiryat Arba Arrested | Main | Rabbi's Arrest Sparks Citywide Protests »

June 27, 2011

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Shmarya

Wasnt Lewin named as the advocate for skverre at first?

Not that I'm aware of.

bas melech

Wasnt Lewin named as the advocate for skverre at first? Now its Snitow. Seems Lewin is genuine and only takes on cases he is passionate about and which he believes in, and he knows the truth-- if he lived in New Square, they would have done the same to him ... especially since he let his daughter Alyza out of the kitchen.... and raised her to value halacha but also be a smart woman and develop her potential and brain who can stand on her own two feet, support her husband and family when necessary, and even read megilla!

OMG

Posted by: Sam | June 28, 2011 at 06:40 AM

Idiot I am not going to play with you, ring around the rosie.

Sam

Posted by: OMG | June 27, 2011 at 07:39 PM

Now we know that not only do you have poor reading comprehension skills, you also have poor audiological processing skills. Anything else you would like us to know about? Besides, i have not expressed an opinion. I simply stated a fact. But of course, i didn't expect you to understand the difference.

Guest

>Many people are of the opinion that one can detect character in a person’s tone or voice.

Many are of the opinion that one can detect character in the bumps on a person's head or the size of their nose.

Seriously, Ami?

OMG

Posted by: Sam | June 27, 2011 at 04:17 PM

You imbecile here is the link to the audio from the oral arguments, http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/failed_messiahcom/2011/06/audio-rubashkin-appeal-oral-arguments-456.html
pay attention to 10:10 and 14:20 and finally 22:58. You will see that you are a moron who is blinded to your biased opinion, without any backup.

Sam

++You are a fool, a trial error is not an impropriety look up in a dictionary that might help you.++

I did not say that a trial error is an impropriety. You ought to polish up on your reading comprehension.

BP Hockers United!

While the noise created by posters like Kish Mich and Spooner was over the top and appears to have subsided, the message was not - and clearly Shmarya has taken heed as the last few days have brought us back to his bread and butter - the hypocrisy of many in the frum community who create an appearance of a lifestyle while they break the law. What appeared to be a new "pet project" on this blog - an effort to formulate the acceptance by Torah-minded people of a gay lifestyle - may have its roots in good intentions, but is no less against the Torah than Rubashkin's thievery.

A sin is a sin. Shmarya based many of his arguments on conjecture dressed as fact. The reality is the only fact is that the Torah forbids sexual relations between two men. Sin is sin, and attempts to rationalize are just rationalizations. A man cannot act on that urge, whether it is genetic or learned, no matter how difficult it may be.

The Jewish Press article was right on. And I'm not a big poster but I am glad to see this blog back where it belongs because good work is done here.

DF

Who let her out of the kitchen?

... I make a joke ...

OMG

Posted by: Sam | June 27, 2011 at 01:41 PM

You are a fool, a trial error is not an impropriety look up in a dictionary that might help you.

Sam

++Infect when the Chief Judge asked Lewin if he could cite one specific point in the trial that could be viewed, as not fair, Lewin replied that there are none.++

That is an inaccurate recitation of the judge's question. Rather, Judge Riley asked Lewin if there were any trial errors that he can cite which was a direct result of the alleged appearance of impropriety. To that, Lewin replied he can cite to none but that the court need not consider that. And at that point Judge Riley responded that he is asking not because it is required but because it would make his case a much stronger case.

You ought to correct yourself accordingly.

OMG

Sorry should say in fact.

OMG

Over all the interview is guarded, my only issue with the interview is the following part.
"We trust that the Eighth Circuit will recognize the injustice of the District Court Judge’s extensive involvement in the planning of the raid and will conclude that Sholom Rubashkin did not receive a fair trial and sentence”

The fact is that SMR’s lawyers did not argue that he did not receive a fair trial. Infect when the Chief Judge asked Lewin if he could cite one specific point in the trial that could be viewed, as not fair, Lewin replied that there are none. However Lewin argued that law doesn’t require to reach that threshold, it is sufficient that if a person on the street who doesn’t have any direct knowledge of the case, when told the facts of the case it will seems to him that it was a conflict. How would she expect that the Appellate Court would rule that SMR did not receive a fair trial?

Robert Wisler

You call that careful and precise????!!! It was more sentimentalized bull which the "humble, sweet, sentimental" Lewin excels at.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Failed messiah was established and run in 2004 by Mr. Shmarya (Scott)Rosenberg. The site was acquired by Diversified Holdings, Feb 2016.
.
We thank Mr. Rosenberg for his efforts on behalf of the Jewish Community

.

Comment Rules

  1. No anonymous comments.
  2. Use only one name or alias and stick with that.
  3. Do not use anyone else's name or alias.
  4. Do not sockpuppet.
  5. Try to argue using facts and logic.
  6. Do not lie.
  7. No name-calling, please.
  8. Do not post entire articles or long article excerpts.
***Violation of these rules may lead to the violator's comments being edited or his future comments being banned.***

Search this site with Google:

6a00d83451b71f69e201b8d1656462970c-250wi

FailedMessiah.com in the Media