New Letter/Warning from Original Directors of Machne Menachem

English Translation
Erev Pesach 5769
To Anash and the Crown Heights Community

Greetings and Blessing!

As the summer approaches and the children will go to camp or Yeshiva Kayitz, you, as parents, are busy thinking about camp and deciding which one will be best for your child.  Thank G-d there are many summer camp options to choose from.

We do not want to convince or persuade you where to send your child this summer, but rather, to make you aware of the present situation with the Camp Chayolei Hamelach which is under the management of Rutman and Spritzer and located in Lackawaxen, Pennsylvania.

For the past year, there has been a restraining order, an Ikkul, placed on Rutman and Spritzer by the Bais Din of our community.  They are not to open the camp until there will be Din Torah decision concerning the camp’s rightful owners.

In addition, Mr. Spritzer has been called over a year ago to the Bais Din Machon L’Horaya –Monsey- and has not yet agreed to come.  It is therefore clear that the restraining order, the Ikkul, is still in force upon him.  If anyone sends their child to the Camp Chayolei Hamelach, he is participating with Spritzer in the travesty.

Further more, we are reminding everyone that it is stealing, gezel, to use the property without permission from its Owners.  We do not allow anyone— a camper, counselor, or teacher, etc.—to use our property which is located in Lackawaxen, Pennsylvania, which in its time was known as Machne Menachem.

We reserve the right to eventually demand full compensation from the parents that went against the restraining order, the Ikkul, and illegally used our property (Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat, Siman 363).

Signed in the name of,
The Machne Menachem Board of Directors
For the original Letter in Hebrew
Hebrew warning letter 2009

Last years letter 5768-2008
Letter to Yeshivas and Mosdos


6 Responses to New Letter/Warning from Original Directors of Machne Menachem

  1. Injunction-Ikkul:
    Law. A judicial process or order requiring the person or persons to whom it is directed to do a particular act or to refrain from doing a particular act. (a command; order; admonition)

    Basis of injunctions:
    At the core of injunctive relief is a recognition that monetary damages cannot solve all problems. An injunction may be permanent or it may be temporary. A preliminary injunction, or an interlocutory injunction, is a provisional remedy granted to restrain activity on a temporary basis until the court can make a final decision after trial. It is usually necessary to prove the high likelihood of success upon the merits of one’s case and a likelihood of irreparable harm in the absence of a preliminary injunction before such an injunction may be granted; otherwise the party may have to wait for trial to obtain a permanent injunction.

    Rationale behind injunctions:
    This injunctive power to restore the status quo ante; that is, to make whole again someone whose rights have been violated, is essential to the concept of fairness (equity). For example, money damages would be of scant benefit to a land owner who wished simply to prevent someone from repeatedly trespassing on his land.

  2. הלכות גזילה ואבידה פרק חמישי

    א. אסור לקנות דבר הגזול מן הגזלן ואסור לסעדו על שינויו כדי שיקנהו שכל העושה דברים אלו וכיוצא בהן מחזק ידי עוברי עבירה ועובר על ולפני עור לא תתן מכשול

    ב. אסור ליהנות בדבר הגזול ואפילו לאחר ייאוש והוא שידע בודאי שדבר זה הוא הגזלה עצמה. כיצד ידע בודאי שבהמה זו גזולה אסור לרכוב עליה או לחרוש בה

    ג. גזל בית או שדה אסור לעבור בתוכה או ליכנס בה בחמה מפני החמה ובגשמים מפני הגשמים. ואם דר בתוכה חייב להעלות שכר לבעלים כדין הדר בחצר חבירו שלא מדעתו. גזל דקלים ועשה מהן גשר אסור לעבור עליו וכן כל כיוצא בזה

  3. Camper says:

    Siruv is no joke, especially for a man who does a lot a business with Frum people, who go to the extent to buy tissue paper with a Hechsher.
    I don’t think the Frum community will be to found about doing business with someone who has a Siruv on his back.
    I would also wonder what their reaction would be to the information provided on this site.

    One thing for certain, it will answer the question of “can this man be trusted?”

    Unfortunately, not so in our circles, were we find those that are ready to give up on their principles (if they had any to begin with is another question), just to save a buck.
    Unfortunately, even if there is a Siruv, it will be ignored by many (in OUR community). These people (who dress in righteous clothing of either [slogans of], “koved Rabbonim” or “Koch in moshiach” etc…) will find any excuse why they can and will do what’s best for them (they justify mesira and Genava etc…).
    I’ll even take it as far as…Unfortunately, even if there is a Din Torah and Spritzer losses, (meaning he has to give back the camp, pay all the monies stolen from the camp and from all the money spent all those years in court on time and lawyers etc…etc… all that would be for the Bais Din to decide), and of course knowing who Yankle the Ganev is, he won’t follow the Bais Din Psak (as this site has proven to us, he does not even listen to his own Rav). STILL we will find those that will excuse and back him (because they have their agenda, whether in be to save s dollar or save the “party” etc…V’dal).

    We will have to wait and see what happens.

  4. CHER says:

    either way (siruv or D”T) Spritzer is in a deep pit.
    may I add hes the only one to blame for this pit, for he and he alone dug it.

  5. concerned parent says:

    Strong letter!
    I don’t understand who could send their child to such a place, just for the fact that there is a doubt that the place may have been stolen, just for the fact that the people running the camp might be questionable is enough.

    I’m also not so excited about the fact that Mr. Spritzer does not want to make his case in a Beth Din.

  6. Rambam says:

    Halacha 1

    1. It is natural for a man’s character and actions to be influenced by his friends and associates and for him to follow the local norms of behavior. Therefore, he should associate with the righteous and be constantly in the company of the wise, so as to learn from their deeds. Conversely, he should keep away from the wicked who walk in darkness, so as not to learn from their deeds.

    This is [implied by] Solomon’s statement [Proverbs 13:20]: “He who walks with the wise will become wise, while one who associates with fools will suffer.” Similarly, [Psalms 1:1] states: “Happy is the man who has not followed the advice of the wicked.”

    A person who lives in a place where the norms of behavior are evil and the inhabitants do not follow the straight path should move to a place where the people are righteous and follow the ways of the good.

    If all the places with which he is familiar and of which he hears reports follow improper paths, as in our times, or if he is unable to move to a place where the patterns of behavior are proper, because of [the presence of] bands of raiding troops, or for health reasons, he should remain alone in seclusion as [Eichah 3:28] states: “Let him sit alone and be silent.”

    If they are wicked and sinful and do not allow him to reside there unless he mingle with them and follow their evil behavior, he should go out to caves, thickets, and deserts [rather than] follow the paths of sinners as [Jeremiah 9:1] states: “Who will give me a lodging place for wayfarers, in the desert.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: