Goal

Welcome!

The goal of this blog, is of course the Truth/Emes.

The truth of how the camp was stolen from the original directors of Machane Menachem.

The truth of who took who to court. Was it – as claimed – Hershkop that summoned Spritzer to court, or was it in fact the other way around?

The truth of who took who to a Din Torah?

The truth of what really happened in court, what happened in the Din Torahs?

The truth of how things ended up the way they did, and whether justice was served, or justice was undone?

The facts as to why you are not – morally, justly, and Halachically – allowed [presently] to send your children to that camp, currently known as Chayolei Hamelech* and how by doing so you are taking part in everything wrong that was done.

The facts exposing Y. Spritzer for his [publicly repeated] lies, deceit and straight out Messira.

All these questions and facts will Iy”h be addressed through this blog, through which I hope that some sort of justice will be served.

*Camp legal name: Summer Recreation for Children Inc.

אמת מארץ תצמח

The facts speak for themselves, and therefore, I will mostly be posting documents from the years of court cases, Bais Din, and personal as well as public letters.

If you have any questions or comments that you would like addressed, or any suggestions for a post, you may use the comments and I will G-d willing get back to you.

Anybody with anything to share (documentation, stories etc…) feel free to do so either on this site (using the comments) or by e-mail at:  machnemenachem at gmail.com

ארור משיג גבול רעהו ואמר כל-העם אמן

(דברים כ”ז- י”ז)

9 Responses to Goal

  1. machanemenachem says:

    ארור משיג גבול רעך
    דברים כ”ז- י”ז
    “Accursed is one who moves back the boundary of his fellow”

    Rashi:
    ONE WHO MOVES BACK THE BOUNDARY:
    He moves it backward and steals the land.
    the word מסיג is an expression related to והסג in, “Has been moved backwards.”

    Stealing is stealing no matter what way you do it, the camp was stolen, ripped off from the original owners (how it happened does not really matter to you, although I will do my best to show you just that), by you sending your kids there, either to be a camper or to work you are guilty of helping a Ganev/theft and a Mossier!.

    For those that give the excuse to why they are sending their children as campers or staff to “Spritzers camp”, although they know it was taken/stolen from others, that
    1. “it’s much cheaper” (they can’t afford another camp).
    2. “I have nowhere else to send my child” etc…

    I say:
    The same Torah that says the above (ארור משיג גבול רעך) says you must only eat Kosher. If Kosher food gets to expensive can you now eat non-kosher food (g-d forbid). If Kosher food is unavailable can you eat Traif?
    If tuition for a Jewish education is to expensive (which it is) will you send your child to public school, it’s free, why not?
    Does the Torah state anywhere that when it gets hard keeping the Mitzvos you can start making compromises? Because it’s cheaper or you have nowhere else to go so there is no more the concept of Right and Wrong?

  2. who cares? says:

    do you really think people care about the truth, even if all this is true unfortunately people just do what good for them without considering what RIGHT or WRONG.
    so why are you waisting your time. they will just dismiss any claims and move on?

  3. machanemenachem says:

    “…unfortunately people just do what good for them without considering what RIGHT or WRONG.
    so why are you waisting your time…”

    Because I care about the truth,
    I care for whats Right or Wrong!

    I don’t do what everybody else is doing, I do whats Right.
    A dead (salomon) fish swims/goes with the flow, a live fish swims against the flow.

    Besides, before you had an excuse “I did not know”, well now you know. What people do from here on is their responsibility, it’s between them and G-D almighty.

  4. machanemenachem says:

    Id would like to stress again…

    This site is not addressed to the malevolent troublemakers who thrive on dissension and miss no opportunity to stir up controversy. They have no interest in knowing the truth, so no letter, information or facts, can deter them from their goal of provoking strife and sitting back to enjoy the action…

    This site and the information on it, is addressed only to those genuinely interested in the truth, justice and who are honestly concerned about respect for the Torah, and are upset by what they feel to be the Chillul Hashem by Spritzer and friends.

    If you have nothing genuine to say/state or ask (comment), just don’t!

    if you know something I might not know, feel free to inform (all of) us. E-mail: machanemenachem@gmail.com

  5. Added: (March, 8th, 2009) After reading thorough stacks of material on this case, I have come to a conclusion, that in essence the only thing I would have really needed (to make a case against Spritzer) is Judge Glassers Verdict (everything else is good, but extra). Meaning: if I was to just make a site posting this Verdict, it would be enough . If you really want to get a true [whole] picture of what went on, I advice you to read this verdict more then just once.

  6. JOKE OF THE DAY! says:

    david grossbaum (fake name) a.k.a. on this site as noneedtoknow wrote (in an email to me):

    “If I was to just post PMM and Judge glassers verdict, it also would have just been fine.”

    noneedtoknow:
    The judges verdict doesn’t say a thing… any judge can say what he wants! since when does a jusges’ ruling have a say in what actually happened?
    The same way we can’t decide from the courts first decision (on what you call the “Mesirah”) you can’t decide from the final ruling.
    The only way to know what actually happened is to ask people who where around then and remember.
    And I did,
    as I told you already, I’ve been asking people about what happened then. I heard many different interesting things: but the Tzaad Hashove between all of them is that they all remember the hershkop (thugs – as they call them) were doing acts of terror against spritzer schreiber and speilman.

    by the way, I recall you discribing how grave a RICO is, and how 7 entire familes would have to sit in prison for doing nothing and how a great moiser sprizter is… etc. etc.
    I asked a lawyer (a friend of mine) this week and spoke to him all about RICO.
    Basically, any person who feels threatened by someone else, and who has “received” acts of terror from any guy\thug\gangster etc. files a RICO case.

    check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rico_act
    Rico cases are very thoroughly investigated, and no charges would have been made towards “seven Innocent families”. Were talking here about Gadi and Lelly hershop doing acts of terror against some people. Were talking about accts which were frozen (WITHOUT permission from beis din) – so filling for a RICO case is not such a grave MESIRAH as you put it…
    but anyways, continue to lie to the community as you do on crownheights.info, and the truth will come out anyway.

  7. keep it up says:

    Putting Modesty Aside

    In general, modesty is a good trait. You’re far better off concealing your talents and good deeds in the shadows.
    But when you come to the defense of truth and justice, then is a time to stand up and make yourself heard loud and clear.
    As for your modesty — you’ll just have to put that aside for the moment.

  8. Free Speech says:

    Rush Limbaugh on freedom of Speech

    RUSH: Freedom of speech is something that we Americans, I think, have always taken for granted. We were born to it. We think that it’s part of our natural spirit, which it is. Freedom is. But what we all have come to know — at least I have over the course of my 20 years — is that I have been made aware that there are people who don’t like what other people say.

    For it offends them or whatever reason. And rather than just leave it alone, turn it off, or run away, there are people who want to silence those who say things that they don’t agree with. And that is an ever-present danger, and it is something that we all have to be vigilant against. And the best way to engage in free speech is to engage in free speech, to not be afraid of what somebody is going to think of what you say.

    I got a piece of advice when I moved to Sacramento in 1984. That was actually my first full-fledged talk show, and the guy who took me out there — who has passed away, Norman Woodruff, one of the most important people in my career — said, “Look, we want controversy.” I was replacing Morton Downey Jr., who had been fired for telling a “Chinaman” joke and not apologizing for using the word “Chinaman.” And one of the city councilmen was Tom Chinn, and the joke was about him, and Mort refused to apologize. So it was curtains. I didn’t know that ’til I got there, and they told me, “We want controversy, but…” (audience laughter) “We want controversy, but don’t make it up. If you actually think something — if you actually believe it, and you can tell people why — we’ll back you up.

    “But if you’re going to say stuff just to make people mad — if all you want to do is rabble-rouse, if all you want to do is offend and get noticed — that’s not what we’re interested in and we won’t back you up,” and I’ve never forgotten it. The best way to practice free speech is to do it and to not care what people say. The best way to get the people off your case who want to shut you up is to keep shouting louder. Well, we do it within the context of something I think a lot of people need never to forget. We’re broadcasters first. The evolution of talk radio has been amazing in the 20 years. When I started in 1988, I was it. And the only cable network that mattered was CNN, in terms of news. The rest was CBS, ABC, NBC, the newspapers and the magazines.

    And look what it’s become now. A hundred and twenty-five radio stations were doing talk in 1988. Today it’s 2,000, or maybe more. If you want to hear a discussion on Chinese opera, you can. The idea that points of view are being censored — that points of view are not being heard, that somebody can’t find what they want to listen to — is ridiculous. There’s more available now than there has ever been, and it’s because the Fairness Doctrine was rescinded, but it was because everybody’s interested in the whole concept of free speech. Now, we do it within the context of broadcasting, and those of us in broadcasting, I think, should never forget that we are broadcasters first. It’s easy, given the evolution of what’s happened to us, to think that we are issue oriented, involved in the public scene, the political scene, and that that is something that will define our success.

    Mistake. None of us in this room can raise anybody’s taxes. None of us in this room can send anybody off to war. None of us in this room can make sure that somebody gets elected. And none of us in this room can make sure that somebody gets defeated. Our job is to attract an audience, to hold that audience for as long as we can. (audience member snapping a photograph) Excuse me. (smiles) Did you get it? (audience laughter) Do you want a pose shot? (poses) (audience laughter and applause) Thank you. Attract the audience. We hold it for as long as we can for the purpose of charging confiscatory advertising rates. This is a business, and that’s how we stay on the air. We don’t stay on the air because we lead millions of people to a specific end or result of an issue.

    We stay on the air because we attract an audience. If we don’t attract an audience and don’t hold it, all the rest is academic. Now, despite what people — some of you in this room, outside the room — might think, that is always my first, foremost objective: the business side of radio, the acquiring an audience and the holding it. I was first and foremost — it’s a close second, by the way, now, don’t misunderstand. But if I were first and foremost interested in moving public opinion to the point that I was affecting policy, I’d get out of radio and I would move to Washington where that happens. I don’t want to do that. I don’t want to live in Washington, and I don’t want to get involved with policy. I love what I do. I have never been happier.

    I am one of the most fortunate people on the face of the earth. I’m doing what I was born to do. I have had people that I’ve worked for who have been just fabulous, who got out of my way, let me try it the way I thought it ought to be done. They invested trust and faith in me. As our business goes forward, you have arguments, “Well, there’s too many syndicated programs now. There’s not enough local talent. We don’t have the local programming. We’re not giving an opportunity for local hosts to develop.” There may be some truth to that, but the way to find — no matter where you are, regardless how much syndicated programming you take, you still have local hosts somewhere.

    And it is a concern building a talent base, the bench that’s going to take over and keep this business thriving. Now, based on my experience, you find somebody who really loves this — and I’m talking to program directors and general managers. Find somebody who really loves this, who you can’t keep out of the radio station, who you can’t kick out of the radio station. Get out of their way for a while and let ’em see what happens, and you find out what happens. The only way you’re going to find out if true talent exists is to let it blossom. We have the perfect vehicle for that. Radio. I’ve done television and I’ve done radio — and radio, to me, is incomparable and irreplaceable. The other night I was on Hannity. I did a two-part interview on Fox.

    Nine out of ten e-mails: “Gosh, you looked good.” Didn’t even hear what I said. (audience laughter) “Yeah, you looked good.” I’ve never had anybody listening to me on radio say, “You know, I wonder what you were wearing when you made that brilliant point” that they can cite word for word. Radio is intimate, spoken-word radio that captivates the audience. You own that audience member. It’s not Muzak. They’re not doing anything else. This is direct, hands-on. This is primary listening. This is not secondary. They are listening to you if you’ve captivated them. That’s why talk radio, as an advertising vehicle, surpasses anything else. The host has credibility, captive audience; audience loves the host, thinks the host tells the truth. Host advises a product is worthwhile, product moves off the shelves.

    Bingo, success. I don’t know about you, but that’s what keeps me on the air. Not what I think about issues. Not what I think about who the president is or what he’s doing. That matters; it’s a close second, don’t misunderstand. But we’re in radio. We’re broadcasters. We have the opportunity to move more people in a substantive way for the good of the country because of that intimacy that radio affords, that television doesn’t. Television provides the pictures. Radio doesn’t. The host either paints them or the listener paints the image him or herself. But once that starts happening, you’ve got them locked. Television, people sit there and watch it as a sponge, just soaking it all up, paying half attention to what they’re seeing, very little attention to what they’re hearing. Radio provides an entirely different opportunity and reward.

    And the thing that makes it work is free speech. Don’t be afraid of what somebody else thinks. It’s just words. They can’t hurt you. I learned… It took me about three years. One of the toughest things I had to learn as a human being. I had never — growing up, nobody who knew me thought I was a racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe, nor did anybody hate me. (audience laughter) Except some old girlfriends (audience laughter) and now three ex-wives. (laughter) But nobody hated me. Nobody hated me, until I started on the radio. Then statistically, I’m told, half the country hates me — and I had to learn how to take “hate” as a measure of success. None of us are raised wanting to be hated. We all want to be loved. We all want to be adored. We want everybody to like us.

    In fact, so many of us want everybody to like us, we’ll go out of our way and be who we are not trying to figure out who they want us to be, and then we try to be that. That means you lose who you are. You become phony. That’s what happens if you start responding to critics. For all of you on the radio, we’re all going to be criticized. We’re all going to get ripped to shreds. We’re all going to be compared to a bag of manure, the only difference between the bag and us is the manure. We’re all going to have that said about us. But we know in our hearts whether we’re being honest with the audience. We know in our hearts if we’re being honest about what we believe and what we care about. And so, don’t give anybody the power to offend you.

    You turn that power over, and you’re giving away who you are. You’re giving them way too much power. We have so many special interest groups in this country based on being offended, and that’s led to whole groups of people thinking that they’re victims of an unfair, unjust society– in the greatest country in the world, with more opportunity still today than ever before in human history. And every day in this country… Paul Harvey used to say this: “Every day in America is better than the day before.” It still is the case. We can help make that remain true by focusing on our free speech and our job and our responsibility. Michael, thank you very much for this award. I’m very honored to have it. (audience applause) It’s great to be here, folks. (audience applause) Thank you. And all the best to Talkers magazine! (continued applause)
    END TRANSCRIPT

  9. hypocrisy! says:

    To all those who are going to loss focus about the real issue (the Genava, mesira etc…) and are going to start complaining about “lashon Hara” and fairness etc… all that Hoces pokes…

    I say this…
    This is the height of insult here. I’m sorry, Sean. I just want to jump on this so badly because this is so — talk about arrogance. Talk about insult. I mean to segment out Americans who dissent from this administration, to segment out conservatives in this country who have a different philosophy or view from this administration, and labeling them as terrorists and then to call into question the service of the men and women who are right now standing on that wall defending our freedom and linking them to terrorism while you refuse to call the terrorists — the real terrorists — terrorists, to me it’s the height of insult…

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: