Shmarya (AKA idiot), You give weight to the fact that the abusive, violent secular Israeli policeman claimed that he was attacked/insulted before he illegally beat a religious Jew? You don't write one word about the fact that, even if the secular policeman told the truth about being attacked, he broke the law by continuing to beat the religious Jew after the religious Jew was in custody? Go learn a machloket Shach & Taz and see how far you are from the intellectual prowess of the rabbanim, you moron.

Shmarya, are you losing it? How did "he entered the yard of a Toldot Aharon Chassid" (from your own link) become: "as he tried unsuccessfully to enter the courtyard of a Toldot Aharon hasid?" *********************** "At one point, he entered the yard of a Toldot Aharon Chassid who lives in the neighborhood. Before he entered, more fanatics threw his hat in the air, and trash cans and diapers began flying." http://www.bhol.co.il/article_en.aspx?id=58178

"One of the demonstrators sustained a head injury when he exchanged blows with officers at the site." He fought with Border Police (or stoned them), was chased down and then punched in the head. Posted by: Shmarya Rosenberg | August 16, 2013 at 07:05 PM. So, Shmarya, when a video shows no exchange of blows but only a brutal beating by a chiloni israeli police officer, you assume that before the video started there must have been a violent act by the victim. You also have no problem with the fact that the police officer continued to punch the protester when the protester was on the floor defenseless and again when he was in the police van and defenseless. Of course, you would be bothered by a police beating of a leftist (though the israeli university students, who block roads over negligible tuition increases and demand increased subsidies by tax payers are always left alone to protest for as long as they like). You know, Shmarya, that you simply defend the left and attack the right and couldn't care less about truth. This site is a rag - not toddle off.

Shmarya, where is your proof for "A haredi man injured after attacking Border Police Wednesday in Beit Shemesh." The only video available starts with the attack: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bQy9fVJ2uvs If you don't have the proof, issue a correction and apology immediately. In general, your "journalism" is sloppy. Work on yourself.

Shmarya wrote: Many Egged buses carry widely ignored signs warning riders that “... harassing passengers regarding this matter may be a criminal offense.” ... even nicely asking a passenger to gender segregate, is a crime. At which secular institution did you learn that "harrassing" = "even nicely asking?" Or is there a law that says "even nicely asking a passenger to gender segregate, is a crime" and Egged simply failed to include it in its sign? If so, provide the reference to the law. Otherwise, waddle off the internet and explain to your mother that blogging was never a real job anyway.

Shmarya, now you're a conspiracy theorist, with wild theories about how public companies dispute police reports in order to appease a minority group and cover up for the all important driver whose mistakes must be concealed at the risk of endangering the careers of executives? And sorry large man, the ivy itself, not it's city and no legacy. But right, keep on believing that every frum person is either evil or an ignorant follower of the evil.

Wrong - my education was in the Ivy League. And, at your community college, did they forget to explain that a bus company would not make an official statement about a bus incident without confirming it with the bus driver. After all, when the bus driver in beit shemesh said that there was a request to move to the back, egged supported it, even after the alleged victim said that the woman merely "informed" her and was "kind" to her, facts the Leftist media and your pitiful site left out in order to continue providing 1 sided stories.

Shmarya, I'm going to try to make this as simple as possible. There are 2 versions to the story. You presented 1. You did not mention that the bus driver claims that the attack by the chiloni had nothing to do with seating arrangements. I mentioned the other version. The bus driver was there when it happened. The police were not. The most important version to report was the bus driver's - you didn't, you failed.

Ed – I should add that you misreported what both Mako and Arutz Sheva reported. Both clearly say that police are sticking with their version of events. Posted by: Shmarya Rosenberg | August 08, 2013 at 06:19 PM Are you serious, Shmarya? My post is simply a quote. How could it possibly be a misreport when nothing is added to the quote. The police version is already posted by you, of course. The only thing to add, for the full picture was the version of egged.

Shmarya, your deterioration is epic. Again, the woman reported to YNET that the man did not speak with her and that his wife did not say, as you wrote, "would you mind sitting in the back." She only said what was customary on the 497 line (which you still have not admitted that you falsely wrote is not a line that is customarily segregated by gender). Your mind's inability to distinguish between a white man telling a black man that the front of the bus is for whites and a woman telling a woman that the front is where men normally sit is sad. It is also sad that while you went off the derech, leaving some shabbat observant woman unmatched, and while you knew full well the way women are treated in gender mixed public schools, you claim that the bus segregation by the community (in which men respect women enough to approach them through their families and to not touch them before marriage) is intended to harm women. Again, you know better, but your hate rules what's left of your mind. Go to sleep, selfish boy.

Thank you, Shmarya, for your emotional reaction in place of any kind of intelligent response. A further proof of your lack of concern for truth. Now waddle off large man.

Shmarya, did you ever consider that for every male like you who goes off the derech there is a frustrated frum female who cannot get married because you're too selfish to put H' and family first (not that you're not frustrated yourself). Enough about your unrelated topic of frustration - 1. Moron, it is never illegal to inform anyone of anything, except in Nazi Germany and other socialist states "useful idiots" (as described by Lenin) like your leftist self support. 2. See 1. 3. The woman said she was not intimidated, idiot. 4. It was the chiloni bus driver who made the disturbance, and only the bus driver (who in general is endangering 6 million Jews with his chillul shabbat - and yes, Shmyara, chareidi pedophiles are also endangering the entire countries with their aveiros, except that their aveiros are not celebrated by the community or this website). 5. Correct, some kinayim helped the leftist cause with their behavior, which is why some gedolim have banned their followers from participating in any hafganot. 6. The driver is an anti-semite enforcing thought/speech control and attempting to incriminate a husband that was never involved. 7. You're a confused individual. 8. She never felt in danger but was traumatized by the bus driver's bringing the police to her. Remember, Shmarya, the khmer rouge commies killed the liberals first, becaused duped leftists are considered more dangerous than right wingers who knew commies were the enemy.

"Ed – The original reports all said demand or ordered." Posted by: Shmarya Rosenberg | August 01, 2013 at 03:04 PM So, Shmarya, you keep going by the original reports even after YNet published that the victim herself said she was not ordered, just because you thought it would help you smear the chareidi community. You're are certainly not a journalist. You would have been removed from any respectable publication just as any woman other than your mother would have removed you from her house. "and that "it's customary for women to sit in the back of the bus" which is also a lie."Posted by: Shmarya Rosenberg | August 01, 2013 at 03:04 PM Shmarya, are you willing to put money on what is customary on Kav 497, or is spewing hate more important than the truth in Shmarya's warped mind - reishis chochma yiras H'" - you have no yiras H' and you'll attain no understanding of simple issues, ad cdai cach that you'll support the police state action of arresting a man because his wife informed another woman of a custom which the other woman desired to follow.

Shmyra, If anyone resembling you lied the way you did here, and if their politics were outside the realm of what Leftist thought police consider acceptable, you would call them an obese, worthless basement dweller with no concern for the truth. Since conservatives are more compassionate, it will suffice to note that you wrote, "Ordering Woman To Back Of Bus" after you already knew this to be a lie since you linked to the YNET report stating the opposite: ""A woman came up to me and told me the bus was 'kosher,'" Rosenfeld said, "and I told her I didn't know what that meant. She said it's customary for women to sit in the back of the bus, and I told her I had no problem with that, only that it'd be difficult to move with the kids and my bag. She offered to help me and we moved to the back. "Right then the driver got mad and said he would call the police, and there were a few men there who were looking for some action maybe and they provoked him," Rosenfeld added. "After two stops, police came and arrested the couple. After they were arrested, the police officer came up to me and asked me what had happened. I told him they were making a big deal out of nothing and the couple was kind to me. We eventually kept on driving, and got to Bnei Brak. Later we heard they threw stones." "

Why do the headline and the article not reflect the fact that the doctor is dati leumi person living in a dati leumi yishuv (kochav yaakov)?

Shmarya, I predicted that you would eventually begin attacking conservative Jews (and then Reform & unaffiliated). So why stop with Eisner? How about: The antisemitism caused by the dominance of the porn industry by secular Jews, as reported by anti-semitic hate sites like http://holywar.org/txt/033.htm Or the reform rabbi pedophile caught on one of the first "to catch a predator" episodes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lo-bWWg2pzE Or corrupt secular Jewish Union boss Mark Rosenthal stealing elections and collecting unearned salary: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/labor_big_real_heavy_sleeper_jl3C7gI710FI3XqpEl5o3O Or the secular Jewish top IRS officials using the IRS as a weapon against Freedom of Speech (Shulman, Learner, Miller): http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/05/21/irs-whos-who-schulman-george-miller/

https://www.facebook.com/dov.lipman - Bernie Moskowitz Dov, the coalition agreement that your party signed said that if a chareidi doesn't sign for the draft, there would be economic sanctions. Now, your party says that unless there are CRIMINAL sanctions, you are leaving the government. Do you agree with this? And why the switch? 8 hours ago · Like · 2 Dov Lipman The legal advisors explained that the law would not get through the Supreme Court with financial sanctions because then it is not a law. Furthermore, it is simply not right to take people who have little money and literally starve them. So, the law says that as long as the army meets its goals in the draft then there won't be jail time but if it doesn't then the criminal issue arises. No one wants to arrest anyone. There will be incentives to help entice guys to serve and the goals will be met. 4 hours ago · Like http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/166216#.UaPhw0Bgfvc "Yeshiva students who refuse to appear for military service will not be criminally charged, as had been planned. Instead they will be subject to economic sanctions, losing virtually all government support." http://cbci16.b3.cdn.co.il/article.aspx?id=52066 "Currently it seems that the criminal sanctions against avoiding service will not be included in the final outline, but economic sanctions are expected to be extremely severe"

“It’s Yesh Atid violating the coalition agreement, not Ya'alon. There won't be a coalition crisis unless Yesh Atid wants one,” the Post was told – even though this makes absolutely no factual or logical sense. Shmarya, Reports of the coalition agreement stated, back then, that it was agreed that there would be no criminal sanctions. Then Yesh Atid produced a bill with criminal sanctions. So Yaalon said Yesh Atid violated the agreement. To you, Shmarya, this makes absolutely no sense. As it says, "reishit chochma yirat shamayim..." Shmarya, you'd better take a break from the news and open a gemara.

"Rabin was not killed by a Charedie." The words that inspired the killer were absolutely spoken by one.............several in fact. Wrong. Amir was trained and coached by a secular mosad member, who himself was tried for inciting Amir, if I remember correctly.

Shmarya, Right, say "Haredim Refuse To Work" instead of "SOME haredim continue their Jewish education into their 30s before entering the work force" Don't mention that most haredim leave kollel by their 30s. Don't say of chilonim, "University students refuse to work." And fail to mention how much money those chareidim who pay income tax and the 100% of chareidim who pay real estate (arnona) tax and 17% sales tax are paying for obscene art, PhD subsidization, anti-Israel plays and movies, jail for chiloni teenagers stabbing eachother at nightclubs, etc., etc. Twisting things to make identifiable Jews look bad (with half truths and unequal comparisons like Tel Aviv resident arrested for rape vs. Chareidi man in Jerusalem arrested for rape) are the hallmarks of an anti-semite. In your case, your words are then picked up by the Gentile press where anti-semitism is then generated. Kol HaKavod