KIDNAPPING, TORTURING NYC RABBIS SHOULD BE "HATE CRIMINALS"
By Rev. Ted Pike
22 Oct 13
Recently the FBI announced arrest of 10 Ultra-Orthodox NYC Jews in a bizarre kidnapping/torture plot against Jewish husbands who refused to grant divorces to their wives. The alleged ringleaders were rabbis Mendel Epstein, eminent Ultra-Orthodox advocate for rights of Ultra-Orthodox (Hassidic) Jewish wives, and Martin Wolmark, head of a yeshiva (Jewish school). Eight other Hassidic Jews were also arrested.
Hassidic Judaism emphasizes women’s primary value as child-bearers. Hassidic families commonly number 10 or 12 children. Ultra-Orthodox religious courts favor the husband's rights over the desire of many Hassidic wives to stop conceiving.
Husbands claim a religious right—under natural law, the Bible, and the Talmud—not to grant them divorces. Rabbinic courts are extremely unlikely to provide sanction for divorce (called a "get") without the husband's approval. Separated without a get, a Hassidic ex-wife cannot date or remarry and is likely to suffer ostracism by the tightly knit Hassidic community.
Terrorist Attacks on Recalcitrant Husbands
Enter rabbis Epstein and Wolmark and their eight burly Jewish "persuaders." The U.S. attorney says that over the past 20 years many Hassidic wives have come to Epstein for help. Recently an FBI agent, posing as such a truly desperate Hassidic housewife, obtained this response from him: Epstein said he and Wolmark "get “tough guys” who would use “electric cattle prods, karate, handcuffs and place plastic bags over the heads of husbands” in order to get what they wanted" [the get].
Epstein and Wolmark allegedly charged up to $100,000 to kidnap and torture a husband. Epstein would then take his statement from the battered husband, releasing his wife to the presiding religious court, which would grant the divorce. The U.S. government said up to 20 husbands have been coerced through torture over the past 20 years to grant such divorces.
Is this a Hate Crime?
The U.S. government has not described this as a possible hate crime. Why not? It is certainly very similar, and far more injurious, than the "hate crime" committed by 15 Amish men and women who forcibly cut the beards and hair of their theological rivals several years ago. In that case, the government contended that the religious rights of the victims were violated because of the spiritual significance the Amish place on beards. By shaming them, the 15 beard cutters were guilty of bias motivation, plus conspiracy and assault: a "hate crime." The 15 defendants were sentenced to between one and 15 years in federal prison under the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act. (See Convicted Amish Are Not "Hate Criminals"")
Already, R. Joseph Gribko, assistant U.S. attorney for New Jersey, seems to dismiss the possibility of a hate crimes charge. He says the defendants were motivated by money, not faith. Yet, if the Amish could be prosecuted for attacking fellow Amish because they assaulted the cherished religious beliefs of their victims, these Jews should be as well. The 10 defendants inflicted violence and insult upon one of the most cherished religious beliefs any husband can have: his right, having been united by God as one flesh in marriage, to remain so. The fact that the defendants were motivated by money is irrelevant, not disqualifying this as a hate crime.
Yet let me make a prediction: There will be no hint of hate crime charges against Epstein, Wolmark, and the eight Jewish "tough guys." Jews are exempt from hate crimes charges under the Jewish Anti-Defamation League's state and federal hate laws. ADL has boasted that its "legal experts" wrote the federal hate crimes law, passed by Congress in 2009. (Since I widely publicized this admission at ADL.org, it has been removed yet is in my article "Twisted Justice in Amish Hate Crimes Conviction.")
As Attorney General Eric Holder revealed in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2009 Jews are viewed as historic victims of white male Christian civilization, along with Muslims, blacks, Latinos, Native Americans, homosexuals, and women. As a result, if they commit a hate crime, they will only face civil charges, not the possible triple penalty that can be meted against a white male Christian who commits exactly the same offense.
America: Land of the Legally Privileged?
Such disparity and blatant discrimination against the majority of Americans is a powerful reminder that "equality and justice for all" is an illusion from America's past. There is no equality under the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act or any of the US hate laws in America, in Canada, or overseas which ADL/B'nai B'rith International have orchestrated and preside over.
Conviction of the 15 Amish earlier this year confirms that America now has two legal systems. One has traditional penalties for the privileged; the other has grossly punitive, excessive penalties for the majority.
This is not what our Founding Fathers intended. This is not "equality and liberty and justice for all." This is not even what Attorney General Eric Holder, speaking to an ADL national convention this spring, hypocritically described when he said the highest ideals of America are "equal justice for all."
Instead, America is laying a concrete, virtually irreversible foundation, not in Sharia law, as most Christian/conservatives are taught to fear, but a new two-tier legal system. It is a twisted, discriminatory mockery of justice that is "good for the Jews" but bad for the goyim.