For at least 13 years, neighbors say, the overgrown land behind the Shop-Rite parking lot in Borough Park, Brooklyn, has been a headache. Among many complaints made to the city, they pointed in 1994 to fire damage to an old warehouse at the site, in 1998 to the danger that the warehouse roof would collapse, and, just this fall, to homeless people slipping into the burned-out shell of the building.
Now, neighbors have turned their ire toward a building proposed to replace the warehouse: an 8-story structure with 145 apartments, underground parking and a commercial component that could be a hotel. The proposed building is shorter than a 12-story tower the same developer had proposed for the site. But in a public hearing Nov. 14, a roomful of members of the area’s Orthodox Jewish community voiced continuing opposition to it.
“This community does not want this project,” said Hershel Waldner, one local resident. Noting that the developers are from outside Borough Park, he added, “If they would have proposed a project like this in their neighborhood, they would have been tarred, feathered and run out of town on a rail.”
The proposal would require a zoning change because it is higher than the surrounding buildings, most of them single-family houses. It had earlier drawn attention because one of its developers was Mendel Brach, who had been accused of breaking city zoning rules on a building in Bedford-Stuyvesant. Mr. Brach had also built a structure in Williamsburg that was widely and derisively known as “the finger building” because it is much taller than its neighbors.
The owners of the warehouse site are now listed in city documents as Eli Dweck and 886-894 Dahill Road L.L.C. Howard Hornstein, a lawyer for the developers, said that Mr. Brach’s share had been sold to the Wydra family, which redeveloped the Gretsch Building in Williamsburg.
Mr. Brach’s departure may not matter, said Wolf Sender, district manager of Community Board 12: “It wasn’t controversial because of the developer. The controversy here was the size of the project.”
Mr. Hornstein argued that the building would bring needed apartments to the area. But opponents say it would do little to help ease neighborhood crowding because the area’s Orthodox Jews, many of whom avoid elevators on the Sabbath, would be unlikely to live in a tall building.
In an interview near the building site, Steven Gershbein, a lawyer for the neighborhood group Concerned Citizens of Borough Park, pointed to crowds of children emerging from nearby religious schools.
“The amount of vehicular traffic is going to make it unsafe for the little ones coming home from school, and is going to make it into, basically, Manhattan,” he said. “I’d love to live in Manhattan, but these people have chosen not to.”
(Source: NY TImes 11/25/07)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
57 Responses
I think it is unbelievable the response from the local Boro Park community concerning this issue. I am familiar with that vacant lot and among other things it attracts rats never mind the homeless.
The Boro Park community years ago was able to get zoning variances so they are able to build the homes of the size they wanted without realizing that the sewer, water, and street size was for residences the tenth of what now occupies all those lots. Men ken nit tanzten auf tvei chasunos.
It’s about time normal zoning should be introduced. All the new buildings are building countless apartment WITHOUT any parking spaces or garages. The neighborhood is already so congested so why isn’t there a mandatory parking space law in affect. All the new houses build up to the sidewalk or even further robbing the people of their walking space and making the place look like a real “CONCRETE JUNGLE”. Enough is enough there should be some simple zoning laws…………
Who are these hypocrites that complaint about getting new housing with parking spaces?
Last time I checked, BP has a major shortage in housing. Just ask anyone in the market looking to buy or even rent an apartment.
We should be rejoicing & celebrating with a L’chaim, that finally someone is willing to build apartments & provide parking spots with them. Let’s go out & celebrate that relief is on the way.
No wonder developers or running away from BP, if this is the kind of support they’ll receive.
Just like Flatbush Bubby said: Men ken nit tanzten auf tvei chasunos.
Housing, especially the affordable kind, is in great need. It just doesn’t seem that this will solve the affordability problem, and it will add more problems to a very congested “bottleneck” area between Flatbush and Boro Park.
While housing is necessary, this project, if approved, doesn’t look like the kind that will solve the community’s housing shortage. And overconstructing in an area that can’t handle it will put a tremendous strain on the entire surrounding area.
This particular site also doesn’t have very good access, as many of the streets are irregularly shaped, one-ways, dead-ends, and multi-directional intersections. This will further strain the surrounding area, whether they include parking spots on this particular site or not. This neighborhood simply can’t handle this kind of project.
RE: FLATBUSH BUBBY: Your logic is as poor as your grammar, syntax and punctuation. Where is the nexus between the negative impact of rats in an empty lot and the even worse impact of a fifteen story building in a neighborhood – composed of both Jews and Gentiles – opposed to tall buildings? Additionally, a variance to build closer to a property line is not the same as a variance to build fifteen stories.
RE: JOLI: I agree with your statement that the neighborhood already is overcrowded. Relative to the issue of zoning laws, I have four huge volumes of such laws on my desk right now. The goal must be to get developers like Brach, Kahan, Welz, etc. to comply with said laws.
Re:flatbusher: Tall buildings might not be a problem for the residents of Williamsburg; they clearly are for the majority of the residents in that section of Borough Park. Relative to your second comment: Making a change in a situation is not always bettering that situation.
RE:YBbp: I agree with you! We want developers who are going to destroy the neighborhood to run away.
RE:DR: Although I can not say that I am one hundred per cent “on all fours” with you, you not only appear to understand the issues here, but your arguments are both cogent and coherent. Your comment is indicative of both insight and the ability to see beyond your own four cubits. Kol HaKavod.
RE:Steven L. Gershbein Get the facts straight. btw your command of the english language is very impressive even though you dont understand the real issue.
TO BBsimcha:
I learn far more from criticism than from praise. I implore you to be a part of the edification of yours truly and explain (what you obviously believe to be) the real issue. I thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation and alacrity.
Mr. Gershbein, you perhaps are not capable of taking a objective point of view because you may be a direct party that will benefit from the building on aforesaid location.
There is a very real connection between a variance for building up to the property line and building a fifteen story building. The sewer and water mains were installed when Borough Park was a tenth of the population size currently. Although there have been no impact studies done on the sewer, parking, etc. conveniences since the variances were given, it may be because of politicians who do not want the truth to be told.
So, Mr. Gershbein, sir, is it possible you would be willing to do all of us the favor of coming down from the legal perch you have installed yourself on. I see you are illustrating an old Chinese proverb; thou prosteth too much. Are you perhaps the developer who is in charge of the project or the lawyer who is handling the title? And, do you feel your bottom line, i.e. your income is threatened by the intelligent and articulate bloggers on Yeshiva World? Please come down so we may confront you in your face pal!
TO: Flatbush Bubby: Ignoring your extremely poor spelling, grammar, syntax, etc., I will address my comments to the substance (to the extent I can make same out from the drivel you call writing in English) of your comment.
1. I do not understand what you mean by “come down” and other similar comments. I give my real name; you hide behind a silly pseudonym.
2. Anybody capable of reading on a third grade level can see that I am directly involved. I REPRESENT A CIVIC ORGANIZATION opposed to this project. The NYT article specifically names my client. REREAD THE ARTICLE (or, in your case, perhaps, have someone read it to you).
3. What does “handling the title” mean? If you are attempting secundum artem, you truly fail to do so with any significant measure of accuracy.
4. I would prefer to engage in intellectual debate than name calling, but you tried to drw first blood. Remember, as my father (a nationally reknowned columnist often says, we can disagree without becoming disagreeable).
5. I welcome your “confront[ing me] in the face” if that means non-violent discourse, but please kindly share your real name and your real connection to this issue (as I have done).
6. I agree that Borough Park has grown. Praise The Almighty for that and for the fact that other neighborhoods which have seen expansion geographically as well as demographically include (but are not limited to): Flatbush-Midwood, Kensington, Far Rockaway, Kew Gardens, Forest Hills, Bensonhurst, Williamsburg, and Pelham Parkway.
3.
Mr. Gershbein: Pretty interesting approach to come on a blog and fight with those who won’t disclose their true names. By translation it’s non-intellectual. Sort of childish actually. A dignified lawyer like you should stick to the real issue. Winning your case.
We love to come here and voice our anonymous opinion. We don’t promote a true intellectual outlook. It’s our sentiments, emotions and opinions. So please don’t come here and take the high holy righteous road that everything is cut and dry.
Dear Mr. Gershbein,
According to the NYT article the developers / owners involved are Dweck, Hornstein & Wydra. Why do you need to mention other names on a public form? I don’t think this is the norm here on YW. And please don’t judge someone’s logic by their spelling or grammar. Keep personal insults out of this site.
Mr. Gershbein,
All your sophistry will not win you any hearts or minds. Instead of attacking a Grandmothers writing skills, why don’t you first correct your own. There is no word the English language as “reknowned”. Perhaps you were speaking Ebonics. If you meant renown, I’d hardly consider daddy Stanley writing in a locally freely-distributed neighborhood paper such as the Courier-Life to be “nationally renown”.
Furthermore, considering you just admitted above you represent your “clients” on this issue, I’d hardly consider the previously unknown Concerned Citizens of Borough Park a “civic” organization but rather a political front-group. Civic organizations represent citizens, not paid “clients”.
Mr. Zalman:
You are clearly correct; I used a non-word. That is the result of attempting to dictate and work on a file at the same time. Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa.
Re my father: In the past twenty days, he received letters in response to his columns from Texas, Arkansas, Florida, California and Illinois. That would appear to me to be someone who is read more than locally. Additionally, most Courier-Life Publications are NOT “freely-distributed” (or even distributed gratis, which is probably what you meant). Moreover, my father has written of a trip he took with President Carter for Newsday. Nonetheless, I am pleased that he has a friend on this site who knows him well enough to refer to him using only his first name. (And if you are his personal friend, I would like to think of you as my friend.)
Re Concerned Citizens: You may call the group whatever you wish, but the fact that you did not know of it until the NYT article merely makes it “unknown” to you.
For your edification only: Not all clients are paid clients. A large percentage of what I do for Borough Park groups as well as individuals is performed pro bono.
Finally, I am sure that I have committed sins in my life larger than mere sophistry. I do express my gratitude to you publicly, Mr. Zalman, for correcting my English.
To YBbp:
Kindly reread what I wrote. I stated that both her grammar AND her logic were inadequate. Therefore, I was not making any conclusions about her logic based on her grammar. It is not my intention to insult anybody. (If you show me (citing with sufficient specificity) that I violated any halachot, I will use this same forum to do tshuva.) I will, however, defend the residents of Borough Park from Sinat Hinam. Re my mentioning the Welz family: They are also attempting to build in Borough Park. Moreover, they are also seeking a variance to build a structure larger than nearly of the residents (both Jews and non-Jews) of that block desire to see built on their block. I cite this as one example of developers trying to erect edifaces that they would not allow in their backyards.
I thank you for disagreeing without becoming disagreeable. I could learn a great deal from your derech eretz. Thank you again.
Well Steven (now that we are friends), I only made an issue of your English skills since you were the first to question another’s writing capabilities. Since this isn’t an English course, nor is language the issue at hand it was an unfair (not to mention uncivil) point for you to bring it up in a discussion.
Regarding your father, there is this wonderful tool on the internet called “Google”. It can do wonders. The same is true for your “civic” organization. Its first reference ever since Google has begun indexing the internet (which is a long time), has been last week. The NY Times story is the first major media to mention it (last week). Perhaps it existed on some legal document for some time prior to this Shop Rite development issue, but I’m sure you can elucidate everyone here to the “history” (if it has one) of the Concerned Citizens of Borough Park.
Dear Mr. Gershbein,
I too received letters from those places. Its good to know that I will be nationally renown once I finish writing about a trip I took with Dwight Eisenhower back in Normandy.
Why don’t you address the question here if your work on this development issue for Concerned Citizens of Borough Park is being financially compensated or if, as you implied above, it is being done pro bono for a “civic organization”.
Thank You
My Friend, Reb Zalman:
It brings me pleasure to hear from you again. I agree to refrain from correcting your English (and that of others) due to the fact that, as you stated, this is not a course in English. You may consider yourself at liberty to correct me if you feel a need as I feel a need to learn from any individual who has something to teach.
As to my father, good friend, your comment was non-responsive. I am certain that you knew that. You are clearly an intelligent individual with formidable skills on and with a computer.
And as to Concerned Citizens of Borough Park, Inc., you have inspired a truly wonderful idea. I am considering bringing up the possibility of our members jointly writing a book on the history of Borough Park with a chapter dedicated to the role our organization has played in the recent history of our neighborhood. Thank you for the germ of the concept. I appreciate your assistance, my good friend. Perhaps we should meet some time for coffee and conversation.
Mr. fahrfrumt:
You misread both my words and my intent. Anonymity is sometimes a good thing. The Talmud tells of circumstances where a man should dress in dark clothes, go to another city and remain anonymous. What I was reacting to from this rather pedestrian lady was the fact that she engaged in an unprovoked and somewhat ridiculous attack on my character. She implied that I was distant or hiding from average folks and that I was a secret agent for a developer. (Other than G’dolim, we are ALL average folks.) I pointed out that I gave my real name and I detailed my interests and where I was NOT to be considered impartial. She should not throw stones while living in a glass house.
As to me invading your territory, you need not worry, Mr. fahrfrumt. I discussed (through an intermediary) your blogging behaviour and the behaviour of your brethren with a Posek (decider of Jewish Law) and his eitza (advice) was that I probably should not participate in this activity. I will be seeking a p’sak (a definitive ruling). If I am given a p’sak that this is forbidden for and to me, then you shall be rid of me and you can return to your non-righteous road (your words) of “sentiments, emotions and opinions” (again, your words).
Just for the record, I prefer the criticism of my new friend, Reb Zalman and YBbp to you(r) referring to me as “dignified”. I learned from something from their criticism.
On a final (for now, anyway) note, I disagree. Sometimes things are black and white and those who search for a gray compromise are doing a disservice to both the American concept of justice and, far more importantly, the halacha (Jewish Law).
Mr. Hill Of Beans:
Since I promised my good friend, Reb Zalman, that I would refrain from correcting (the)grammar, syntax, puntuation, etc. of the bloggers here, I will merely request that you state with specificity what you believe to be the issue that needs to be addressed. It is difficult to determine from your missive what that issue, in fact, is.
If the issue is whether I am paid to represent Concerned Citizens of Borough Park or not, then I will address that issue now: More than 95 % of the hours that I put into the organization is rendered pro bono. I do, however, allow myself to reimbursed if I expend sums of money for postage and for retaining experts (architects, zoologists, historians, etc.). One of the goals of the organization is to work with builders so that construction may occur with the minimal loss of trees (and the flora and fauna in that part of Brooklyn in general – I apologize that that goal is not as exciting as political battles, but it is what it is). That particular goal requires advice of and from experts in pomology and horticulture. I concede that is not terribly interesting or important, but it is what the members want.
Where did you serve with Ike?
Where can we learn more about “Concerned Citizens of Borough Park”? I live in BP for over 29 years, but never had the occasion of hearing from or about them. Is this org. specifically on zoning issues, or do they get involved in other community related issues (I.E. Pigeons or Flyers etc. 🙂
My last line in #25 “I.E. Pigeons or Flyers etc” was in ref. to news items that appeared lately on YW about a concerned politician representing our community see article: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/article.php?p=11705
It did not intend nor assume that “Concerned Citizens of Borough Park” is involved with issues like this. It was just poor Humor on my side. I apologies if anyone involved in “Concerned Citizens of Borough Park” was offended by this.
New item on the Pigeons story here: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/article.php?p=12255
More on the Flyer issue hers:
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/article.php?p=6431
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/article.php?p=11917
Mr. YBbp:
I appreciate your query. I will suggest that we establish a committee to prepare press releases and, perhaps, to prepare a pamphlet describing the organization and the history of same at the January meeting.
Re the issue of pigeons: We have never directly addressed this in the past (to the best of my knowledge), but I will be happy to look into it. We have hired experts to examine the trees growing in Borough Park and, in reports, mention was made of the birds indigenous to this part of Brooklyn.
Mr. Gershbein,
Unfortunately, and as you are well aware, you are beating around the proverbial bush in not answering some of the pointed questions posed to you here. It is obvious that this so-called civic organization was formed for this particular development issue. If that is not correct, please stop beating around its non-history with plans to possibly write its history at your next meeting in January, and advise us of at least ONE issue this so-called civic organization has previously been involved with prior to this development issue. And please be specific.
Also, you continue to engage in sophistry with your mentioning that you will not mention someones English writing faults. Just drop that issue, as you yourself are guilty of this complaint.
You further beat around the bush in responding to the financial aspect of this. You were asked if you are compensated, yet you reply you are reimbursed for your postage expenses and expert retention. Reimbursement is not compensation. Do you deny being compensated on this issue?
I say unfortunately in all this because I’d venture to say that most of the commentators criticizing you likely agree with your goal on this issue, but are taking you to task for your tactics.
Otherwise I would be pleased to join you for coffee with Zalman.
Mr. Joseph (No-Last-Name):
It would be my pleasure to have you join me and my very good friend, Reb Zalman, for coffee as I find you quaintly amusing.
You appear to be so easily distracted. It is silly that you (and a few others) want to make me the issue. The issue is (and I will spell this out as directly and simply as possible): There are (at least) three major (I understand that that is a subjective term) development projects planned for this section of Borough Park (from 49th Street through 62nd Street and from 18th Avenue through 21st Avenue). The individuals residing (homeowners, renters, etc.) on the blocks of these respective projects are, to a large degree, against these projects. These individuals come from various backgrounds and ethnic groups. They comprise Jews (Hasidim, Litvaks, etc.) and non-Jews (of Italian descent as well as some Hispanic and, at least one Moslem who is indirectly involved and lives elsewhere). Some of these individuals are involved with Concerned Citizens of Borough Park and some are not. There is at least one other organization of which I am aware as that organization contacted me and asked if I would meet with them and address them on issues of community activism directed towards halting the conststruction of multi-story (one diagram/plan I saw was for a fifteen story structure) buildings in this section of Borough Park. There are also individuals who do not belong to either group interested in preventing fifteen story buildings from being built ANYWHERE IN BOROUGH PARK.
My compensation (or lack thereof) is not the issue. You are being silly if you obsess over that. Nonetheless, I will state that I have expended between 125 and 150 hours on issues related to the three development projects and I have been compensated for 2.5 (two and one-half) hours. That would place the number of hours which I have performed work pro bono in excess of 95 % of total hours expended. It is my intention to continue to expend hours pro bono as I truly believe in much – although not all – of what these people desire for their blocks. I have NOT sent or prepared an invoice for any of the work I performed (other than the 2.5 hours aforementioned supra). I hope that we can now return to the real issues facing Borough Park.
Finally, and with a pentitent’s heart, I deeply regret (I suggest you research the etymology of the term “penitent”) having criticized any person’s lack of skill in constructing a sentence, a paragraph, an argument in English. It brought me down to the level of many of the bloggers here and did not aid in defeating developers who, for a dollar or two (or twenty million), would destroy a fine neighborhood.
When are we having that coffee?
Who will be paying this coffee? Is someone trying to bribe us? Please be careful.
I am familiar with the terminology without the need to resort to any research.
How about sometime on Monday at Mendelsohn’s?
I hope Mendelsohn’s meets your expectations. Otherwise we can think of something more upscale.
Still waiting to hear back from you.
To YBbp:
I apologize for the delay in getting back to you. I have been rather busy helping other Jewish organizations and also dealing with paying clients.
I am both hurt and confused by your message. I am hurt that you would even suggest that I would behave in a fashion less than that of strictly adhering to ethics. I am confused that you believe anybody would WANT to bribe you. In the wise words of Pete(r) Townshend, “Who are you?”. Are you a Welz type of developer (someone who would/will destroy a Jewish neighborhood for a dollar – or millions of them, anyway)? Are you a landowner with eight or ten lots ready to sell to a developer? Kindly explain WHY someone would take precious time to attempt to bribe you? I understand that the internet is largely made up of anonymous people and that people generally do not give their real names so that they can pretend and fantasize being someone other than the reality of the mirror, but tell me, why I would consider wanting to bribe you. I am now intrigued.
Re Comments 33. amd 34.:
If anybody is interested in putting together this meeting, shoot my office an e-mail with a real name and telephone number so that it may be arranged. The telephone number allows us all to stay in touch to schedule this and deal with last-minute changes in schedule. Thank you.
Steven, You haven’t provided us the means to get in touch. Where is your office and what is its number?
Thank You
You are very welcome, my friend (and, please remember, Mr. Reb Zalman counts me as a close personal friend). Anyone wishing to arrange a meeting in a local restaurant to discuss community issues should shoot me an e-mail at: [email protected].
Steven, Now that we are all amicable with each other, perhaps the term “shoot” (an e-mail) is ill advised.
In any event, in order to choose the proper venue we must know what your kashrus standards are. Is it Chasidishe Shechita only? Perhaps Vaad of Flatbush is acceptable? Satmar only? Beis Yosef?
Hi Stevie – Are you from Canarsie High – Class of ’78?
Reb Steven, Which restaurant would meet your standards/requirements/preference?
To Mr.? Miss? Ms.? Mrs.? Confused? ujm:
“Stevie”? Do I know you? Do you have a name or were you only blessed with initials?
Mr. Joseph:
If it disturbs you, I shall refrain from using the colloquial “shoot” when referring to e-mail. Your comment reminds me of the pithy comment of Don Vito Corleone about friends and enemies. After briefly investigating Kashrut issues a couple of years back, I have three comments on that subject: 1. I am not a posek. I am not qualified to give halachic opinions. I am not even an ant compared to the Torah Giants who have been kind enough to give me some of their truly valuable time. I can give you a list of poskim if you need such information. 2. I am not certain that I understand the concept of chasidishe shchita. Does that mean that the cow is makpid on gebrochts? That the chicken wears a shtraimel? I respect minhag, but The Shulchan Aruch does not mandate it and Reb Moshe (zal) did not require it. I therefore do not need it. 3. The O-U is very good (in my opinion) and nearly every Vaad in the New York area does a commendable job. I will eat in most places in Flatbush and/or Borough Park. I will not eat at/in Amnon’s Pizza.
Rabbi Gershbein, I am truly shocked and disappointed that you should publicly impugn the integrity of Amnon’s. I think you should apologize to them and publicly to us.
Furthermore, you ought to try to get a little sense of humor. Its obvious to all (with the apparent exception of yourself) that the folks above were joking regarding the kashrus points i.e. “chasidishe shechita”.
Alright “Steven” Sir, You obviously know me not as all those who do know me almost exclusively by my acronym ujm, a distinction I earned in the service of this nation at a time my identity was not public knowledge for reasons of national security. Although that threat has since passed, my nick has stuck.
Mr. Hill of Beans:
I am uncertain as to why I should apologize to you, but on the very, very low chance your request warrants any serious cogitation on my part, I will revisit the issue during The Ten Days of Repentance.
As to apologizing to Amnon’s: No Sale. If you witnessed what I witnessed, you would not only refrain from eating there, you would consider burning the joint to the ground. Since I am a law-abiding citizen, I am not suggesting you should actually perform that act, but if it did happen, it might hasten The Coming of The Messiah.
Perhaps my sense of humor is too dry or wry for your taste. While I do enjoy The Three Stooges (or whatever or whomever you find funny), sometimes I speak and write with tongue firmly (im)planted in cheek. Maybe that is what I was doing when I wrote of “chassidishe shchita” (or, then again, maybe not). I do thank you for your comments.
I have met real Rabbonim. I am not even a wooden match compared to the blazing forests of Torah that these Giants are and were. I am not worthy of holding the box that contains the sugar cubes for their glasses of tea. Please do not call me “Rabbi” as I feel it diminishes what a real; Rabbi is and means to The Jewish People. If you wish, call me “Shmuel” (and I hope to have the privilege of calling you something other than “Hill et al”).
Post Script: Do you have any photographs of
you(rself) with General Eisenhower?
To ujm (gender unknown, assumed male):
Now that your stint with the CIA or FBI (or as President of Mars) has ended, are you permitted to have a real name? A ‘Nam vet once told me that “the guys that talk didn’t do and the guys that did don’t talk” so you keep talking about being superspy and I’ll be happy to call you “ujm” if that is what you need.
By the way, you did not answer my query.
Mr. Hill of Beans:
Since there are so many who do take Chassidishe Schchita seriously, how would you know that Mr. Joseph was mocking it? Unless you have more than one name….
Not to me Dear Shmuel, but rather to the fine people at Amnon’s who you’ve disparged with your vague innuendo. Please elaborate on what you’ve ”witnessed” rather than hurling ambiguous charges.
In any event, hasn’t he already come? At least the last time I strolled down Eastern Parkway that was the impression I got.
Hillel Shmelka Yeruchem Finkelstein
P.S. Yes indeed. It is of the General, by that time President, in the Oval Office awarding me the Purple Heart. You are welcome to my home office to view it at anytime. It hangs in a 10 X 20 frame in the office right behind my desk. We can have coffee at the same time and reminisce about my experience serving and liberating Europe from the heavy yoke of Nazism.
Mister Gershbein, I most certainly have answered your query. I explained the usage of my initials, I stated you obviously know me not, and my gender is most irrelevant unless you are in shidduchim. In that case, please stick with a proper shadchan as the internet is no place for stalking a mate.
BTW I got that kashrus “joke” too. It was rather obvious.
okay okay will all this childish sniping please cease? can we all act like grownups around here? and i mean everyone.
stop with the silly who’s better at english, the silly sniping at a pizza store and burning it to the ground, the silly banter about “a nam vet”, chicken with a shtreimel, use of anonymity or lack thereof, press releases, civic/political org’s, etc. etc. etc.
oh and btw, if you search google for Steven L. Gershbein (or even plain STEVEN GERSHBEIN in all caps) this Yeshiva World page is the #1 result.
now the whole world can be proud.
To Hill of Beans:
OK, I’ll tell you what I witnessed. The individual who is either the owner or the night-time manager beat up a handicapped individual in front of me and two friends. (The handicapped individual was being rather annoying and would not leave the place.) When I asked him how he could do such a thing, he told me that he was certain this person could do nothing about it. When I tracked down the handicapped person, he was so frightened that he did not wish to pursue it. The Kashrut there is probably reliable. I would rather not eat in a place where someone in authority treats the handicapped like that.
You are a true hero. Anyone who helped defeat the Nazis fought against true evil and I shall stand when you enter the room. It is an honor for me to communicate with someone who does not believe that he is James Bond, but actually IS a Mickey Marcus. You DID while others TALK. While some of the other bloggers are beginning to tire me (as well as bore me), I will respond to you and treat you with the respect that someone of your stature deserves. As an individual who lost relatives in the Shoah, I thank you for the effort you expended and the risks you took. I wish you a Hanuka Sameah and I know that when your time comes, you will be ranked among the Gibborim.
Since I am more than likely quitting this Blog (for numerous reasons), feel free to e-mail at my address (supra) any time your wish. Thank you again for your service to the(se) United States and to The People of Israel and May He Always Keep You Safe.
Did anyone ever consider that all these comments are one big jest?
To Chuck Schwab (at least an interesting pseudonym):
You are a comic genius.
And what makes it any more an interesting pseudonym then Gershbein? Or perhaps better asked, what makes it any more a pseudonym then Gershbein?
Mr. Schwab:
I am somewhat disappointed; you have gone from comic genius to sophomoric silliness. I thought I really found a blogger with something to say. Haval. I bid everybody farewell. I will probably be leaving this blog next week. Hanuka Sameah.
Mr. Gershbein,
I am so truly sorry. Please do forgive me. I meant no ill. I plead with you on my own behalf, as well as all my fellow bloggers above, be us all moichel. Rosh Hashonah will be here before long. Please do announce your love and forgiveness.
From the bottom of my heart and all my soul, yours truly,
Charles R. Schwab
Atherton, California
P|S| A freilichen Chanukah and a gutte kvittel.
P|P|S| Please retract my “sophomoric silliness” label and restore my status as a comic genius.