Does Lakewood have a shortage of qualified sofrim?
There a Course now in Lakewood for Sofrim by Rav Zeida.
Reb Moshe notified Reb Shnuer not to use Empire, and it was much then, before Yechiel Babad took over. But KCL's bak'shish overrules.
Baptized by CRC?
Empire Kosher Poultry with establishment number P1015
MESORAH
Establishment Number: M1655 + P1655 + V1655
Kiryas Joel Poultry
M31727, P31727, and V31727A
It's not Shaiyish, Not Bais Yosef, and it's not even Glatt.
Regarding SBD Veal, others were instructed by their Hacham to kasher their utensils, R"L
The Israeli Rabbanut will not allow it in any Israeli establishments.
According to the latest from Israeli Rabbanut sources.
The above-mentioned meat should not be considered as GLATT at this time, until the proper changes are made, including Cameras that are monitored online.
We will advise when the changes are in place.
26 Iyar 5784, Monday, 03/06/24
To the Honorable Rabbinical Committee Members:
Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu Shlit"a Rabbi Yitzchak Ralbag
Shlit"a Rabbi Eliezer Simcha Weiss Shlit"a
CEO Rabbi Yehuda Cohen y”u Legal Advisor Mr. Harel Goldberg
y”u
Subject: Plan for the "Les Feyder" Plant in
Uruguay
Due to the unique high speed of slaughter and inspection at
the "Les Feyder" plant, which operates at approximately 120 to 140
animals per hour, a request has been made to establish a program that adheres
to the stringent standards of rabbinical kosher supervision while accommodating
this high speed.
At the committee’s request, I have formulated two possible
plans, with the second being preferred according to kosher standards:
Important Note: This plan can only be executed if all
team members adhere strictly to the outlined procedures. If not followed
precisely, significant kosher issues could arise. Based on past experience, it
has been proven that the speed of slaughter and inspection can reach up to 140
animals per hour in this plant.
To avoid problems and ensure proper adherence to kosher
standards, I suggest the plant operate with six slaughterers divided into two
teams of three each. Each team should consist of two slaughterers and one knife
inspector, with an additional inspector for marking and handling non-kosher or
kosher animals.
Additional Notes:
In prayer that no mishap will occur through us,
Sincerely,
Rabbi Avraham Buchbut Director of Meat Processing Plants and
Butcheries
Dear Rabbi Shain,
KASHRUS ALERT - UPDATE
In recent years it has become common for companies to produce
'prechecked' items with a hechsher, and selling them as נקי
מחשש תולעים, בחזקת אונם מתולעים 'no checking necessary'. Often, these
items are not grown with a special system to prevent infestation [which if done
properly may eliminate or minimize infestation], but is regular produce that
undergoes some form of washing and checking procedure. This includes items that
are מוחזק בתולעים
and are extremely difficult to clean properly [for example: dill, parsley, mint, cilantro, basil, rosemary, kale, arugula, spinach].
Often, the
end product is still infested. These products are available in many local
stores. It is advisable for the kosher consumer to consult with his Rov before
using such products.
An example of such an end product is 'Kosher Checked'
produce, certified by VK [Volover Kashrus], and available in many local stores.
It is also available in Gourmet Glatt [repackaged under Bais Din Minchas
Chinuch], marked as Refresh/VoIover.
The hechsher has been contacted by numerous 
Rabbonim and kashrus experts, and
recently pictures of tolaim found were publicized. It is unclear why the
product is still available.
ועל הציבור להזהר
Chareidim must become Anti-Zionisim.
Chareidim preceded Zionisim by thousands of years.
Therefore, Zionisim must step aside in favor of Chareidim.
Chareidim will step aside for Zionisim located in Uganda, or any other distant non-chareidi country.
Update: produced at Empire, R"L
It's not Mesorah- don't buy it- It's only intended for 5 Town people~
The educated kosher consumer should be aware that not always is the Hashgocha on a product a definite indicator of where the actual shechita took place, therefore we are providing the USDA plant numbers.
Sometimes the number appears on the plumba or the metal seal on the package, etc.
MESORAH
Establishment Number: M1655 + P1655 + V1655
Kiryas Joel Poultry
M31727, P31727, and V31727A
Empire Poultry (Empire Kosher Poultry,
Inc.)
Empire Kosher Poultry with establishment number P1015
|
|
|
I ask the caterer, your Non-Jewish employee went on Shabbos to your commissary, took out his keys and went into the Frig and took out chicken and made fresh Schnitzel on Shabbos, he had his own keys or was it your keys? He said I don't even have keys to the commissary, only the Mashgiach has the keys, but the Hashgocha changed the locks of the commissary.
Therefore, the Mashgiach must have given the worker a key, so what would it help to change the locks?
At Menash's halls the non-Jewish workers have a free rein of the kitchen without any yid present.
The same very popular Lakewood caterer does many Shabbos simchas and he talks his heart out to a Ruv, numerous times the Hashgocha does not send a mashgiach to the Shabbos jobs and I always give them a list enough in advance- He asks the Ruv, is it my fault or the Hashgocha's fault that there isn't a Mashgiach?
The Ruv responded, it's not your fault, but it's your problem!
Question- Any one signed on this obviously inaccurate letter intended to mislead the Tzibur, Are they acceptable for any other shechita?
Ask your Rav.
This Treif issue has allegedly been going on for years
It was distributed to many of the Lakewood caterers among many other ones as well.
This Hashgocha publicized their so called בישול-ישראל potato chips while using 20% בישול-עכו"ם oil.
The Minchas Chinuch Tartikuv had numerous times with the Galil products kosher and non-kosher in the same package or same bin, etc.
There are numerous incidents.
They even don't feel they have to notify and post ads that this item is not kosher. Weeks have gone by since they found out.
As long as Mivakshei Kashrus, Irgun Shiurei Torah, Rabbis Bald, Feingold, Aurebach, Uri Newman, Bengio of NPGS, etc praise these type Hashgochas tells the consumer a lot about them.
In Yudel Shain's home and on his Hashgochas of affairs, there is no Minchas Chinuch/Tartikuv among some others ever used.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZ8Th-2CrhI
Historian- truth V Lies
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVeYUQBhRWA
Background: When Rav Dr. Yosef Breuer, Z”L, announced the establishment of the highly respected KAJ Kashrus, he stated:
“I am founding a kashrus organization that will adhere to basic kashrus standards, without chumras or hidurim.”
He explained his reasoning:
“If one focuses on chumras and hidurim, eventually, there may be nothing left of basic kashrus.”
Then the Chumras and Hidurim are irelevant.
Today, Bnei Torah and Yeshiva Leit seek high-quality products with a reliable kashrus standard—one that maintains authenticity without unnecessary chumras and hidurim.
Tartikuv Minchas Chinuch, Yechiel Babad, et al stands out stands out very much in this are of Chimras/Hidirim, but no basic Kashrus.
How often does a catering hall have the capable manager act also as the full time hands on mashgiach and is able to juggle both responsibilities without a conflict.
Consultant, Not Counselor- by S. N. Busch
During
a recent case in which I was a circumstantial caregiver for an elderly patient
receiving home-based palliative care, the boundaries of medical authority
became starkly apparent. As New York's Medical Aid in Dying Act awaits Governor
Hochul’s signature, questions about how physicians define their role in
end-of-life care have never been more critical.
The
new physician was called in to evaluate the possibility of introducing IV
fluids. After a quick glance at the patient and the data we presented, he asked
to speak outside—and immediately adopted a psychological stance, urging
acceptance of decline and recounting cautionary tales of families who
"forced" care. He dismissed carefully documented observations,
referring to them as "an ICU you have going on in there," and implied
denial. We clarified that the previous doctor had requested the documentation and
asked for it each time he had visited. But the new one stated, "I will
determine… Don't try to be doctors. I am the doctor." The program's fixed
schedule (a physician every X days, a nurse every Y, a social worker every Z
weeks) was presented as immutable. Only after digging in our heels against the
rigidity of the schedule ("... So we let the patient dehydrate until the
next scheduled visit?") and the prescriptive worldview, did he offer a
superficial "We don't give up on anyone…" before leaving.
We
sought emergency care after the patient developed a fever within hours. He
improved dramatically within 48 hours of arrival in the ER, progressing from
unresponsive to communicating discomfort and needs.
Another
case involved a patient with endocarditis who was being pushed towards a choice
between biological and mechanical valve replacements. A cardiothoracic surgeon
was summoned by the internist. He answered all the patient's questions,
especially about the ramifications of each decision, neither of which sat well
with the patient. The on average once-a-decade repeated biological valve
replacement was not an attractive option, and being permanently on
anticoagulants frankly frightened him, given both his tendency to clumsiness
and having lost someone close to him to an overreaction to the same medication
he'd be put on. While he acknowledged that there were no shared genes, the
psychological barrier was present. The surgeon said to think about it. He later
returned, "I just examined your studies – I hadn't examined your case
myself earlier. I believe I can repair your valve." He explained what the
repair would involve, and also shared that we should understand that it was him
and us against the whole hospital. We gave him the go-ahead. Our joint decision
stunned other medical staff, who asked in passing, "So, what did you
choose?" when they saw the patient was post-op — and were shocked when he
said that it was repaired, not replaced.
The
contrast between these two clinical encounters illustrates how the integrity of
medical care depends on physicians maintaining professional boundaries,
offering clear, expert consultation without shifting into personal counseling,
so that patients retain genuine autonomy in complex care decisions.
That
cardiothoracic surgeon did a "world-class" job according to the
patient's cardiologist and internist. The surgeon was essentially acting as an
exceptional medical craftsman. He respected the psychological challenges, and
didn't try to counsel his patient out of them. He also went to bat for his
patient, resolving bureaucratic issues that had delayed the valve repair by
preventing an infected tooth from being treated.
One
physician expanded his medical problem-solving to the point of advocacy, while
respecting boundaries; the other contracted his medical assessment while
overstepping into counseling.
When
patients say, in whatever form, "Give it to me straight, Doc," the
request may reflect a desire for clarity, or for guidance. But it's often
interpreted as a cue to narrow the conversation, or to translate uncertainty
into preemptive finality. The line between clinical interpretation and personal
framing can shift, especially under cultural, societal, systemic, or political
pressures, given the ever-more multicultural makeup of both service provider
and service recipient. That shift is rarely acknowledged when it happens, and
ay, there's the rub.
Physicians
face many pressures: time constraints, systemic demands, institutional
expectations, and patient hopes, in addition to their own cultural and
religious backgrounds that can subtly influence how they present options or
outcomes. Patients sometimes expect or ask physicians to provide guidance on
existential or spiritual matters, but even then, physicians should clearly
direct them to chaplains, counselors, or social workers who specialize in that
support. The goal must remain clear communication grounded in medical
expertise, coupled with respectful acknowledgment of the patient's broader life
context, and appropriate referrals when needed.
And
policymakers should let physicians reclaim what brought them to medicine in the
first place: offering not closure, but care: Medical Aid in Living.
