What is Rabbi Hertz Frankel trying to say?

Pages 66-67 of Ami Magazine issue 54.RabbiFrankel

Needless to say I was surprised to see the Rebbe's picture gracing Ami's pages last week. And, נאך, the "Principal" article! נישט שייכות צו זאגען! So I began to read. At first we read about Sender Deutsch being G-d's gift to humanity. OK. I get that. No mention of his nasty side, but that's to be expected. He was his friend, after all. But then he goes on to say how he regrets never having met the Lubavitcher Rebbe, and my ears stand on end! So I continued to read, and I came out scratching my head, because it seems at one point that he had a "gotcha!" moment where he "catches" Rabbi Hodakov with an untruth. And they make a "grab" out of it in the article as well. So did he regret not meeting the Rebbe because he could make the same point to the Rebbe directly, or was it because he wanted to really meet the Rebbe and bask in his glow? Anybody care to comment?

As was made very clear in the comments, the whole story makes little sense. Not that we doubt that RHF visited with Rabbi Hodakov in 770, but the dates don't match. There was no proclamation about Tefillin till years later. AFAIK the battles against נתוחי מתים were in the late 50s, and מבצע תפלין was not announced until 1967/5727. And even on that the Rebbe didn't sign anything. The קול קורא was signed by many Rebbes and Rabbonim, including many Litvishe Rabbonim and Roshei Yeshiva, but it was done "לאור קריאת כ"ק אדמו"ר מליובאוויטש שליט"א" and the Rebbe's signature did not grace that page. So where does that leave us as to the veracity of the article in particular?

Principaled Lies?

No, this is not a personal attack against Rabbi Hertz Frankel. It is what you might call simple question that comes to mind when you read his weekly article in Ami magazine. It may have reached the climax - or low point - depending on how you look at it, this week, with the bombastic headline you see here. In honor of 21 Kislev we were all told that we all owe a great deal of gratitude, and we're forever indebted to the Satmar Rov. That were it not for him we'd all still look like we did in the 40s, the 1940s, that is, and we'd eat Hershey's chocolate and Entenmann's cakes. Our wives would not wear sheitlech, even our Roshei Yeshiva's wives, and our daughters would go to mixed beaches. Shtreimlach? מאן דכר שמיה. Children speaking Yiddish? fugedaboudit!!! We had RaSHBI in our midst and we never even knew it. So you might say that after seeing that article I had seen enough! I just wonder why RHF didn't send his own kids to that euphoria if he loved it so... Is this his opinion since when he worked there, אין בית רחל, or has this been happening to him only lately; this idea that it's all Satmar, and always has been/will be. I've read the series that RHF writes since its inception. Not every week, but often, as often as I see it, which is often. I try and buy the magazine every week when I do the grocery shopping. Until this week the series didn't garner any negative responses, at least we didn't get to see any. [Now, in this week's issue, one week after the issue discussed here, Ami went ahead and printed a letter to the editor which took RHF to task for printing what they saw as untruths. So it seems like I'm not the only one who sees the series what it's really for.

Question 2 is where does the editorial board - notably the published, Reb Yitzchok Frankfurter - stand with all the Satmar pushing that goes on EVERY, SINGLE, WEEK. No, I do not expect to see a PR piece from Lubavitch every week, and I would be surprised to see an Agudah/Torah U'mesorah/Chinuch Atzmai piece every week, Avi Shafran not withstanding. So why is Satmar allowed to have one that is repackaged as memoirs? At first glance it would seem that the reason is RYF's allegiance to Satmar, which is fine. His family is very close to the Rov there. I have no issues with it. I'm not here to call him out and to "expose" anything. That's not what I do here. But then we need to remove the mask. If all RHF has to say about his tenure in BR of Williamsburg is that the SR was the Savior to Yiddishkeit post-WW2, then don't make it about being principal. Then, if that wasn't enough, Frankfurter starts being all diplomatic and makes sure to plug both Satmars. As if. C'mon, don't insult our intelligence, brother! If you want your magazine to be a cut above don't talk down to us. Otherwise you're no better than the others, and we know that if that were the case there'd be no need for Ami in the first place, right?

Pages 84-87- Ami-issue 50.Rabbi Hertz Frankel