Beating dead horse of peace negotiations
The “chickens–t” slur directed by a “senior Obama administration official” against Benjamin Netanyahu says more about our administration than about the Israeli prime minister (“White House distances itself from official’s slur against Netanyahu,” Oct. 31). Apparently, the Obama administration is frustrated by Israel’s unwillingness to obediently follow the U.S. lead into the nirvana of the Israeli-Palestinian peace deal.
Unfortunately, this nirvana looks more like a plain mirage, mostly because there are no modern-day Anwar Sadats or King Husseins on the Palestinian side who would be ready to enter into a peace agreement with Israel. The Jewish state is surrounded by Hamas, Hezbollah and Hamas-Fatah unity, who don’t have on their minds a two-state solution but rather a solution without Israel.
This is the harsh reality of the Middle East. Of course, it is disappointing to the Obama administration. But continuously beating the dead horse of negotiations can’t change the facts on the ground.
Whatever stalemate happens to be in the Middle East, it hardly can be transformed into progress by name-calling and insulting the Israeli premier.
Vladimir Kaplan | San Mateo
Cozying up with the enemy
I think we now know the Obama administration’s true feelings about Israel and Netanyahu given the Atlantic article by Jeffrey Goldberg. With administration officials calling Benjamin Netanyahu “chickens–” and making other overtly disparaging statements, uncensored nor denied, we know that at least for the duration of the Obama presidency, Israel cannot expect support.
Netanyahu rightfully concerns himself with the safety of Israel, not this administration’s views. Israel is not alone among our allies in recognizing the two faces of current U.S. Mideast policy. America’s closest allies no longer trust this administration, which seems to prefer cozy relations with enemies over positive relations with allies.
Linda Diamond | Berkeley
Happiness? Forget about it
Rabbi Yisrael Rice says, “We are supposed to be happy. God wants us to be happy” (“Don’t worry, act happy,” Oct. 24). This is a modernistic interpretation of Judaism. Historically, it has been an austere religion, eschewing happiness.
For instance, what is the Bible’s definition of a perfect man? “Blameless and upright, one who fears God, and turns away from evil” [Job 1:1]. Job was not a happy man. He worried endlessly that a calamity of one sort or another would befall him, and it did.
I do not know of a single person in the Bible who was a happy person. Moses never entered the Promised Land as a result of an earlier transgression against God. David’s worst moment came when he was an old man, fleeing from Jerusalem, because his favorite son, Absalom, had rebelled against him. A reader of the “Ethics of the Fathers” realizes pretty soon that happiness is not one of the qualities a God-fearing Jew should strive for.
Joseph Itiel | San Francisco
Corrosive comments
Regarding the full-page “open letter” ads from Susan Koret and the Koret Board in the Oct. 17 issue of J. Knowing nothing of the details of the dispute between these two parties, I find myself highly critical of the personal attacks against Mrs. Koret contained in the board’s letter. While her letter cites misbehavior on the part of the board in fulfilling their appointed positions, she never criticizes their personal characters. The board’s letter does exactly that, committing the sin of lashon hara (evil tongue), one which our rabbinic sages condemned as worse than murder.
Dvora Cohen | South Lake Tahoe
Stop censoring Emma
Concerning “Emma Goldman: still too hot to handle?” (Oct. 17), U.C. Berkeley remains fearful of this influential Jewish immigrant anarchist. The university is defunding the Emma Goldman Papers just as the project approaches completion.
The project has received widespread praise for amassing a mammoth Goldman documents archive, democratizing research by creating a microfilm edition (and soon digitalization), publishing an excellent four-volume edited documents collection, and establishing popular history programs. The director, Candace Falk, has written the pre-eminent Goldman biography.
Why is the university withdrawing support? For slow work, it says. This is not justified, given the project’s scope, productiveness, and the similar time required for similar documentary editing projects (Jane Addams Papers, Martin Luther King Jr. Papers, Margaret Sanger Papers).
This defunding follows a troubling university history with the project. Most notable, during the run-up to the second Gulf War, the university censored the project’s fundraising letter for its Goldman anti-war and free expression quotes. That censorship stopped only after extensive criticism and an embarrassing New York Times article: “Old words on war stirring a new dispute at Berkeley” (Jan. 14, 2003). Thereafter, the university minimized support, and now it would entirely withdraw.
The university, currently honoring the 1964 free speech movement, should do the right thing: Help preserve the rich record of Emma Goldman’s ideas and deeds, including her early advocacy of free expression, through the project’s conclusion.
Kenneth Kann | San Francisco
‘Shame on you, Jewish studies professors’
We have a great illustration of the inconsistent application of academic freedom in the response of the Jewish studies professors to Amcha’s circulation of the list of Middle Eastern studies academics who support boycotting Israel (“Warning of anti-Israel bias is ‘deplorable,’” Oct. 3). According to these holier-than-thou Jewish studies specialists, academic freedom gives the Israel bashers the power to vent their views, but does not allow public criticism of these views.
What chutzpah! What an abandonment of rational thought and democratic values! What academic elitism!
Once the Middle Eastern studies people went public with their anti-Israel petition, they were automatically subject to counterattack. That’s the way our political system works.
Shame on you, Jewish studies professors and your Middle Eastern studies colleagues, for trying to hide behind your privileged positions in the ivory tower.
Al Sokolow | Davis
‘Informative’ financial advice
Just wanted to let you know how much I enjoyed Ira Fateman’s Oct. 3 Money Matters advice column. The advice he provided was very informative, and the way in which it was presented was excellent. Please keep his columns coming!
Jan Locker | Fresno