Year ends on a sour note
Laced with irony is the Sept. 11, 2015 — yes, Sept. 11 — issue of J.
On page 12 of the print edition is an article about the ability of Americans, in the wake of the American-Iranian peace agreement, to buy Iranian caviar and pistachio nuts. The article says if a person likes these foods, “you’re in for a treat.”
On page 14 is a short news item about Israel’s demise: “Israel will not exist in 25 years, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in a speech to the Iranian people.”
Page 16 features an article about Syrian refugees entering Europe. The article states: “Yet, as many European Jews rush to the refugees’ aid, some worry that letting them stay may contribute to the anti-Semitic violence driving Jews to leave Europe.”
On page 43, there is a letter to the editor mentioning that “news broke that a 34th senator had declared support for President Obama’s Iran deal.”
The comments cited above cannot be considered good news for Jews. For over 1,000 years, Europe has had enough anti-Semitism, and no more is needed. No one knows if the end of sanctions will lead to Iran having more money to sponsor terrorism against Israel. As for caviar and pistachio nuts, Jews might be better off forgoing these foods if Iran uses any new export-related revenue to bring harm to Jews anywhere.
On the Jewish calendar, the year 5775 ended on a very sour note. Let’s hope that 5776 has less irony and more good news.
Richard S. Coleman | Orinda
Not so smart about kashrut
In your Sept. 4 issue, next to the article “Smart eats: how to pack a healthy lunch for your little one,” is a sidebar titled “Simple and healthy lunch ideas.” The last lunch suggestion recommends combining meat and cheese in a sandwich. Such a combination strikes clearly against the basic tenet of kashrut: milk and meat separated. I’ve never noticed any such listing in J. before.
While I don’t expect J. to advocate for keeping kosher, I do expect it not to advocate for a practice so squarely contradictory of a basic Jewish teaching. Do you have a policy about publishing — or not publishing — recipes or food recommendations that blatantly contradict kashrut?
Judy Einzig | San Francisco
Editor’s note: We do have a policy of not publishing recipes that mix milk and meat, but somehow we missed this one.
Setting record straight on Irgun history
In reply to Jean Tome’s letter to the editor (“No longer shocked by extremists,” Sept. 11), I wish to correct her allegation that the Irgun threatened to kill any Jew who betrayed them to the British during the British Mandate. I was already active as a Zionist as a young man during that period (1945-1949). That threat never took place.
On the contrary, if she would go online and Google the “Altalena Episode,” she would find that David Ben-Gurion ordered the shooting with cannons on that Irgun ship when it anchored in Tel Aviv with 940 volunteers aboard with large quantities of arms and ammunition that were badly needed to assist the struggle against the Arab attacks on the Yishuv. The final result was the death of 16 of the volunteers and the sinking of the ship with the loss of arms and ammunitions for the struggling Jewish defense forces. During this period, Menachem Begin, who was on the ship, urged his followers not to retaliate and to enlist in the IDF forces to avoid any civil war.
History should be reported the way it was, and not altered to fit anybody’s political outlook.
Henry Sommer | Burlingame
Under Netanyahu, changes for the worse
In a recent letter (Sept. 11), Jean Tome admonishes readers not to be surprised by recent attacks on Palestinians because “things have not changed at all.” Certainly, since the beginnings of modern Zionism there have always been some right-wing Jewish extremists and murderers. But the Irgun and Lehi were rejected by the mainstream Jewish political establishment, which adopted a policy of havlagah (restraint), i.e. not attacking Arab civilians.
I do not pretend that Israel has been angelic — but even when engaging in morally questionable acts such as expelling Arabs, there was at least a rationale — e.g., eliminating potential safe havens for Arab resistance fighters. (As Benny Morris pointed out, one of the prime issues for Jews during the 1948 war was ensuring freedom of movement, as the necessity of constructing the “Burma Road” demonstrates). Thus, the forcible removal of some Arab populations centers may have been essential. Furthermore, there are always atrocities in war, and the Israeli wars were no exception.
But recognizing injustices that surrounded Israel’s birth should not blind us to subsequent changes. Leah Rabin blamed the Likud and Netanyahu for the environment that led to her husband’s assassination. Netanyahu is now more entrenched than he was then and the resulting environment is more poisonous. That anyone could believe that murdering a Palestinian family furthers the goals of Torah is a new nadir. Although Netanyahu disassociated himself from the murders, it is not surprising that they happened under an administration that won the last election by appealing to racist sentiments, manipulated the deaths of Israeli teenagers to popularize the last Gaza war, and has been lax in prosecuting perpetrators of anti-Arab violence.
We must recognize the direction the current government is taking Israel and do all we can to support political and social organizations that oppose that direction.
Yonkel Goldstein | San Carlos
Orwell couldn’t have said it better
Welcome to the Orwellian world where defeat means victory. Witness how the administration is happily celebrating the Senate Democrats’ mastery of collecting 42 percent votes in the Herculean efforts against the majority of the senators intended to reject the Iran deal.
As indicated in the Sept. 12 Wall Street Journal article “Pact,” the White House was able to stymie the bipartisan resolution of the Iran deal’s disapproval by combining its forces with the San Francisco-based Ploughshares Fund coalition, which included J Street representatives, a former Iranian government spokesman and a number of U.S. diplomats who talked privately with the Iranians.
And of course only in the Orwellian world can one proclaim that he/she is on the winning side when, according to the most authoritative opinion studies by Pew and Rasmussen, the support for the Iran deal among Americans is only 21 percent and 32 percent, respectively.
In this Orwellian world, AIPAC shouldn’t hang its head and retreat in sorrow. There is nothing wrong with being on the side of the majority here in the United States and there in Israel. That is what AIPAC is all about: highlighting common values and interests between the Americans and Israelis, and strengthening their ties. There is nothing wrong in pointing out the flaws in the Iran deal, which can lead to empowering Iran in its march toward a nuclear bomb. And it is only right to demonstrate that the Jewish historic loyalty to Democrats has limits in these changing times.
Vladimir Kaplan | San Mateo