More untold stories in San Francisco’s Jewish past
Thank you for your cover story “Time-tripping through San Francisco’s Jewish story” (Sept. 2). While John Rothmann’s fascinating anecdotes about San Francisco’s elite German-Jewish families — Levi’s Jeans founder Levi Strauss and the Haas, Stern, Lilienthal, Hellman, Bransten, Zellerbach and Sutro families — are an indelible part of the city’s remarkable Jewish history, they comprise only one of its many diverse facets.
Notably, it was a Sephardic Jew from Georgia named Washington Bartlett who, in 1846, while serving under Capt. John Montgomery, changed the city’s name from Yerba Buena to San Francisco. Bartlett would later become San Francisco’s 20th mayor from 1883 to 1887, and then California’s first (and so far, only) Jewish governor in 1887.
Later, Eastern European Jews fleeing the shtetls poured into the city. By the late 1800s, San Francisco boasted America’s largest Jewish population outside of New York.
In 1916, a poor immigrant from central Poland named Aaron Silver settled in the city. He came to America in 1909, worked as a cattle driver in Texas for three years while saving up to bring his fiancée to America, and then nearly lost her when she was given the opportunity to sail to the United States aboard the Titanic (fortunately, she turned it down to take an earlier ship). In San Francisco, Aaron worked as a mattress maker, supporting his wife Regina, their children Ruth and Sam, and his father-in-law Hersh Isaac Stetiner. Aaron died in 1948, beloved by those who knew him but otherwise forgotten. Yet he, too, is part of San Francisco’s Jewish story, and while there are no stadiums or towers or gardens that bear his name, his legacy continues through his great-grandchildren (my children), who are fifth-generation San Franciscans.
Stephen A. Silver | San Francisco
This year, no guilt over not ‘loving’ my parents
The article by Lisa Braver Moss helped me to deal with this year’s Yizkor (“At Yom Kippur: Remembering my parents, but not with love,” Sept. 30). It never meant much to me (I actually felt guilty) because I, too, didn’t have “loving” parents. They were not abusive, but from my teenage and adult years, they clearly did not approve of me or my choices. There were many abusive words thrown at me. When they loved my children, I wanted and needed an apology for many things, and that never came.
I will say Yizkor this year and just ignore the loving part, and not feel guilty about it.
Thank you, Lisa.
Anonymous | Sacramento
Kerry’s ‘concern’ a diversion from real obstacles to peace
The “extremely agitated,” voice-raising, “sternly” critical Secretary of State John Kerry might do well to direct the thrust of his “continued concern and passion” away from nonexistent “new Israeli construction in the settlements” and toward the massive diversion of funds in Gaza to build terror tunnels and other preparations for the mass murder of Israelis (“Support Israel in ways that reflect personal values,” Sept. 30).
Perhaps he could focus his efforts on the obstacle to peace Iran has created by rearming Hezbollah in flagrant violation of U.N. Resolution 1701. Hezbollah clearly intends to wreak more terror, more hatred and more destruction, Iran is happy to fund it, and Secretary Kerry averts his eyes.
Only Israelis, those whose everyday lives are so frequently impacted by terror and random missile attacks, can legitimately address the issues Israel faces.
Whatever one’s personal values, it should be clear that the greatest obstacle to peace is not emanating from Israel. “Official Israeli causes” understand what is needed to prevent the destruction Israel’s neighbors have in mind for her. They understand the situation better than any group or individual located thousands of miles away ever can. “Official Israeli causes” deserve our support.
Julia Lutch | Davis
Settlement growth blocks Israel’s path to peace
However you view the path to a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, there is one fundamental position that Israel must make clear: Is the control of the West Bank in place to preserve conditions that can lead to a negotiated solution for disputed territory, or is its true design one of territorial expansion?
Ongoing settlement activity in the West Bank damages the perception of Israel’s commitment to a two-state solution, and current activity by the Israeli government has reached a point that the State Department recently published a strong condemnation, and accused Israel of “a pattern of provocative and counterproductive actions that undermine the prospects for a two-state solution.”
The time is right for the American Jewish community to take a strong position to advocate that Israel freeze all settlement expansion activity. If this path is not reversed in the near future, Israel will be in danger of losing its existence as a Jewish and democratic state, and security in the region will be ever more difficult to achieve, which is detrimental to U.S. interests.
Don Raphael | San Francisco
Unilateral action by Israel? More like unilateral surrender
Israeli Maj. Gen. Amnon Reshef’s “Security First” plan for unilateral action to end the Israeli-Palestinian stalemate sounds more like a plan for unilateral surrender (“Israeli generals initiate own security plan, urge unilateral action,” Sept. 23). He calls for Israel to retreat from Judea and Samaria and depend on walls for protection, while allowing the Palestinian culture of hatred and death to continue unabated. His call for Israel to renounce its claim to “Palestinian land” is a call to renounce Judaism itself.
Reshef leads a group of over 200 high-level security officials who endorse his plan. Is it possible that such distinguished security experts could be wrong on such an important issue? Yes, because they don’t know that the world is governed by God, rather than Man. If God wants us to have the land according to the promise He made to our forefathers, all we have to do is take it with boldness and confidence, and our enemies will scatter in all directions. But if we’d rather surrender the land than fight for it, we may be judged unworthy to possess any of it, and could lose all of it.
The way for Israel to achieve security is not by retreating, but by advancing, by ruling out territorial concessions, increasing the pace of settlement, and no longer seeking the well-being of our sworn enemies.
Martin Wasserman | Palo Alto