Who cares about Jewish sons-in-law?
How many other readers were as uncomfortable as I was after reading “Battle of the Jewish sons-in-law: Clinton vs. Trump,” in the May 27 issue of J.?
In this sad time of celebrity worship, two more wealthy, privileged members of the investment class are given a once-over for drooling followers of “success.” Was it necessary for JTA to provide the cost of each newlywed’s residence, the level of economic success of each son-in-law?
Even more disturbing was the section explaining the crimes of the fathers of Marc Mezvinsky and Jared Kushner. I could picture this information going viral on social media, perhaps even feeding the timeless anti-Semitic hunger for more reasons to despise Jews.
Marian Blanton | San Rafael
Terrorist T-shirt? Not on my watch
I want to respond to the op-ed piece by Anastasia Torres-Gil about the Friends of Sabeel BDS Conference held in late April at Peace United Church of Christ in Santa Cruz (“At BDS event, Leila Khaled is ‘the magic word,’” May 20).
The conference rules expressly prohibited depictions of violence and weapons; all vendors were informed of this, and agreed to respect it. The vendor in question — obviously understanding the prohibition — then kept the T-shirt hidden. (Editor’s note: The T-shirt depicted terrorist Leila Khaled holding an AK-47 assault rifle.)
I circulated through the sanctuary throughout the conference to ensure that the rules were followed, and I saw no T-shirts such as the one Torres-Gil claimed to have purchased. Our church provided her with a scholarship to attend the conference. She knew who to ask about the unauthorized depiction of violence. Then she displayed the image, and used it to discredit the conference.
Others, eager to come to the conference in good faith and learn about the political situation in Israel today, paid their own way; many thanked us for providing opportunities to hear information and opinions that apparently cannot be expressed in their local synagogues. Presenters were Jews, Christians and Muslims, Americans, Israelis and Palestinians; opportunities for discussion were available.
We had no expectation that every participant would agree with every viewpoint by such a wide variety of speakers. People have different opinions. We were and remain committed to providing a forum where these ideas could be expressed.
Mary Male | Santa Cruz
Moderator, Peace United Church of Christ
Palestinian views are poison to peace
It was disappointing that in her op-ed, Fatima Fettar, the U.S. program officer at the Alliance for Middle East Peace, chose to reiterate a criticism of her group without attempting to provide counter-evidence (“Paving the way for a lasting peace, people-to-people,” June 3).
Fettar quoted my May 20 letter, which cited a report from NGO Monitor noting that AMEP includes some 80 member organizations, some of which “promote agendas based solely on the Palestinian narrative of victimization and completely omit Israeli perspectives.”
Instead of trying to refute that claim, she appears dismissive. She comments on “people-to-people work” in the peace process. “Its mere mention,” she writes, “often elicits responses ranging from confusion to frustration.”
To move toward progress on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, it is vital for these groups to grapple with tough political issues, such as Palestinian claims and boasts that their eventual state will be Judenrein, and Palestinians’ refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state.
I hope that future contributors to J. on the purported benefits of these people-to-people groups will go beyond the feel-good neighborhood block party image.
Larry Yelowitz | Sunnyvale