Terror by fire: We will replant and rebuild
The horrific fires sweeping Israel are yet another indication of the continuing threat of terror.
Several years ago while traveling in Israel I had the opportunity to visit an Israeli prison. During that visit I met a prisoner who was an arsonist during the terrible Carmel fires. The young man spoke fluent English. He had studied at the University of Michigan.
In a calm and reasoned manner he explained to me that he loved Palestine. I asked him a simple question: “You love the land that you call Palestine and I love the land that I call Israel. Why would you burn the trees that beautify the land that we both love?”
His answer sent a chill through me which I will never forget. “I would rather see the land in ashes than rebuilt by you Jews.”
As the former president and chairman of the board of our regional Jewish National Fund, I believe that we must offer a direct yet simple response. We will replant and rebuild all that the terrorists would destroy. I hope that all who read these words will participate in the vital work of the Jewish National Fund.
John F. Rothmann | San Francisco
The sky is not falling
The Nov. 25 edition was replete and even consumed by articles deploring the presidential election result and the consequent state of the union.
I think I can understand the feeling of Holocaust survivors, but I recommend re-examination of the U.S. Constitution and the implications of separation of powers and strong legislative and judicial governmental branches. The sky is not falling down for Jews, all other Americans and Israel.
Quentin Kopp | San Francisco
Reinforcing fears without facts
I have been reading J. for nearly half a century. It is my go-to source of world news, especially of Israel, humor, insights, events, personalities, opinions. Each issue features great writing and provocative ideas. The week of Nov. 18 is no exception. I was intrigued by details in the feature on tattoos, and moved by Debbie Findling’s essay, in particular.
Overshadowing those was something else that moved me: outrage that the cover story on Stephen Bannon, titled “Cause for alarm?” was so firmly one-sided. I fully expected text to debate whether or not this person was a cause for alarm, using facts rather than a rehash of rumors.
You quoted the cant of prominent and respected liberal watchdog agencies, the ADL and Southern Poverty Law Center. Today, the ADL conceded that it is not aware of any anti-Semitic statements made by Bannon. Will you promote this turnabout as vociferously in the name of journalism?
At the end of the two-page spread, you cited lesser-known sources who suggest, weak-kneed, that we “wait and see,” and give Trump’s team a chance to prove itself. This was followed by a frail nod to the Zionist Organization of America assertion that Bannon has a pro-Israel stance.
Did you not have time — or inclination — to dig a bit into the background of Bannon? There is plenty of information online to suggest that this man is not as much a cause for alarm as your coverage suggests. Shame on you for reinforcing the fears of your readers without facts.
Shirley Ginzburg | Aptos
A response to Federation’s ‘open letter’
To the Federation: I received your “Open Letter to Our Community” and am writing to express my disappointment, anger, and fear regarding the Federation’s deafening silence on the appointment of Stephen Bannon.
The Federation’s “mandate with respect to political matters” is not always upheld. The Jewish Federations of North America has previously issued statements on Iran policy and just recently issued a statement imploring Benjamin Netanyahu to uphold his commitment to creating egalitarian space at the Western Wall, two cases which reveal the inconsistency of your justification for not speaking out against Bannon’s appointment. This refusal is based on an arbitrary notion of neutrality that threatens to do significant harm not only to our community, but also (and especially) to Latinx, Muslim, black, LGBTQ+, indigenous and disabled peoples.
Although your letter refers to tikkun olam, the SFJCF’s inaction intentionally undermines that value. Hiding behind rhetoric of inclusivity and unity belies the reality that the president-elect has threatened various communities in material and dangerous ways.
I am heartbroken that the SFJCF would hide behind the banner of heterogeneity to avoid doing the important work of embodying moral leadership. To your point that not all Jews are on the same side of this debate: There has never been an instance in which every person agreed, perhaps particularly in the Jewish community. Waiting for a green light in the form of consensus is the same as turning a blind eye. It makes us complicit and complacent in an ecosystem where the comfort of the privileged outweighs the lives of those less fortunate. The policy of “neutrality” undermines our community’s values of pursuing justice, performing acts of love and kindness, and recognizing each other’s humanity and vulnerability — values that I learned through Federation-supported education and programming.
The election of Donald Trump is unprecedented and has propelled the world into a state of emergency. This is not the time to rely on conventions that no longer reflect our political reality; it is imperative that the Federation lead by example and not fall prey to bureaucratic influences that obscure the moral imperative to call out hatred and bigotry.
Doria Charlson | San Francisco
Good for Israel, bad for Jews?
Several of your readers have pointed out compelling arguments for having supported Donald Trump (and Stephen Bannon) for president because of his position on Israel. On the other hand, several articles in the Nov. 25 edition make reference to American Jewish fears that Trump has promoted a climate that resembles that of prewar Germany.
In one article, Jonathan Greenblatt of the ADL is quoted as saying, “The American Jewish community has not seen this level of anti-Semitism in mainstream political and public discourse since the 1930s.” We have all seen the swastikas and the Heil Trump salute. Most of us know that in the past year, Jewish journalists have received 19,000 anti-Semitic tweets and emails with Holocaust memes superimposed over their likenesses.
So was our choice to vote for Donald Trump (and Stephen Bannon) good for Israel, but bad for the Jews?
Natalie Krauss Bivas | Palo Alto
‘Heartening’ Trump picks will be tough on Iran
It’s time to move beyond the election and focus on the serious national security issues that the Trump administration and most of the surrounding people would love to see us will face. A good starting point is Iran and the wholly inadequate nuclear deal that President Obama is leaving for his successor.
While it may delay the advent of a nuclear-armed Iran, any conclusion is at best tentative since the deal lacks any semblance of the intrusive inspection regime minimally required to assure Iranian compliance.
The clauses on the inspection of undeclared sites involve a series of cross-communications to resolve any issue. After these exchanges, there is a 24-day waiting period prior to actual inspection of the site in question. Over the long term the deal’s numerous sunset clauses will, in the absence of fundamental change in the nature of the regime, assure a nuclear-armed Iran.
It is thus heartening that Mr. Trump is recommending Rep. Mike Pompeo as CIA director. In 2015, Rep. Pompeo and Sen. Tom Cotton visited the IEAE headquarters in Vienna only to find that there were secret side deals, of which our Congress had not been informed at the time of the vote. Secretary Kerry later claimed not to have read these separate arrangements. These facts speak to the deal’s inadequacy and the incompetence if not cynicism of the administration that negotiated it.
Hopefully as CIA director, Mike Pompeo will be able to assist President-elect Trump work through a series of threatening situations that he will find on assuming office.
Steve Astrachan | Pleasant Hill
Israel should not negotiate with a ‘culture of death’
J.’s editorial calls for a two-state solution, but the only argument it offers is that much of the world views Jewish settlements as an obstacle to peace, and Israel can’t afford to go against world opinion (“2-state solution is still the best and only option,” Nov. 25). In fact, Israel has never gained anything by bowing to world opinion. It only succeeds when it takes a principled position and sticks to it, even if others don’t like it. The Torah itself warns us of the dire consequences of abandoning our religious obligations for the sake of pleasing the nations.
Advocacy of a two-state “solution” is not only a betrayal of 4,000 years of Jewish history, but a capitulation to a culture of hatred and death that shouldn’t exist in the land of Israel at all. A nation that reveres life cannot coexist peacefully with one that reveres death.
The way for Israel to achieve peace is not to seek an accommodation with the culture of death, but to remove it from the land altogether. But in order to do this, it must first reject the liberal delusion that the conflict could be resolved peacefully if Israel would only abandon its religious heritage and make huge territorial concessions.
Martin Wasserman | Palo Alto
When will Muslims go to bat for Jews?
I was pleased to see a headline claiming that Jews and Muslims are “stepping up to the plate together” against bias and discrimination (Nov. 18). After reading the article, I think “Jews going to bat for Muslims” would be more correct. The ADL and the Hartman Institute are going to help Muslims on issues that matter to them. But you don’t say that Muslim groups will help Jews on issues that matter to us. For instance, can you clarify your mention of CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations)? Are they part of this joint effort or not, and have they made any retreat from their well-known anti-Israel stances?
Ilya Gurin
 | Mountain View
How to preserve Jewish values in a Trump-led nation
Explanations of our recent, self-inflicted catastrophe — Trump’s election — are complex. Trump points us to one factor: “I love the poorly educated.” Americans must focus on how masses of people can be so ignorant as to be duped into thinking that the man who voices our pain can improve our situation, despite his almost total lack of concrete policies and specific proposals and his track record of exploiting others’ weaknesses for his own greed.
The educational questions raised by Jewish support for Trump are different. Despite our history as an oppressed minority, some of us are only too ready to abandon the lessons of that experience in return for Trump’s supporting right-wing Israeli politicians. Singling out Muslims for special treatment does not reflect American values. Supporting a bigot and misogynist does not reflect Jewish values, regardless of where he locates the embassy.
When I consider how my Jewish soul developed a visceral reaction against what Trump represents, I think of, among other things, classic Yiddish literature, which has tremendous insights into how to preserve Jewish values when the world undergoes tectonic shifts. I am not so naive as to believe that if Jews simply read a few stories, none would have voted for Trump. But I do believe our identities as “pursuers of justice” (and hence, opponents of Trump) would be strengthened if we had been raised on stories and poems like “Late” (about bending Jewish law to aid a gentile in need), “If Not Higher” (about caring for the poor), “Two Brothers” (about greed and exploitation) and “Don’t Think the World Is a Bar” (about the importance of self-restraint).
In many ways, “mentschlichkeit” and “yiddishkeit” lost out to Zionism and secularism in the intra-Jewish struggles of the 20th century. They should be reintroduced immediately.
Yonkel Goldstein | San Carlos
Give young Mr. Kushner a chance
In response to Reggie Griner’s letter re: Jared Kushner (“Kushner a ‘scion’ of infamy,” Nov. 25), it is curious that among us are those who apparently are not familiar with Ezekiel 18:20: “The son will not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son’s iniquity.”
By all means, let’s evaluate young Mr. Kushner on a basis other than his own actions. Great example of Jewish values.
Evidently some among us are such paragons of virtue that they can throw stones at young Mr. Kushner from their glass houses located in some moral high ground neighborhood.
Julia Lutch | Davis
Calling Trump anti-Semitic shows ignorance of history
While slander has forever been part of political theater, it is downright disgusting to see the articles and letters in J. attributing anti-Semitism to Donald Trump, whose daughter Ivanka converted to Orthodox Judaism and in 2009 married an Orthodox Jew, Jared Kushner. On election night, Mr. Kushner was the telephone gatekeeper, screening all calls, before handing the phone to Mr Trump. Thus, an Orthodox Jew has enormous influence on Donald Trump — hardly a position a Jew-hater would ever permit.
Likening Trump to Hitler requires a consummate ignorance of history. For a decade before coming to power, Hitler railed against Jews generally, and the Jewish citizens of Germany specifically, as the cause of all of Germany’s ills.
In 1961, President John F. Kennedy asserted: “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.” In today’s political atmosphere, Kennedy would be a right-wing Republican.
During the first days of last summer’s Democratic convention, many PLO flags were seen around the venue but not one Israeli flag. Democrats also removed support for Israel as a component of their political “plank.”
Jews need to be much more realistic in assessing the changing tide of America’s political-party agendas.
Fred Korr | Oakland