JCRC Bay Area is causing trouble
The latest brouhaha conjured up by the Jewish Community Relations Council Bay Area is about the California Faculty Association, the union for knowledge workers in the California State University system. In a recent email, JCRC announces, “The California Faculty Association claim that Jews ‘harm working people’ is blatant antisemitism. The California Faculty Association (CFA) is no longer cloaking its bigotry.” (“CSU faculty union conflates state Jewish lobby with tobacco and oil,” Oct. 22)
It is a pretty serious allegation — that the CFA is antisemitic and bigoted — and it’s also scary. But is it true?
The entire affair is based on the text of a questionnaire for candidates for public office who are seeking CFA’s endorsement. Here is the text of the question: “Do you have endorsements or take contributions from groups and sectors like AIPAC/JPAC, the Oil Industry, the Tobacco Industry, police associations, etc.?” In context, candidates would understand that the position of the CFA is that these groups and sectors “harm working people” and that the CFA opposes their activities.
This question may offend you, or it might not. If the JCRC staff believed the question was self-evidently problematic, they would have copied it into their email directly, letting the union’s quotes speak directly for themselves. They included some CFA’s text, but then added this:
“To clarify: CFA is urging candidates to reject money from ‘the Jews.’ There’s really no other way to read the blatantly antisemitic language of this questionnaire.”
What is the purpose of this gloss? Far from clarifying, it obscures. The purpose of this inflammatory copy is to alarm and offend people who weren’t offended by the actual text of the questionnaire. In a way, the purpose is to lie to people who wouldn’t have been offended by the real text. The impact is to cause needless anxiety among Bay Area Jews and to create divisions where none need exist.
The Jewish advocacy organization I desire is one that gives accurate information about antisemitism. Instead, the JCRC is crying wolf, increasing anxiety within the Jewish community and reducing its credibility outside of the Jewish community.
Sonja Trauss | Berkeley
Ro Khanna is no Zionist
Rep. Ro Khanna claims to be a Zionist, yet he casts his political lot with those who clamor for Israel’s eradication. (“Rep. Ro Khanna says he supports Zionism in exclusive interview on Jewish issues,” Oct. 17)
He claims to be a moral leader, but he cannot for himself define what constitutes a genocide. He claims to oppose antisemitism, yet he platforms Holocaust deniers.
His only defense in the Jewish world comes from J Street. All other Jews should take notice.
Sheree Roth | Palo Alto
Rotten trees should be culled
Some people, as the saying goes, can’t see the forest for the trees. Jay Michaelson sees both very clearly.
However, as his recent op-ed (“Trump administration is targeting Jewish organizations — what are we prepared to do?” Oct. 14) proves, he doesn’t seem to understand that rotten or dying trees can infect or damage the whole forest.
Those trees should be culled, not protected.
Jeff Morgan | Berkeley
Evils done in name of religion
I would remind Martin Wasserman (Letters, Oct. 6) of the many evils done in the name of religion, many of them visited on our people. The “word of God” was evoked when Christian soldiers were sent on the Crusades, in the expulsion of Jews from Spain and Portugal, in the Inquisition, in the conquest of the New World, in justifying slavery, even as motivation for pogroms.
Wasserman referred to “core Jewish values.” The Jewish values I was taught were the Enlightenment concepts included in that other sacred document, the Declaration of Independence: that all men (read “people”) are created equal with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I grew up with the idea of tikkun olam, repairing the world, which does not include using our religion, our beliefs, our Scripture as a club to beat other people with or to drive them from their land.
Danny Yanow | San Francisco
Something is wrong at J.
On or about Oct. 7, J. published a letter to the editor in my name. J.’s editorial staff composed that letter from a longer opinion piece I had submitted, which had been rejected for publication. When J. staff presented me with this rewrite, I informed them in writing that I did not agree to its publication as a letter and denied permission to do so. J. published it anyway. The essence of my opinion piece was that legacy Jewish organizations have their heads in the sand when it comes to addressing Jew hatred. Their strategies are not working.
Rather, grassroots organizations like the Oakland Jewish Alliance are doing the frontline fighting and need more support. I didn’t just complain. Casting the problem as a civil rights issue, I provided a detailed plan of action that has been proven successful. In rejecting my opinion piece, I was advised that “it was not directly tied to current news or events, which is one of the first things we look for in opinions of this sort.” I gather the J. does not believe Jew hatred in the Bay Area is a current event. What’s worse, rewriting an opinion piece, in effect, a sanitization of my original, and publishing it in my name when I specifically denied permission, was a gross violation of journalistic ethics. Something is wrong at J. I call upon the editors and the J. board to do some soul-searching.
Mark P Cohen | Jerusalem, Israel