New outrage
The latest “outrage” by the incorrigible Israeli government concerns the intention of the Israel Antiquities Authority to replace a temporary bridge that substituted for an unsafe pre-existing stone ramp.
This “outrage” is, according to prominent Arabs, including even the “moderate” king of Jordan, likely to have negative consequences for the peace process because it allegedly threatens the al-Aksa Mosque. What? The structure is not even on the Temple Mount, sacred to both Jews and Muslims.
Yes, folks, the replacement of a temporary structure that itself replaced a dangerous ancient ramp is going to affect the peace process? If anyone believes that, there’s a bridge for sale and I have the listing.
Let us remember that it was a similar “outrage” involving Ariel Sharon that Arabs say led to the outbreak of the second intifada, with the consequential loss of thousands of lives and maiming of tens of thousands. Never mind that the intifada had been planned long before and was waiting for an excuse, fabricated or not.
No wonder there’s no peace in the Middle East. It’s the engineering, stupid.
Desmond Tuck | Palo Alto
Diluted message?
The Jan. 19 j. article “Time is on homosexual advocates’ side” concluded with Rabbi Eliot Dorff joking that he really does “talk about other things.”
I always find it interesting when straight people feel they need to clarify their stand on the gay issue by offering this or similar disclaimers. To me, as a gay man, every time I hear something remotely similar to this, it sounds like a cross between an apology and a reassurance that the speaker himself is not gay.
This issue just happens to be in the forefront these days, both in religious and civil matters. May I offer to Dorff and others, with all due respect, if it is important enough for you to advocate for it, don’t offer apologies or reassurances for voicing your opinion; from my perspective, it dilutes your message.
For what it’s worth, I was only 10 when the Civil Rights Act was signed into law, but I really don’t remember white people who supported the signing of the act having to reassure people that they “talked about other things.” But, interestingly, it seems to be that way whenever someone talks about the gay issue. Can we please get past that?
Kenny Altman | San Francisco
Nothing learned?
It’s discouraging to see an online study play a central role in the Conservative movement’s halachic decision-making process (Feb. 2 j.).
The movement’s leadership seems to have learned nothing from their past mistakes of allowing laity to set its religious agenda — this time, online.
This approach may be pragmatic and contemporary but it is not even arguably halachic to pick and choose religious worldviews based on the majority and the “times.”
The survey seems to exist to satisfy members’ subjectively defined needs without regard to the founding philosophy of being committed to halachah even when rules or regulations are inconvenient.
This inconsistency and uncertainty amongst the membership, synagogues and within peoples’ hearts and minds has led to devastating and distressing results. The movement’s traditional Ramah camps and Solomon Schechter schools have become feeders for Orthodox day schools while the seminary has become a lightweight version of the more intellectually honest Reform movement it originally sought to counter.
It’s unfortunate that the final nail in the coffin for this once-promising and vibrant and now fast-declining organization will be its fixation on not more than a handful of gay rabbinical ordinations (right or wrong) over the next decade.
Reuven Kahane | Oakland
Part of ‘folklore’
A small reminder of Homewood Terrace lives on in Davis.
When the home was disbanding, somehow a contact was made with our small group of Jews here as we were embarking on a building project to create the first Jewish presence in Yolo County.
In short, the ark was donated to what was called The Jewish Fellowship of Davis, and was installed in 1972 after being stored in a member’s garage for several years.
In 2004, the congregation known now as Bet Haverim moved to larger quarters and with great ceremony walked the ark to its new home. This has been the focal point of our shul and part of our ‘folklore’ for 35 years.
Marilyn Groth | Davis
Smearing Carter
Neal Sher’s Jan. 26 view on President Carter’s character included a few speculations that might be interpreted another way.
His reference to Carter’s note that the board of the National Holocaust Museum had “too many Jews” might have been the former president’s sensitivity to the need for an ecumenical, even international, board of directors, so that the museum not be narrowed to a “Jewish Issue.”
In light of Carter’s past efforts to make peace work, he is likely to have meant that rather than Sher’s interpretation of bigotry.
A similar choice occurred in Atlanta when Carter solicited members of the
board for the Carter Center. The 14 Jews who resigned, I’m reasonably sure, must have been asked to join because there were “not enough Jews.”
Sher smears Carter’s name by innuendo, assigning Pat Buchanan’s ill-advised actions as though they were Carter’s guilt. Carter’s solicitation of Arab good will gives him credentials that others lack to broker a peace. Pages 11-19 and 200-216 of his book offer a more comprehensive view of Carter’s objectives.
Bernard A. Goldberg | Sacramento
Condemnation?
Two questions for the Jimmy Carters of the Bay Area and world: When will you condemn, in the safety of your home or in public speech or, God forbid, public demonstration against the reinvention of human sacrifice (suicide bombings in the name of Allah, or Moloch?) and the purposeful targeting of civilians?
Gerson Jacobs, M.D. | Greenbrae
Another connection
Regarding your Jan. 5 article on Janis Joplin’s Jewish drummer, Dave Getz, there is one other Jewish connection to Big Brother and the Holding Company. The bass player, Peter Albin (not Philbin, as j. reported), worked in Jewish camps in the mid-’60s.
I met him in 1965 at the JCC Camp Rafael summer day camp in Marin County when he was a counselor and I was a junior counselor. I don’t know whether he has any Jewish background, or not, but he fit in well and seemed comfortable with Jewish programming.
In addition, about 20 years ago, I ran into him at the Starry Plough, a club in Berkeley. There was another woman at the club who knew him from another Jewish camp in the Bay Area.
Barbara Colton | Martinez
Staff lauded
Re “A Damn Good Job” by Raul Gallyot (Feb. 2 letters): In addition to the extraordinary Homewood Terrace staff members Raul rightfully mentioned, let me also mention Goldie Steiner, Velma Willingham, the Hoggards, Norman and Wilma Philpot, Angelo Cincotta and Mr. Kaufmann, and I’m sure that I missed many other fine house parents.
Walter Ballin | Chico
Unbalanced?
Regarding j’s Jan. 26 article “Palo Alto nonprofit works to rebuild Palestinian homes,” I am not an expert on the demolition of Palestinian homes, and after reading this article, I feel no better informed.
What is such a one-sided piece doing on the news pages instead of the editorial page? All it takes is an Internet search of the various organizations mentioned to learn that these are not objective people merely seeking understanding at a grassroots level. These are anti-Israel organizations with misleadingly benign names (akin to the “International Solidarity Movement”).
Here is what a few minutes of searching reveals:
• Rebuilding Alliance: Its Web site presents Palestinians as victims, Israelis as oppressors. It is full of Rachel Corrie-worship.
• Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions: Its front Web page includes articles such as “Ethnic Cleansing and Israel’s Racist Discourse.”
• Global Exchange: Characterizes Hezbollah as a “resistance movement.”
Your reporter does not include any attempt to balance her article with the viewpoint of Israelis besieged by rockets and suicide bombings. Why not? All we get are statistics from these anti-Israel organizations and assertions that the house demolitions are “illegal.” with nothing deeper in terms of analysis or balance. J can do better.
Donald Milenko | Sunnyvale
EDITOR’S NOTE: J. ran the story because many Jews — including an Israeli rabbi — volunteer with the organization.
Disturbing accord
Alan Dershowitz and Michael Lerner have some sharp differences (Two Views, Dec. 8 j.), but also some disturbing similarities.
Dershowitz appears to be a genuine friend and supporter of Israel, while Lerner condemns Israel at every opportunity, citing his “love” of it as a justification. Also, Dershowitz’s assessment of Israel’s enemies is more realistic than Lerner’s utopian peace fantasies, and his dangerously naive delusion that sufficient caring and sensitivity can change Islamic radicals from foes into friends.
However, both men, in their own ways, deny the two central principles that form the core of the Jewish nation: the sovereignty of God, and the truth of the Covenant.
Both think that peace requires dividing the land and creating an all-Arab state in the heart of our historic homeland. And both believe that Israel needs the support of the nations more than it needs the support of the Creator.
This is very unfortunate, because it’s only by adhering to these two central principles and consistently acting upon them, that we can restore our long-lost heritage, prevail over our would-be destroyers, and live in peace, with no need to fear, in the Promised Land.
Martin Wasserman | Sunnyvale
CopyrightJ, the Jewish news weekly of Northern California