Letters to the editor
Readers respond
Baffled by supporters of Summer Lee
It is truly sad that so many people vote along party lines instead of looking at the issues. Summer Lee has sponsored many antisemitic causes, issues and statements (“Summer Lee co-sponsors series of anti-Israel resolutions,” online, March 6; this issue Page 8). This is so ironic in that she represents Squirrell Hill, which has a large Jewish population. I am completely baffled by her and the support of her constituents. Like many politicians, she speaks out of both sides of her mouth!
Politics are complex and emotional. I think for each issue, one needs to look at what is actually being said instead of employing a rubber stamp that says, “This representative is from the Democratic party and I am supporting it.” We are given the freedom to choose and so many do not choose, they just follow like sheep. What a shame!
Deborah Rotenstein, MD
Jerusalem
Palestinian pain, Jewish pain
I felt deep pain and sadness when I read “Shiri Bibas, and sons Ariel and Kfir, memorialized at Squirrel Hill gathering” (March 7). A friend of mine lost two grandchildren at the Nova music festival. When I watched the filmmakers of “No Other Land” (a film about the history of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict told from the Palestinian perspective) deliver their acceptance speech at the Oscars I also felt deep pain and sadness, but I also felt anger. When the Palestinian filmmaker spoke of the need for ending the “ethnic cleansing” of the Palestinian people there was loud enthusiastic applause from the glittering audience. When his Israeli filmmaker partner spoke of the horror of the Oct. 7 butchery and the need to bring all Israeli hostages home there was lukewarm, tepid applause from the crowd.
Why is Jewish pain of less value than Palestinian pain? A documentary of Jewish pain would be a documentary without end. Palestinians were killing Jews in Palestine throughout the 1920s, culminating in the slaughter in Hebron in 1929. Back then Palestinians weren’t being oppressed by a powerful Israeli army. The state of Israel didn’t exist.
People who support the Palestinians and condemn the state of Israel should learn their history. Not that it would help. Antisemitism knows no logic.
Mitchell Nyer
Pittsburgh
A call for communication, not ‘gloating’
Regarding “Proposed anti-Israel referendum fails,” (online, March 7), I am glad to see that no one is proclaiming “We won” as they did a few months ago when the ballot petition for boycotting Israel failed in court. Indeed, no one “won,” either time.
Common sense and the common good have prevailed: The ill-advised ballot initiative will not be coming before the good people of Pittsburgh. I suppose those who took the petitioners to court might say “We prevailed,” but that seems somewhat embarrassing and wrong-minded, rather like gloating.
The court case from the perspective of the Jewish organizations was based on the assertion that the petitioners’ actions were inappropriate, that the result would possibly be against the law and the effort was likely poorly executed. It was not because the petitioners are evil, or criminals, or need to be punished. As I understand it, they ultimately stipulated that their petition was deficient.
Let’s not be boastful. While we are trying to reach out to people and educate, any proclamation of winning seems like we are saying “we” are so much better than “they” because “they” failed. That is not helpful.
When the Federation is quoted as opining that “Their failure to secure the necessary … signatures sends a clear message,” I find that, too, boastful. The message is not that clear, and we have a lot more work to do.
We are living in a time in which many of our friends and colleagues believe what they read. In this case they have read that Israel is filled with genocidal colonialist maniacs, that there are open-air prisons oppressing persons of color. Have we changed their minds with this court case? No. We may even have incited the petitioners to go further the next time; we may have increased the dearth of understanding among us.
Had the referendum ended up on the ballot, we would have had an uphill battle explaining to the public why it was a bad idea.
Yes, it cost time and money to take them to court. But isn’t it better to consider that expenditure an investment toward educating Pittsburghers about the subject at hand? Now let’s take it further, toward living in harmony with our neighbors and friends, toward increased understanding. Let’s continue to minimize the gloating and get to work communicating.
Audrey N. Glickman
Greenfield
comments