To the Editors:

I was happily reading the most recent edition of The Commentator, until I turned to page 15 and noticed an article about Rabbi Michael Lerner, editor of Tikkun Magazine in San Francisco. Leaving the bulk of the article aside and without dealing with Rabbi Lerner's views on spirituality, I find it strange that The Commentator would publish such a seemingly laudatory article about a man who continues to condemn Israel's right to self-defense. I must assume that the editors have never heard of Lerner or his views. I will let Lerner's views speak for themselves

In an article about the lynching of the two reservists in Ramallah in October 2000, he writes,

"Yet the preponderance of responsibility lies with Israel and with an international media that continue to obscure the basic realities facing the Palestinian people, and continue to treat the death of Israeli soldiers enforcing a brutal occupation as somehow more outrageous and barbarous than the killing of (many times as many) Palestinian teenagers who we resisting the occupation." (Friday, October 13, 2000, Los Angeles Times)

This statement typifies Lerner's views on the Israeli-Arab conflict. While he is adamant that the Palestinians need to end their campaign of violence against Israeli civilians, and he is probably the strongest supporter of peaceful protest against the Israeli occupation, he equates Palestinian terrorism with the Israeli acts of self-defense. Lerner continues to ignore the obvious fact that the Intifada is a PA sponsored reign of terror, while the Israeli response is self-defense against that terrorism.

Lerner's use of Arab propaganda blaming the violence on Israel's "occupation of Palestinian lands" cannot and will not change that fact.

I hope that next time the editors of The Commentator at least make a note about who such authors are. I'm sure many readers were led to believe that Lerner's magazine really is only a "bimonthly Jewish critique of politics, culture and society," instead of the Socialist, Leftist pro-Palestinian publication it really is. While I realize the article had nothing to do with Lerner's political views, not acknowledging the true nature of his publication is deceiving. Since a newspaper's primary obligation is to inform, I feel that in this instance, The Commentator did not adequately do its job. I'm sure that in the future such oversights will not reoccur.

Nephtuli Taubenfeld
Signed: SSSB '03