Purely Commentary
Behold, and see
If there be any pain like unto my pain,
Which is done unto me,
Wherever the Lord hath afflicted me . . .Lamentations, 1:12
So soon after the great tragedy that has afflicted the entire community, involving
so many aspects of confusion in the mind of a deluded youth and the shock from which
all of us suffer, it is nigh impossible to render proper judgment, fully to evaluate the
occurrence, properly to console the suffering families.
It is needless to say that the man who has been so gravely injured is one of the
world's most distinguished Jewish leaders. He is a great rabbi and he belongs to that category
of men who deserve the title leader.
That such a voice should have been stilled temporarily is one of the horrifying shocks
from which it will be difficult to recover—until that hour for which we pray when he will
speak again to us, when he will lead again, when he will continue his great labors for Jewry,
for Israel, for humanity.
The best years are ahead for him. He had only recently given up an important
national post to conserve time for the completion of important literary works. He is under
assignment for the editing of the works of the eminent philosopher, Dr. Hayim Green-
berg, to be published by Wayne State University Press.
It is impossible fully to chronicle the many duties that confront him, entirely to com-
pile the vast number of obligations he is yet to fulfill. There is a rich life ahead for him,
and we pray that we should be able to celebrate with him—on March 30—his 60th birthday.
Then there is the congregation where the abomination occurred, where he preached
so elequently. In this synagogue the charge of hypocrisy was leveled at all of us. But it
Ls from this congregation—from Shaarey Zedek—the synagogue whose name means Gates
of Justice — that the leadership in communal efforts - stems. • It is the membership of this
synagogue that has provided the sinew, the brawn, the means with which to direct and
to finance the most vital movements in Jewish life. It is Shaarey Zedek that has provided
Zionist leadership, that has created direction for the United Jewish Appeal's efforts, that has
contributed toward the serious tasks of assuring race equality in our community.
This is not the time to test ourselves. This is a time to pray for life. But test ourselves
we must and we will — and in doing so we know that the man who was a victim of a sad
act resulting from dementia was greatly responsible for elevating spirituality, for advancing
learning, for encouraaing the enactment of the basic and the highest principles of Judaism
which were assailed by one who was confused by the challenge of accepting the high ideals
inherent in our heritage.
During her saddest hours, when she could have been embittered, Mrs. Adler was
thinking of the poor parents and grandparents of the deluded and demented lad who acted
so thoughtlessly, whose confusion led him to brutality. What grandeur there is in Goldie
Adler's attitude! And how fully it refutes the charge that was leveled at us by the boy who
has caused her and her family so much suffering!
We review the case and we weep — and our sorrow, too, may be ameliorated by her
stoicism. May Goldie, her daughter and son-in-law and her grandchildren be spared further
sorrow, may the rabbi recuperate quickly — then we shall all be spared the agony under
which we await good news about the spiritual leader from Sinai Hospital.
*
The Fragility, the Torment and the Dementia
The tragic deed last Saturday, the ex post facto
statement by Rabbi Adler's assailant about no longer
being able to make "significant creative contributions,"
the reference to "what happened in Shaarey Zedek hap-
pens only once in a lifetime." provide much food for
thought. The Vietnam problem, the "contributions" of a
lad in a life that had just begun for him — these suggest
so many evaluations and devaluations in our approaches
to our youth! Perhaps the statement made to this writer
by Prof. William Haber, Dean of the University of Michi-
gan College of Literature, Science and the Arts, offer
much to describe not only the torment but also the
fragility of the boy who passed on after a week resulting
from confusion. Dr. Haber wrote to us:
I cannot begin to tell you how sick all of us are
about Morris Adler. The tragedy "out of the blue"
stunned everyone . . .
I was startled to learn that two members of our
faculty knew the young lad very well. He was, as
you know, a brilliant student here, graduating with
honors and Phi Beta Kappa. What one of the faculty
members told me is rather interesting. I learned
from him that after the young man's graduation in
1964 he went to Israel. While there he became very
interested in one of the Hassidic sects; which one
and where, I don't know. He developed a tremen-
dous attachment to the idea of a "holy life." He ap-
plied to the University of Chicago Divinity School
for a fellowship in medieval scholasticism. We wrote
very strong letters in support of him, and he got
the fellowship. His involvement in all of these mat-
ters, in "holiness," made him exceedingly critical of
Jewish life in general.' He deplored our secularism,
our involvement in ecumenism, our concern with the
sociology of the Jewish people rather than their
theology. Apparently he saw in Morris Adler the rep-
resentative of all these digressions from holiness.
He could not comprehend Rabbi Adler's concern with
matters like unionism. In brief, when he exclaimed
that we are all hypocrites, he meant that as Jews
we should not be doing these things.
How sad and so terribly tragic. We wrote in
our letter to Chicago about the boy's personality—
how sweet he was and how brilliant. And now we
also know how fragile.
Indeed, we shall have much to think about, much to
• do in the future to guard the brilliant students against
and to avoid the dementia that ends in tragedy — if such
an avoidance is at all possible!
The Civil Liberties Union, Rockwell and the 'Rat Finks'
A Jewish lawyer who thoroughly dislikes George Lincoln Rock-
well and the American Nazis—all Nazis, for that matter—undertook
to defend the Nazi and to secure his release from prison on bail after
his arrest in New York. He aroused anger, another lawyer spat at
him, but Martin Berger holds on to his views that a man has hi ,
rights in court, that there should be no restrictions on freedom 0
speech.
The late Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes had an
interpretation for this type of freedom of speech: that you can not
permit a person to shout "fire" in a crowded theater.
That's what Rockwell had been doing: he publicly advocated the
extermination of the Jews.
Yet, there is a principle involved, inherent in the policies of the
American Civil Liberties Union, not to deprive any one of the right
to express himself. It is an incontrovertible policy which, nevertheless,
needs some reviewing.
For example, in Trenton, N.J., the American Civil Liberties Union
refused to defend the "Rat Finks" whose anti-Semitic songfests have
outraged public opinion.
Where is the line to be drawn?
Technically speaking, Berger is right: if one group is denied the
right to free expression, others may suffer the same fate. But the
others may be the rational, Rockwell and the Rat Finks are the
irrational. ACLU has a real problem — where to draw the line in his
basically superb principle of the right to freedom of speech.
*
*
*
What Fun in 'Sieg Heiling!' . . . As Hitler Had Hoped
A student rector at Georgetown University fell back on an old and
long rejected defense in his explanation of the "sieg heil" cheers and
the Nazi uniform that was displayed at a Georgetown-Columbia U.
basketball game in New York. He said he was taking note of "the
sensitivity of New Yorkers."
Usually, the comment is about "the sensitivity" of Jews. Now it
is about New Yorkers. As if people had no right to be sensitive when
Nazism showed its ugly head!
Isn't is just as Hitler had hoped—that the rest of the world
would adopt his ways?
Whenever there is a sign of Nazism, there should be sensitivity,
and the moment that ends Nazism will have a clearer road. That's the
lesson to be taught the sieg-heiling students and, regrettably, those
who would defend them.
Johnson Administration Charged With lielidions
Bias in Making Diplomatic Assignments Abroad
BY MILTON FRIEDMAN
(Copyright, 1966, JTA, Inc.)
WASHINGTON—The Department of State his finally officially confirmed that it differentiates between
Jewish and non-Jewish personnel in assigning employes to posts abroad.
The Department revealed that Americans of Jewish faith are not sent to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria,
Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq and Libya because of concern over Arab sensitivities. Such a policy affecting foreign
service officers has long been suspected but only recently admitted by high officials.
Department sources meanwhile confirmed that the United States government has asked some non-Arab
states if they would object to American diplomats of Jewish faith. A case in point is Malta. When George J.
Feldman was last year considered for the ambassadorial post, Secretary of State Dean Rusk asked subordinates
to determine whether Malta would object to a Jew. Some Maltese are of Arab descent. But Malta made
no objection. Feldman now serves there as Ambassador.
Some Department officials felt that an "artificial question" had been raised by Rusk, indicating a
hypersensitive attitude of compliance with real and imagined anti-Jewish attitudes.
A long-standing complaint of U.S. Foreign Service officers has been that officials considered for assignment
to diplomatic posts in Israel are asked if they are Jewish. Jews are regarded as ineligible for service
in Israel because the Department fears they may display "dual loyalty" conflicts.
This policy has not prevented the Department from sending Americans of Arab descent to Arab
states, Irish-Americans to Ireland, and German-Americans to Bonn.
The Department offered the unofficial explanation that the Israel government allegedly prefers to deal
with non-Jews because "they display more sympathy and don't lean backward to disprove pro-Israel tendencies
It is also alleged that Jewish foreign service officers prefer other assignments and have not sought postk
in Israel.
Assistant Secretary of State Douglas MacArthur II admitted in a letter dated Jan. 14 that the
Department weeds out Jews from assignment to Arab countries because they allegedly could not effectively
fulfill "functional obligations in the interest of the United States." The letter was addressed to Rep.
Richard S. Schweiker, Pennsylvania Republican:
MacArthur conceded that "while the United States does not normally take into account the religion of its
employes in assigning them for duty abroad, this is regrettably a factor which .cannot be ignored in the
case of certain countries whose policies in this respect we cannot control however much we disagree with
them."
Another Department communication on the subject said that "unwarranted interference in the internal
regulations of other countries by threat or retaliation will often have an adverse over-all effect on American
policies."
The Department admitted that "the United States tries not to assign any employe to a country where he
will be unacceptable to the host government."
Rep. Schweiker said he now regarded evidence as adequate to charge outright that the administration
was guilty of religious discrimination in assignment of personnel to overseas posts. He asked that President
Johnson act immediately to end the practice.
The Congressman said the disclosures revealed a "national disgrace which casts the Administration as
a silent partner in the anti-Jewish actions of the Arab nations."
"By its demonstrated willingness to go along with the anti-Semitism practiced by these Arab bloc countries
when assigning U.S. personnel abroad, the Administration is guilty of following a double-standard, properly
outlawing discrimination by private employers at home but improperly discriminating in assigning its own
employes abroad," said Rep. Schweiker.
He said the United States "should refuse to respect the discriminatory restrictions which these nations
seek to impose, not honor them."
Rep. Schweiker started probing anti-Jewish and anti-Israel tendencies last year when a non-Jewish
cone tituent complained that he had been fired by the U.S. government for refusing to sign an anti Israel
declaration required by Libya. The man had been hired to work in the U.S. Air Force Post Exchange at
Wheelus Air Base but discharged when he said he could not conscientiously sign anti-Israel commitments
that U.S. authorities ordered him to approve in order to appease Libya.
Jewish Campaign
Divisions Go Into Action
2—Friday, February 18, 1966
By Philip
Slomovitz
THE DETROIT JEWISH NEWS
-
A series of campaign meetings scheduled for the coming weeks
have been called, with prominent speakers to evaluate the
major objectives of the 1966 efforts in behalf of nearly 60
local, overseas and national causes . . Plans include the
holding of numerous meetings between now and the end of
March, when the campaign will open officially . . . Detailed
story of campaign meetings on Page 6.