Purely Commentar Separation Principle Must Not Be -Tampered -With - There has been a difference of opinion regarding parochial sehools' and the support sought for them by religious movements. The attempt again to introduce Bible reading and prayers into our public school systems proves the validity of the firm position taken by all but a very small group of Jews against any attempt to tamper with the principle of Separation of Church and State. Just as school prayer could 'tie -a foot in the door" to introduce other methods of abandoning religious freedom • in this country by en- forcing religious principles on an approved legislative basis, so, also, support for religious schools could be only the beginning for a wide open door for an abandonment of the basic principles of freedom for all faiths through an ideal that bans state inluence upon or relation- ship with religion. The day school idea has gained ground• in this country, and for the first time the Synagogue Council of America, acting in behalf of all religious Jewish groups, has endorsed the need for day schools. But just because children in day schools will not have their education financed by state or government becaute they will no longer be in the public school system does not justify support for parochial school pro- grams. Such support definitely would mean "a foot in the door" of scrapping the Separation idea, and lovers of freedom must band together always to oppose such intrusions into our liberties. The unfortunate debate in the U. S. House of Representatives on Monday, the defeat by so_narrow a margin of a measure that could undermine the basic American principles of personal freedoms, go to prove that the battle to prevent the undermining of a sacred American idea has not ended. Since there is always the danger that even the most liberal of men may be. misled by proposals like the one that was de- feated, the educational campaign against repetition of what had happened must begin anew and must be conducted daily The congressional vote of last Monday presented many puzzles. The Michigan delegation was split on party lines — Republicans — all except Rep. Donald Riegle of Flint—voting for the voluntary prayers in the schools amendment, the Democrats opposing it. It is something to think about in relation to the need of alerting all members of Con- gress, to an understanding of principles on, which there are such sharp divisions. The Panic-Striking in Our • Midst • American Jewry is under diagnosis. College professors who are on the lecturers' circuits have found our intellectual capacities waning. The synagogues, we are warned, are mere "service stations" and are not fulfilling their duties to their congregants. Now comes an emigre from Russia, a man in whose behalf there has been more shouting than for any other Russian Jew who has escaped from the oppressive airs of his native land and tells us that we are too silent. The new issue of Nefesh, the University of Michigan student paper, features its main story under the heading: "Mikhail Zand Stirs Ann Arbor: You Are the Jews of Silence." There are many silent Jews. There are inactive Jews. There are young Jews for whom the synagogue is a "service station." There are the others for whom we have one hope: they should not be frightened , out of their loyalties by either the panic-stricken or by those for whom \ criticism is more the essence of life than the realism of truthfully practical men. Simon Kuznets—Yiddish-Speaking Nobel Laureate Another Jewish name has been added to the list of winners of Noble Prizes. Simon Kuznets, who returned in July from the faculty of Harvard University, was awarded the economics prize. He is the second to win the prize in this category, Prof. Paul A. Samuelson of MIT having preceded hirn a year ago. A bit belatedly, we learn that Prof. Kuznets has strong Jewish affiliations. Not a religious Jew, he has nevertheless devoted himself to Jewish causes, he has visited Israel 17 itmes, and he takes a deep interest in Israel's scientific accomplishments. What's more—he knows and speaks Yiddish and loves a good Yid- dish-flavored story. He adds another feather to the ca pof Yiddishists! (It has not been fully established whether the latest Nobel Prize winners—Dr. Dennis Gabor and Dr. Gerhard Herzberg—are Jews, but it generally believed that they are. The list of Jewish Nobel Prize winners is growing!) With regard to at least one of the two latest Nobel Prize winners, this news story from the Technion may help clarify his background: "Dr. Dennis Gabor, whose selection as winner of the Nobel Prize for physics was announced in Stockholm on Nov. 9, delivered the 1965 Joseph Wunsch Lecture at Technion-Israel Institute of Tech- nology, Haifa. The Wunsch Lecture has been an annual tradition since 1963. Dr. Gabor's subject was: 'Inventing the Future.' His lecture was delivered on May 30,'1965, before the board of governors of the Technion and a selected audience. The lectures were endowed by Dr. Joseph W. Wunsch of New . York, honorary president of the American Society for Technion. Other Wunsch- lecturers at Technion have been: I. I. Rabi, Sir Ben Lockspeiser, Sir Eric Ashby, Arthur Kantrowitz, H. Bentley Glass and. Raymond Aron." 'Dr. Gabor won the Nobel Prize for his work in holography, a process of making three-dimensional photographs. • • • Chinese Policies . . . Prejudices Without Reason Chinese anti-Israel literature arrives in Israel regularly, by regular post, with Chinese stamps. But when Abbe Eban sent a cable of good wishes to the Peking government on the occasion of its admission to the United Nations— Israel having voted with the majority—the cable was returned. The reason that was given was that there are no postal agreements or links between the two nations. Apparently it's a one-way postal path. If' it's hate of Israel, it finds a way, but a good will message in the other direction is barred. That's what we call prejudice without reason. • • • By Philip Definition of. Human Values Needed for Those Who Believe Israel Needs Their Consent to Survive . . . Separation Principle Endangered by Prayer Seekers SkIMOVitZ: _ Israel's "Right to Live" and an Editorial Writer's Error in. Failing to Accept Existing Realities Let's give the editOrial writer for our morning newspaper the benefit of the doubt. Let's say he has a right to his opinion about the great achievements of Secretary of State William Rogers who brought peace to the Middle East with his cease fire plan. (Let's not forget that'there are many factors that contribute toward that • greatztaccomplishment: the inability of Egypt to conquer Israel, the prosperity that the cease fire brought to 'Cairo, the great desire among Egyptians for an end to the war. So it wasn't Rogers' genius alone that gave such a wonderful respite to the Middle East. Israel and the Egyptians had something to do with it.) Let us say that the Free Press writer is right in maintaining that Israel should give a bit more. (The facts: Israel - has offered to withdraw military forces a distance from the Suez Canal and to permit Egyptian civilian technicians to do the necessary restoration work. There was a condition; Egyptian troops were not to be allowed to cross the canal in order to assure complete disengagement of combatant forces. Israel asked, in order to assure proper negotiations—and direct talks, if possible—that there- should be an unconditional continuation of the cease fire. But Sadat's reply—is it for his militants' consumption?—is that he is ready to sacrifice a million lives in order to defeat Israel. Make note of that, F. P. editorialist!) . There are other matters on which the F. P. editorial could be challenged. But the major point is in the concluding paragraph to the. editorial that was headed "Firmness, Not More Jets." That sentiment stated: "Mrs. Meir has a great deal more to lose by obstinacy than she has to gain. The Arabs have already made a major concession in the past year just by agreeing that Israel has a right to exist. The next move must be up to the Israelis. And the United States should push as hard as possible." There • is something utterly senseless about this paragraph. Instead of asserting that the U.S. must con- tribute toward prevention of another war by making it possible for Israel to defend herself, an otherwise great newspaper advocates a policy that would lead to Israel's destruction. The F; P. editorial writer hasn't even given a thought to the form of recognition for Israel to exist in Arab ranks. It has been repeated time and again in Cairo, Amman, Beirut and Damascus that only Jews who lived in Israel before the Balfour Declaration would be, permitted to represent a Jewish state. Mull it over, F. P. editorialist! There is that blind-as-bat attitude that Israel is stronger than Egypt—all of which is negated by the overwhelming number of Egyptian planes that outnumber Israel's and the Russian policy of domination over the Arab areas. Does the new overflight by Russian Foxbats mean anything? And what about warn- ings, like the one by Senator Stuart Symington, of Missouri, in his criticism of the slowness 'with which the Nixon administration provides aid to Israel,_that "about 15 - months ago we received irrefutable evidence that Soviet pilots were flying MIG-21s out of Egypt, and only a few weeks ago were told by this admin- istration that Soviet pilots are currently flying in Egypt's new. MIG-23 (Foxbat) planes !" . On the question of recognition- we . call to witness Israel Prime Minister Golda Meir. She was interviewed last week by Le Monde of Paris. There were some vital questions and some firm answers, and we offer them as a challenge to the charge-of obstinacy against Israel's First Lady: an Arab government said it was ready to grant full recognition to Israel in return _for a complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from the occupied tSnitories, would you consider this. (1) a significant devel- opment on the Arab side, or (2) that it :could provide substantial grounds for serious negotiationi? If Israel granted full recognition to Egypt, would your newspaper print the story under a big headline? The problem is not one of recognition, it is one of peace. U Germany decided to recognize France, would that constitute a big step forward? — , . . Should West Germany recognize East Germany, that would constitute a significant deVelopment.4:)on't you think that, after a quarter of a century of -persistent refusal, the recognition of Israel by an. Arab state would have profound and far-reaching influence on Arab opinion? a In 1947 the Arabs denied the existence of a Jewish people. The United Nations created two states, one Jewish, the other Arab. But the Arabs refused the partition and attacked us. They don't have to recognize" the legality of our state; it was sanctioned by the United Nations Organization. Besides, the fact that they signed armistices with us in 1948 was itself an admission 'of our existence. The armistices were intended to put an end to war •and the threat of war, but war broke out again. Rec- ognition means little to us. What would be a real step forward is if Arab leaders concerned them- selves with their people's education. But after 23 years of existence we aren't going to beg for signa- tures. This country owes its existence to a promise given by God himself. It would be ridiculous to ask that its legality be recognized. What we want is_peace. Sadat (Egyptian President) told James Reston (of the New York Times), "We shall perhaps recognize Israel, but we - won't negotiate." The test for us is the signing of a peace treaty. I don't understand the attitude of those who take up the Arab cause and tell us not to pay attention to what the Arab leaders are saying in public. We have far more respect for these leaders than their supporters have. We read their .statements, we listen to their speeches, and we see in their words and writings that our country has no - right., to exist. Heikal (Muhammed Hassanein Helical, editor-in-chief of Al-Ahram) wrote last February that an Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 frontiers should only be a first step, to be followed by the _return of the refugees and finally the disappearance of our state. In my view, what the Arabs don't accept is the , fact that the existence of Israel interrupts the Arab world's continuity. Did you really believe in 1967 that the Arabs would negotiate? Absolutely. We thought that the experience they had just undergone would'be enough Of a shock. In my opinion, the key to the problem lies in the value which the two sidea=thef_iind . nie--attach to human lives. A government which speaks as casually as Sadat of sacrificing.a million people' last five minutes in Israel. Here, in the last four years, we haven't sentenced elliingle ,-terrorist • to death. There's some point to that, anyway. Sadat may seek - the death penalty' , lot' Babiry' bitt.we don't ask it for Al Fatah members. We can change neither the people nor 'their :mentality. Bid we. can cooperate with the Arabs as we do with .other peoples. West Bank' dwellers are :already saying that they.. would want no wall between themselves and us.•They don't Want ni br .stay there but some- thing new has taken place in their ininds..In the last few months alone-we .allowed"-1E0,0900 P ifiliabitants - from neighboring countries to enter IsraeL The _ country that. they are fighting- against:iv no longeYthe. . • . Israel they had Imagined earlier. - - • It is rather the Arabi people feel sorry for tadaY ; . Why be sorry for theint - All - they have to do is fend for themselves. -That's what- they: must think of first; the day they do that there will be -peice.. And that day, I'm certain will eome.. The Arab leader who makes peace will come. The Arab leader- who makes peace. will be the one who has had - - - sleepless nights thinking of the hunger and Illiteracy 'among his people, and who.reseintely. - aPplies himself to these problems. He will make peace quite simply because he loves his. children. There are 78 U.S. senators—and many. more who did not sign their special resolutionwho believe that firmness by our government should mean more. jets for Israel. The F. P. writer thinks otherwise. He 'is happy: Israel has a right to exist! With the sentiment-he expressed, no nation in - Israel's position could survive very long. Are we making too big a case out of this? Of course not! Any effort to prevent assistance to Israel in the struggle for security, makes it incumbent upon all who wish to avoid another. wholesale 'massacre of Jews to enlighten those who may be misled and especially our own community : which should- be fully aware of the facts in the present Middle East situation. On his arrival in Santiago, Chile, he was asked about the Ruslian Jewish situation and anti-Semitism. 'His comment was: "There are fools in our country, too." Then, angrily, he declared: Angry Comment From Friend Yevgeriy Yevtushenko "I am not an anti-Semite, but the Jews who are leaving the Soviet Yevgeny Yevtushenko, our good friend the Russian poet who, in his poem "Babi Yar" and on numerous other occasions had spoken Union throw filth in our country." It's a pity that he has not read all of the Russian Jews' state- protestingly against anti-Semitism, is a bit angered with us. ments. Many of them speak appreciatively of the , good ,Russia does 2—Friday, November 12, 1971 THE DETROIT JEWISH NEWS for many of them, educationally and in the profesSions and in many industrial jobs. What they ask is the right to live as Jews and not be deprived of their cultural herit- age. Therefore--they ask the right to settle in Israel. It's to be hoped that Yevtushenko will learn the facts and will not be so angry. c ;