4 Friday, September 7, 1984 THE DETROIT JEWISH NEWS THE JEWISH NEWS Serving Detroit's Metropolitan Jewish Community • with distinction for four decades. Editorial and Sales offices at 17515 West Nine Mile Road, Suite 865, Southfield, Michigan 48075-4491 TELEPHONE 424-8833 PUBLISHER: Charles A. Buerger EDITOR EMERITUS: Philip Slomovitz EDITOR: Gary Rosenblatt BUSINESS MANAGER: Carmi M. Slomovitz ART DIRECTOR: Kim Muller-Thym NEWS EDITOR: Alan Hitsky LOCAL NEWS EDITOR: Heidi Press EDITORIAL ASSISTANT: Tedd Schneider LOCAL COLUMNIST: Danny Raskin ACCOUNT EXECUTIVES: Lauri Biafore Rick Nessel Danny Raskin Seymour Schwartz OFFICE STAFF: Marlene Miller Dharlene Norris Phyllis Tyner Pauline Weiss Ellen Wolfe PRODUCTION: Donald Cheshure Cathy Ciccone Curtis Deloye Ralph Orme c - ,) 1964 by The Detroit Jewish News (US PS 275-520) Second Class postage paid at Southfield, Michigan and additional mailing offices. Subscription $18 a year. CANDLELIGHTING AT 7:38 P.M. VOL. LXXXVI, NO. 2 Reverend Reagan Only Ronald Reagan could get away with it. At a prayer breakfast in Dallas during the Republican convention, the President said that politics and religion were inseparable and that those who argued otherwise were "intolerant of religion." Theodore Mann, president of the American Jewish Congress, was one of the first to respond, suggesting that President Reagan's talk, which went on to attack opponents of organized school prayer, represented a "gross misunderstanding of our Constitution and of the importance it plays in the lives of all Americans." The President's political proselytizing is worrisome. New York Times columnist William Safire noted that "some Jews have been beguiled by the fundamentalist support of Israel, and others, mainly Orthodox, are allied with Catholics supporting tuition tax credits for religious schools. Because today's religious political movement is un-Semitic rather than anti-Semitic, short-sighted Jews fail to see the danger to any minority religion from a `Christian Republican Party'." No matter how well intentioned, the President's effort to turn religious belief into political action should be rejected. Remembering in faith Dedication of the Holocaust Memorial Center reaches out spiritually into the heights. It is much more than a soul-stirring local event. It assumes universal aspects and adds continuity to the slogan of Zahor — of remembering the past as an assurance that the future will prevent recurrence of Evil. Zahor! — Remember — has become a compelling slogan - for the victims in the horrifying tragedies and for their fellow humans everywhere. It is by remembering that the recollections of the victims of the Nazi terrors can be fully respected. They were not only the Six Million of the Jewish people. There was the equal number among non-Jews, from the ranks of Christians as well, that Hitlerism reaped a toll that must serve as a warning of Never Again! Thus, it is not the memory of the martyred but the glory of future generations that is taken into account as the Holocaust Memorial Center nears completion with the dedication dinner on Sept. 16. All faiths have a stake in the reminder to mankind of the evils which indict every semblance of inhumanity of man to man, and affirm the commitments to strive for the faith that will not permit repetition of the crimes or the re-emergence of social evils in mankind. The Sakharov tapes The strange episode of the Soviet Union filming Andrei Sakharov and is wife, Yelena Bonner, and making the footage available to the West is the best proof yet that Moscow does care about the world's concern over the Sakharovs. The film was made to offset the reports that Sakharov was dead or that his wife was tried for "slandering" and banished to five years of internal exile. But the fact that the Soviets made and released the propaganda film shows that they do listen to Western complaints, that protests and agitation do help. We must raise our voices louder now in hopes that the Sakharovs and thousands of other suffering dissenters will someday be freed. MEDIA MONITOR An open letter to the officers of the National Press Club BY BERL FALBAUM An Open Letter to the Officers of the National Press Club: Your public explanations why Black Muslim Minister Louis Far- rakhan was invited to address your club has shed some light on why you extended the invitation — you don't seem to understand the issues in- volved. Not only do your arguments miss the mark but it is a bit amusing to find you accuse the media — your own brethren — of being unfair and hypoc- ritical in their criticism of Far- rakhan's appearance. But let's take a look at some of your "defenses." 1. Freedom of speech. Unfortunately, that is not an issue in this case. No Farrakhan critic has suggested that he is not entitled to his opinions — although they are abhorrent in their anti-Semitism. One can defend his right to his views and yet object to the fact that the National Press Club gave him not only a megaphone but also institutional legitimacy. I might point out, however, that a Constitutional argument could be raised that his comments are subject to the rarely-used charge of criminal libel which, as you know, is a limita- tion on the absolute freedom of speech. But let's stick with the issue at hand. If your club had not invited him, no abridgement of his right to expres- sion would have occurred. 2. He is "news." That argument, coming from the National Press Club, of course, is a tautology since it is you and your members that define news. How can one effectively argue against his newsworthiness when the media are the creators of the definition? So for you to raise the point is redundant. 3. Verification. In other words, you maintain, that you wanted to hear him personally to ascertain whether indeed he had been misquoted. That was a magnanimous and benevolent gesture and not one extended to hundreds of other public officials who have made similar claims. Why did the club owe Far- rakhan an opportunity to "define" his views when others are not accorded such opportunities? Would not personal interviews or reviewing tapes have accomplished the same ends? Further, assuming Farrakhan had strategically adopted a less hostile posture before your audi- ence, would that have been proof that Farrakhan's visit assured a sellout crowd and that makes for successful luncheon meetings. he had been misquoted in his other appearances? Hardly. In short, the arguments don't wash. But you are correct on one point — in criticizing your colleagues for hypocrisy. You rightly point out that the media" have taken .issue with you while giving ample coverage to. Far- rakhan's demogoguery on the front page of the nation's newspapers and television talk shows. There appears to be a double- standard here. What's more, according to news reports, you had an over-flow crowd for the Farrakhan meeting. If your members were sincerely appalled at the Farrakhan appear- ance, a boycott would have been a more meaningful testimonial than all the editorials expressing righteous in- dignation. What it comes down to is media and your club were interested in what sells. Why not just admit it. Far- rakhan's visit assured a sellout crowd Cont i nued on. Page 20