News

‘Forward’ says B’nai Jeshurun retrenched on Palestine statement under pressure from wealthy donors

On December 4 the NYT broke the B’nai Jeshurun rabbis’ brave statement in support of the Palestine upgrade at the UN, and it became the most emailed story of the day. After that the progressive rabbis backed off somewhat from their statement, and issued a clarification saying they were passionate lovers of Israel and that they apologized for not consulting with others before issuing the original statement. The Forward says that Rabbi Rolando Matalon read a further apology to the congregation from the pulpit a week ago.

Reporters Seth Berkman and Larry Cohler-Esses looked into the pressure on the progressive rabbis, and they chalk it up to wealthy donors:

The rabbis’ [subsequent] apology from the pulpit took place as a group of B’nai Jeshurun members was organizing to press the synagogue to establish clear policies on the rabbis’ future freedom to speak out unilaterally on public issues.

Sally Gottesman, a vice president of the synagogue board who supports the rabbis’ stand, indicated she thought the group, which reportedly includes some important donors, was having an impact. “I think they are putting on real pressure,” she said. “Minority voices often know how to make their voices heard. As they say, the squeaky wheel gets the grease.” Gottesman stressed that she was addressing the issue only in her personal capacity as a congregation member, not in her official role with the synagogue board.

Marvin Davis, who is a Manhattan real estate mogul and one of the reported key members of the ad hoc group, declined to comment on the matter when reached by the Forward.

Another individual involved with the group, who would speak only on condition of anonymity, described it as an informal “group of wealthy people.”

This is the tragedy of Zionism in American Jewish life. The most powerful segment of the community is the older, conservative wealthy portion, the folks who haven’t studied the issue since 1973. The young Jews who organize against Birthright don’t have money, don’t have clout. This is why Obama ran away from the settlements question with his hair on fire and tried to get to the right of Romney during the general election, money. This kind of story only makes the Follow the money story more important. Hat’s off to the Forward.

40 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

A disorganised religion.

But, is it reasonable to believe that all wealthy Jews think the same? Our media implies that that’s exactly the case.

It is such a mess. It looks like rich Jews using their money to ensure certain people are shafted and nobody does anything about it. Reminds me of a book .

The Israel project is a powerful force.
Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!

RE: “This is the tragedy of Zionism in American Jewish life. The most powerful segment of the community is the older, conservative wealthy portion, the folks who haven’t studied the issue since 1973. The young Jews who organize against Birthright don’t have money, don’t have clout.” ~ Weiss

“TAKE IT AWAY”, JOEY: “Fire Foxman”, by Joey Kurtzman, Jewcy, 07/08/07

[EXCERPT] . . . What’s surprising is how unabashedly forthright Abraham Foxman has become about what motivates him and his institution [the Anti-Defamation League (ADL)]. In October of 2005, Foxman addressed a classroom of Jewish students at New York University. Young heads nodded and brows furrowed as Foxman riled them with his customary rhetoric: Isn’t it antisemitic for pro-Palestinian groups to seek divestment only from Israel, ignoring the far greater crimes of regimes like Sudan or North Korea? How do we describe this sort of selective flagellation of the world’s only Jewish state, if not as antisemitism?
“What if the campus Free Tibet club campaigned for divestment from China? Would that be anti-Chinese bigotry?” asked Asaf Shtull-Trauring, a 20-year-old student and conscientious objector from the Israeli army.
Of course not, answered Foxman
, but it was preposterous to compare the two conflicts, what with the Jews’ experience of two millennia of murderous persecution. Shtull-Trauring responded with two questions: Did Foxman mean that selective treatment is okay so long as it’s not directed at Jews? And where did the Anti-Defamation League get off telling Jewish university students which opinions about Israel were acceptable and which verboten?
The dialogue spiraled into a confrontation. Shtull-Trauring says Foxman, frustrated and under attack, placed his cards on the table, angrily retorting: “I don’t represent you nor the Jewish community! I represent the donors.”
Foxman’s outburst was surprising not because of its content, but because of its candor. Foxman needn’t bother himself with the trifling concerns of American Jews who happen not to be multimillionaire philanthropists. If he makes the Jewish community less appealing to young Jews, if his theatrics turn us off and turn us away, that’s all beside the point. Foxman’s job is to keep the millionaire benefactors happy: the rest of us can go jump in the Kinneret.
Without a meaningful mission to pursue, the ADL has resorted to scaremongering to fill its coffers and justify its existence. These efforts have grown increasingly bizarre and damaging. . .

ENTIRE POST – http://www.jewcy.com/post/fire_foxman

P.S. “take it away” meaninghttp://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080511090814AAbItlh