Dear Mrs. Gruen, Thank you for showing me the October 19 copy of "Peace News." I was happy to have the opportunity of acquainting myself with the Pacifist point of view. However, I must say that I was shocked and dismayed by the lead story in that issue, entitled "Israel and Jordan" by Brijen K. Gupta. In what purports to be an "inside story" on the Middle East crisis, I have found a most intemperate and one-sided condemnation of Israel certainly not calculated to pacify inflamed passions in that international cauldron. The correspondent's thesis is that Israel's policy of "massive retaliation" is the very factor that is disturbing the peace, and that this is traceable to Ben Gurion's "aggressive Zionism." The sophisticated reportorial verbiage aside, this is the essence of the position of the Arab war lords who have been threatening for over eight years now to "push Israel into the sea." Israel, according to this point of view, must behave like a gentleman and remain supremely oblivious to the murder of its citizens on its own soil, the boycott against it, the closing of international water-ways to its shipping and constant warmongering against it. And if Israel raises a finger in its own defense, that is "naked aggression." It calls to mind the story of the youngster reproached by his father for fighting with his friends. "Who started the fight?" asks Father. "He did," replies the youngster, "he hit me back first.""Israel," the correspondent advises, "must take a lead in creating an atmos-phere of mutual trust and peace." Does not this correspondent, who announces that he is giving "the inside story," acknowledge any of the facts of recent history? Does he not know, or want to know, that Israel from the day of its birth has been asking for peace with the Arabs, and has even included this request in its Declaration of Independence? - that for years now its represent-ative at the U.N. has been asking vainly for the Arab delegates to sit down with him and begin nego…

Dear Rabbi Lamm: As usual, my husband and I were very much interested in your sermon last Saturday morning. We feel always so stimulated by your messages, except that we sense a certain aversion to Zionism every time you touch on the subject of Israel. Motivated by your call to the worshippers to speak up when they feel a wrong has been done, I am encouraged to take the liberty of commenting on your remarks in synagogue last Saturday morning. In the course of your sermon you criticized Ben-Gurion for choosing to spend his vacation to “meditate” in a Burmese Monastery. You implied that thereby he was betraying his own religion and setting a bad example for his fellow Jews. I am afraid the facts as presented were rather misleading because they were not given in the right perspective. This is especially unfortunate, as many of your congregants may not be acquainted with the events leading to Mr. Ben-Gurion’s action. You undoubtedly know that the coming sessions of the United Nations will deal with the Arab refugee problem and that these will be trying days for Israel, which will be subjected to a heavy barrage of attacks from all sides. You are also certainly aware that Israel has few, if any, friends. Mr. U Nu, who is a personal good friend of Mr. Ben-Gurion, is perhaps the only true friend Israel now has. He has invited Israel’s Prime Minister to be his guest, and as he has chosen to become a priest, his invitation was naturally extended to his Monastery. The present Acting Secretary-General, Mr. U Thant, is, as you know, a Burmese, and Mr. U Nu, though withdrawn to his Monastery, still has great influence on the representatives of his country and has earned the respect of many neutral countries. While the real reasons prompting Mr. Ben-Gurion’s acceptance of the invitation to Burma would not, of course, be stated publicly, it seems obvious that he is not going for the purpose of “meditating” or alienating his G’d, but rather in the interests of his people, trying …

Dear Rabbi Lamm: I would like to take this opportunity to express our deep appreciation to you for your kind permission to print your article "Our Dependence Upon Israel's Independence." Although it was mailed out only a week or so ago, it has already elicited a very favorable response. I was out of town for a few days this week. During my travels I had the opportunity to go through the article at leisure. I must express my sincere admiration to you. Again, please accept our thanks. I know that we can count upon you for your future cooperation.I remain with greetings of Torah and Zion,Sincerely yours,Elie TomEG/bsDirector

Dear Debbi: Mrs. Lamm and I were thrilled to receive your lovely post card overflowing, as it was, with such enthusiasm for the Holy Land. The "crazy" things you have been doing certainly are an index of your own vitality and to my own mystic mentality of the "kedushat ha-aretz." We look forward to seeing you upon your return with the marvelously beneficial results of your stay no doubt being evident to all.Your parents and brother are all well, thank Heaven, and we shall give them personal regards to you when they visit.Warmest good wishes from everyone at The Center and from our children in particular.Cordially yours,Rabbi Norman Lamm

Dear Rabbi Jung: Just a reminder about the announcement to the Congregation on the Shemini Atzeret for them to write to TWA expressing indignation at the lack of results so far in the release of the Israeli hostages, and also at the general conduct of TWA with regard to the hijacking. – Aaron Green P.S. – Aaron: This is my 2nd or 3rd request.

Dear Mr. Tillinghast: I am sure that there are many, many others like me who, despite strong feelings, have hesitated heretofore to write to you concerning the role of TWA in the recent hijacking of a TWA plane to Syria. I have no doubt that TWA is doing its best to secure the release of the two Israeli passengers for whom it is fully responsible. Nevertheless, I hope that the company is aware of the fact that the original newspaper reports that the pilot was remaining to oversee repairs rather than to secure the release of the hostages left a terrible impression with all past, present, and potential customers of TWA. Furthermore, it would seem to be good company policy that in the event of such future acts of piracy, no member of crew leave until all passengers have been released. As a frequent air traveler, I know that I would feel much safer were this done, if only for the reason that the number of crew members involved would increase the public protests throughout the world. Recently, a new international airport was opened in Damascus. I understand that airlines of a number of countries have refused to use this airport as a protest against the hijacking. I do not recall seeing any mention of such a refusal by TWA. I wonder, therefore, if you would be kind enough to let me know whether or not the company is using the Damascus airport and what it further proposes to do to secure the release of its two passengers who remain imprisoned in Damascus. Sincerely yours, Rabbi Norman Lamm

Dear Norman: I write now to ask you to hold the dates of February 11–12 for a most important intimate meeting in Washington, D.C. You are one of 10 persons to whom I have written. I have spoken with some of you personally about this. I will be calling each of you. Now, however, I only want to alert you to the date and describe briefly what it is all about. As a result of some long and detailed conversations and plans which I have been having with a few key persons on the executive staff of the United Presbyterian Church of the United States, we have finally agreed to hold an intensive, intimate conversation on Middle East questions in Washington, D.C., beginning 4:00 p.m., Monday, February 11 and going through luncheon the following day. They are inviting 10 of their top people, executive and lay, and I am doing the same from the American Jewish religious community. There will only be 20 persons at the sessions. Included is their list of invitees. Three basic topics will be on the table: The Third World perceptions of Israel as an imperialist nation now creeping into the thinking of some elements of the religious community; The Palestinians; Framing a religious response to the Middle East. Each of these agenda items is now being drawn up in a more detailed fashion and will soon be sent to you for your further consideration. I mention them now, however, so you will see the general areas of our conversations. Some of you have seen their preliminary study document: “Peoples and Conflict in the Middle East.” Some of us were asked to comment on it in its initial draft form. Since then, it has been circulated throughout the church community and is now being evaluated and possibly revised. Moreover, leadership in the Presbyterian church is anxious to meet for in-depth conversations with a few of their counterparts in the Jewish religious community. We are pleased to be able to help bring this meeting about, though unfortunately we have no funds to even defray your expens…

Dear Norman, Shubert has asked for a chance to respond to your response. On reviewing the exchange, I (and Nat) found it to be of such intrinsic merit that we believe it is worth printing. I’ve asked Shubert to send a copy of his next response to you directly, so that you may then make your final comment if you wish. But I think the material should commit you both. The material should not be designed as between issues! The exchange should be a head to head at my insistence for editorial purposes. We will hold the material exchange for two episodes and then print the 4 pieces at once. I do think the clearest case from your original statement is at stake and the meaning of the theological “center” to Judaism is a common man’s one as the definition of the current polarization is clear. Hence to open a symposium is apt – and that is what the “exchange” will mean. We shall break our self-imposed strategy that each of the two should respond in full to Shubert’s response to your response. Forward to you with response to my request for a statement. All my best – Gene

לכבוד ידידי הנעלה הרה״ג מוהר״י עמיטל שליט״א שלומו ישגא, יכולני להבין כמה נתאכזב מעכ״ת מתוצאות הבחירות אחרי כל העבודה הקשה שהשקיע במאמציו לטובת ״מימד,״ אבל הנני כותב לעודדו שאל יפול רוחו ח״ו ואל יתחרט על יוזמתו, ואדרבה – ישמח שנעתר לדרישת השעה ברוח בקשת האמת והתמסרות לתורה ולעם. ואף אם נכשל בבחירות, הלא הבוחר בתורה ובוחר בציון יודע את הכוונות הטהורות והנכונות הצפונות במטמני לבו של מר, ואין האמת מתבטלת ברוב, ואדרבה האמת יורה דרכו ועוד יבואו רבים ושלמים להשכים על פתחו לחדש מאמציו בכושר הנהגתו וצדקת רעיונותיו. עצם השתדלותו ליצור תנועה שתבטא את המושג של התמסרות לתורה ולא״י בלי קנאות, בשאיפה לשלום בין־לאומי ושלום בפנים, בלי כפייה ובלי ביטול הדדי – עצם הדבר הזה היה והווה קידוש השם, ובמקום שיש חילול השם אין חולקין כבוד, לא לרב ולא לרוב. בכבוד רב וביקרות אמת, נחום לאם.

Warmest from the Source of Kedusha where one becomes more deeply aware of his ניצחיות! Hope all is well with you בכלל ובפרט. Regards from all of us. היה איש טוב – ומבשר טוב. Fondly, Menachem Brayer