InDepth

The bombing of the Jerusalem Sbarro pizzeria leaves the Monitor no choice but to again shelve a good-riddance, tribute-in-reverse obituary for an incomparably odious Jew whose stay of Judgment was at long last revoked early last month.

Prime Minister Sharon is being roundly criticized in his own Likud Party by those who are disenchanted with his policy of "restraint." Indeed, it would now appear that former Prime Minister Netanyahu would win a vote for leadership of the Likud if it were held today. Plainly, there is much frustration with the continuing violence and the failure of Mr. Sharon to bring an end to it.

It will be recalled that The Jewish Press took the lead in criticizing Hillary Clinton during her campaign for the Senate last year. But the fact that we took a back seat to no one in hammering Candidate Clinton for her appalling record on Israel in no way inhibits us from applauding Senator Clinton for her lead role in the efforts to get the International Red Cross to grant membership to the Magen David Adom Society, Israel's rescue and relief service.

For the second week running the Monitor is forced to postpone a celebration of the death last month of one of the wickedest Jews to walk the earth in this or any other generation. The continuing fallout over outgoing New York Times Jerusalem bureau chief Deborah Sontag's novella-length rewrite of recent Middle East history leaves no choice but to put away the streamers and the silly hats and reschedule the party for the next column.

One reading Deborah Sontag's front-page article in the July 26th issue of The New York Times could well understand the calls one hears lately for Jews to suspend their Times subscriptions over its outrageous coverage of the Middle East. Ms. Sontag's piece is transparent revisionism which well serves the seeming omnipresent effort to shift the blame for the collapse of Camp David from the Palestinians to something systemic to the Middle East conflict. It almost seems that Ms. Sontag and others now hawking the same line are following a scenario scripted by Arafat lieutenants intent on minimizing Israeli concessions at Camp David and thereby set the stage for the next phase of negotiations.

An article in the Edah group's online journal about women being called to the Torah should be a wakeup call to leaders of Modern Orthodoxy. When Edah was founded several years ago, it unilaterally claimed a place in Modern Orthodoxy. However, Modern Orthodoxy is at a crossroads and it is now time that the Edah message be seen for what it is.

Is it even the least bit shocking that Deborah Sontag has so eagerly jumped aboard the revisionist bandwagon that seeks to blame former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak for the collapse of last year's summit at Camp David?

In 1995, when Mayor Rudy Giuliani famously barred Yassir Arafat from a City-sponsored Lincoln Center concert for world leaders, the Mayor was rebuked by the State Department and denounced by the left and the Oslo juggernaut. Although it was plain to the Mayor and to some of the rest of us that Arafat was simply an unrepentant terrorist, his comic opera-like pretensions to statesmanship played well to a largely servile world. But that was then. Given the evidence mounting daily of Arafat's systemic duplicity and complicity in the terrorist targeting of innocent civilians, it would hardly be expected that a similar bold stroke would today trigger the same negative reaction.

One of the critical points to be made about the international monitor dispute is being overlooked. No one would suggest that the mission of the monitors would be to prevent violence by force of arms. Rather, it is widely assumed that they would monitor the respective elective efforts of Israel and the Palestinians to observe a cease-fire.

The letters just keep coming in response to the Enemies List column and its follow-up. The responses by and large have been friendly in tone, with the majority of respondents agreeing on all or most of the names submitted by their fellow readers. And then there was this, from an e-mail submitted by some mammal identified as Rashid Monsour:

Debate over Prime Minister Sharon's so-called policy of "restraint" continues to swirl. Among other things, our editorial last week expressing support for his measured responses to the escalating Palestinian terrorism drew more reaction than any Jewish Press editorial in recent memory. The letters from readers on the subject which appear this week are only a sampling of what we actually received, besides some really animated phone calls.

Several days ago, in the course of talking about the New York mayoral race, Daily News columnist E.R. Shipp noted the flap last year over Hillary Clinton's being endorsed by a Muslim group and the hullabaloo surrounding a Hamas group's endorsement of Mark Green. Ms. Shipp then went on to observe:

Why, pray tell, does one give a hoot about Israel and Palestine when one is trying to become New York City's Mayor? Why, pray tell, does one care about which side is the more terrorist, the Israelis or the Palestinians?

The New York Times has been a leader in the public charge against Israel's policy of preempting terrorist acts by targeting those who send out the suicide-bombing drones. So we can't help but make note of a recent Times obituary reporting on the death of one Rex T. Barber

A Sabbath-observant Orthodox Associate Professor of Education at William Paterson College, a state-run university in New Jersey, won a resounding landmark victory from a federal court of appeals in her religious-discrimination lawsuit. A unanimous Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued a 38-page opinion sending the claims of Dr. Gertrude Abramson back to trial court for a full jury trial on her allegations that she had been subjected to a ''hostile work environment'' because of harassment relating to her observance of the Sabbath and Jewish religious holidays. The Court also upheld her claims that her employment had been terminated because she observed religious holidays, and that the College retaliated against her because she maintained her religious observance.

During the past presidential election, we endorsed George W. Bush even though the opposing ticket featured a Vice-Presidential candidate who is a Sabbath-observer. Thus, in addition to strong support for Israel, we were confident that Mr. Bush, if elected President, would also demonstrate his support for religious observance and for the needs of the Orthodox Jewish community.

Prime Minister Sharon is not without his thoughtful critics over his policy of restraint. Those of us who have regularly argued that it is folly to signal to Arafat & Co. that there will be anything but horrible consequences to terrorism, can certainly understand the clamor for massive retaliation and an uprooting of the terrorist infrastructure. And those of us who have relentlessly pointed to the cynicism of the international approach to the Mideast conflict ? which is concerned more about how events fit into the prism of national interest than about notions of justice and truth ? can certainly understand the cry that public opinion be damned. Yet we still strongly believe in the appropriateness of the Prime Minister's course to this point.

The outrageous refusal of the UN to turn over those videotapes that recorded the terrorist kidnapping of three Israeli soldiers last October puts into sharp focus the bankruptcy of the UN?s mission in the Middle East. The tapes are said to show the faces of the kidnappers and also to contain other important information on the kidnappings. Yet the international peace-keeping organization, after shamefully denying that the tapes existed, incredibly is now balking at turning over the tapes without blocking out the faces of the apparent kidnappers in the interests of neutrality.

The international furor over Israel?s policy of what it calls ?interception of terrorists? sharply illustrates the dilemma in which Israel finds itself. Without doubt, Israel?s targeting of suspected terrorists has thwarted many terrorist acts. However, because they were not convicted in a court of law, and thus there is no legal certainty that they were connected to a crime, most of the world has called this a policy of assassination ? a form of punishment and deterrent without trial.

The almost universal calls for ?solidarity? with Israel following in the wake of Reform leader Eric Yoffie?s announcement of the suspension of youth trips to Israel has underscored a curious dimension to the politics of the left. While the Sarid and Beilin crowd talk about American Jews demonstrating their support for the Jewish state, they continue to rail against Prime Minister Sharon for not agreeing to an immediate resumption of negotiations with the Palestinians despite the continuing violence, and for not ordering an immediate end to all construction on the so-called ?settlements.? Despite the lessons of the collapse of Oslo and the obvious and cynical refusal of Yassir Arafat to end the violence, the left persists in attacking Mr. Sharon for insisting that the violence must stop as a precondition to renewed talks. They would reward violence with political concessions while the prime minister would not.

Last week in this space we took the New York Jewish Week to task over its giving front page placement to a rehashing of a year-old story about a concededly serious abuse problem at the Orthodox Union?s NCSY, and to a hazy report about a religious discrimination lawsuit filed against Yeshiva University by a Conservative Jewish woman. We saw this as fresh evidence of an Orthodox-bashing bent at The Jewish Week manifested by that tabloid?s artificial pumping up of negative pieces about two crown jewels of Orthodox Judaism.

We note with sorrow the passing of Rabbi Schulem Rubin, an indefatigable champion of the Jewish community. As a prominent pulpit rabbi and trusted counsellor, Rabbi Rubin provided direction to generations. As a confidante of many in high office, he facilitated access to decision-makers at critical times for more than 40 years. And as the longtime Chief of Kosher Law Enforcement of the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets, Rabbi Rubin worked ceaselessly to ensure that hundreds of thousands of Jews would not unwittingly run afoul of the Halacha in a fundamental and defining aspect of our faith.

In 1982, the late Rabbi Meir Kahane wrote in The New York Times, ?There is one sublime reason why we should not give up a centimeter of land: it belongs to us! ... the land belongs to us because the G-d of Israel, Creator and Titleholder of all lands, gave it to us.?

It was shaping up to be a rather uneventful day until the arrival of a press release from one of the Monitor's favorite Jewish organizations. Laughter may not the best medicine, but it certainly is the best palliative to boredom, and in that sense, at least, the Anti-Defamation League will never be accused of being boring.

Despite the terrible news late Monday of the driveby murders of Dan Yehudah of Chomesh and Doron Zisserman of Einav and other terrorist acts, there is the definite sense that there is an overall lessening of Palestinian violence. While we do not delude ourselves into thinking that the so-called cease fire is essentially anything other than Arafat?s latest ruse, one would have to be inhuman not to take some comfort in the fact that at least for the short run, less people will die or be maimed. And, because we think that a cease fire is in Arafat?s short term interest, we believe that one will take hold. Yet at the same time, while we savor the respite of sorts, we must also focus on the dangers that are already emerging.

We were intrigued to read on the front page of last week?s New York Jewish Week that New York?s Rabbi Haskel Lookstein has called for a boycott of The New York Times because of the anti-Israel animus that has driven its reporting and editorials on the Middle East. According to the story:

In response to a number of requests, the Monitor has put together the following directory of major media outlets for quick reference. Whether you communicate with their offices via telephone, fax or e-mail, it's never been easier to let editors and reporters know what's on your mind. There's no excuse for inaction.

Last week, The New York Times startled even those of us who have come to expect its Mideast reporting and editorializing to be driven by bias toward the Palestinian take on events.

Last week's listing of Israel's worst media enemies, as determined by readers of the Monitor, generated the kind of pro-and-con response such lists usually do. This week we're featuring some of the nominations that failed to garner enough mentions to make the list, but which are interesting (and in most cases valid) in their own right.

Syndicated columnist Cal Thomas, whose work has previously been praised by the Monitor, has run afoul of an American-Muslim organization that is demanding his column be dropped for what the group calls his "racist and quasi-genocidal" views.

One has to marvel at the exquisitely bad taste of The New York Times concerning Israel. This past Saturday, The Times reported on Friday...