These comments have the theme that Jews are a "disadvantaged minority" (Primus's words), discriminated against as Blacks are. As such, they are offensive because they belittle discrimination against Blacks.

How could anyone, in any context, really think that "Harvard's celebrations of Christian holidays...is as offensive to Jews as is racism to Black"? Racism includes violence against Blacks by mobs and the police, harassment in housing, discrimination in promotion and hiring and a million other things beside which "Harvard's celebration of Christian holiday" is less than trivial.

If Libenson was trying to show how both Blacks and Jews face marginalization, his statement betrays a lack of understanding of the enormity of the marginalization of Blacks compared to that of Jews (as do similar statements Libenson has made, and some of Primus's writings; within Hillel I have no protest against these statements, although several Jews outside Hillel have criticized them to me.)

Such unrealistic statements by students in Hillel hurt constructive discussion of race relations by showing that those making the statement do not understand the enormity of racism. Reading The Crimson, or attending Hill Coordinating Council meetings, one would get the impression that the only source of racial tension is the offensive speakers SBA invites.

Both Blacks and Jews must work to alleviate racial tension. The SBA's invitation of Leonard Jeffries was hugely offensive to Jews (and others), and Counter should condemn Jeffries much more strongly than he has.

But students in Hillel should be realistic about the discrimination they face and the discrimination Blacks face. They should not trivialize discrimination against Blacks, as some seem to do; and they should not find anti-Semitism where it is not present, as Libenson has done in his call for Counter's resignation.

Libenson's charges are not supported by Counter's letter, and in persisting with them Libenson delivers a blow to Harvard's racial climate.