I am writing this letter with respect to a complaint filed against me by Rich Siegel and returnable before the Teaneck Municipal Court. The purpose of this letter is to publicly apologize to Mr. Siegel for my conduct. I have asked Mr. Siegel to drop all criminal charges against me, as well as the right to file a civil complaint against me, and he has graciously agreed to recommend to the prosecutor that all charges be dropped.

In spring 2011, while walking my dog, I noticed pro-Palestine bumper stickers on a car parked at a private home. These bumper stickers upset me. On one occasion, I came in contact with Rich Siegel, owner of the car and home. I accused him of being an anti-Semite.

Early on Saturday morning, Nov. 5, 2011, I stopped in front of Mr. Siegel’s home and shouted an obscenity. I was later advised that not only was Mr. Siegel at home but that his wife and daughter were, too, and that my behavior caused them alarm and distress. When Mr. Siegel called the police and sent them after me, I told them that shouting this obscenity was my right as free speech, and compared it to Mr. Siegel’s right to place bumper stickers on his car.

My behavior was wrong on many levels. Obviously it is wrong for a rabbi, or for anyone, to shout obscenities at a private home for any reason. It was wrong to assert that this activity qualifies as free speech. And it was wrong for me to call Mr. Siegel an anti-Semite.

While I am a dedicated Zionist, I recognize that during the entire history of Zionism there have been many Jews opposed to Zionism. Zionism and Judaism are not the same thing. Opposing Zionism or supporting the Palestinian people does not necessarily make a person an anti-Semite.

It has come to my attention that this incident is just the most recent that Mr. Siegel has been made to suffer, including harassment by others and vandalism to his car. I feel this is very wrong. I appeal to the local Jewish community to realize what I have come to understand: that although Mr. Siegel’s views are very different from most of ours, he has the right to them, and the right to express them, while living in our community unmolested and without fear of harm to his family.

The Jewish community is sick. We, all of us, have been attacked on the basis of one thing — our religion. They, the attackers, the anti-Semites, do not distinguish between charedim, chassidim, datim, Satmar, Orthodox, traditional, conservadox, Conservative, Reconstructionist, Reform, Renewal, or even secular Jews. To them, we are all one.

But here we are, with modern schools of Shammai and Hillel pitted against one another, growling like dogs over who gets the rotten piece left over by the scavengers. Of course, today, Jews follow the traditions of our blessed sage Hillel, who elucidated the Golden Rule, “That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn.” This rule emanates from Parashah Kedoshim, which states, “Love thy neighbor as thyself” (Leviticus 19:18). What would Hillel tell us today? Would that we could all follow his rule today. It has served us well for 2,000 years. Perhaps we need another lesson to re-learn it.

To my Orthodox brethren, I commiserate with you over desecrations perpetuated in Paramus, Highland Park, and now Rutherford. I invite you to demonstrate solidarity with all branches of Judaism. We are Klal Yisrael. We cannot afford to be divided.

While reading last week’s Bar/Bat Mitzvah Supplement, I was sadly struck by the “checklist for advance preparation,” which began with the following: “Three Years in Advance: Join a congregation/book the date for the sanctuary; put your child on the learning and mitzvah track.”

Actually, a Jewish child should be “put on the learning and mitzvah track” from the moment he or she is born. A couple that wants to create a Jewish home should join a congregation at the very beginning of their marriage. The beauty of our Jewish heritage should be a part of our daily life always, and not just because we need to book a room and get a child interested in the Jewish part of his life.

If we are truly invested in a viable future for our people, we would be foolish to miss the opportunity of teaching our children the beauty of our traditions during those impressionable young years of their lives.

On Jan. 12, there was a major meeting in Bergen County regarding the recent swastikas and the attempted murder of a rabbi and his family. While I applaud these efforts, I wonder why in the past, when my synagogue had swastikas, when a yeshivah student in Edison was assaulted, when the Edison Lexus dealership and other sites were vandalized with swastikas, that we did not have a similar outcry in our Middlesex County community.

Unless and until the judicial system hands out harsh punishment, including real jail time to these perpetrators, including teenagers, nothing will change. Writing an essay on the Holocaust, or doing community service means nothing to those blinded by bigotry and hatred.

Thank you for setting the record straight on President Obama’s record on Israel. Unfortunately, it seems that whenever he has chosen not to march lockstep with Prime Minister Netanyahu, he has found himself and his administration subject to specious claims of hostility towards Israel. I have heard pulpit rabbis digress from the parashah of the week and, instead, twist the president’s speeches and quote phrases out of context in order to make it appear, incorrectly, as if he advocates a return to pre-1967 borders without negotiated adjustments. As you point out, this administrations’ record, notably in the areas of arms sales and intelligence, has been friendlier to Israel than any of its predecessors.

The JTA article by Zach Silberman on the Rothman-Pascrell race in your Jan. 13 issue was unbalanced in Rothman’s favor. Rothman and Pascrell have virtually indistinguishable voting records on Israel-related matters. In his 15 years in office, Pascrell has written and spoken publicly affirming his personal commitment to the State of Israel. He has taken his pro-Israel stands in spite of the fact that his current district includes an extremely large Muslim and Arab population. I eagerly await an article that describes Pascrell’s record fairly.

The Jewish Standard went way overboard in its Jan. 6 article on President Barack Obama. It appeared to be more campaign literature than honest reportage. I would be remiss if I let that article go by without response. Since becoming president three years ago:

• Obama has shifted U.S. strategy to place pressure on Israel for the failure of peace talks, rather than trying to bring both sides to the table.

• He has allowed Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta to blame Israel for not getting “to the damn table.”

• He seemed to agree with Nicolas Sarkozy when the French president called Israel’s prime minister “a liar.”

• He views the Jewish settlers on the west bank as the obstacle to peace. “America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements,” he told the United Nations General Assembly in his first speech to that body. He never explained why Jews would not be allowed to live in a Palestinian state. (For the record, over a million Palestinians are Israeli citizens living in undisputed Israel.)

• His White House removed all references to “Jerusalem, Israel” from its website and his State Department recently asked the Supreme Court to uphold its policy of not allowing those who are born in Jerusalem to have Israel written as their birthplace on official U.S. documents.

• Obama wants Israel to return to its pre-June 1967 borders.

• His ambassador to Belgium openly said Israel itself is to blame for Muslim anti-Semitism — instead of the actual anti-Semites.

In fact, it is Congress that is Israel’s friend. Obama certainly is not.

While Obama is correct to suggest that the United States is pro-Israel, the evidence would suggest that it is despite him, not because of him.

[The editor responds: Regarding whether our coverage was meant as a defense of President Barack Obama, see this week’s editorial on the subject. As to the claims made here: Obama blamed both sides for not coming to the peace table (something every president has done since Richard Nixon’s day); his press secretary repudiated Panetta’s off-the-cuff inappropriate comments; Obama never said Jews would not be “allowed to live in a Palestinian state”; opposing Israel’s settlement policy has been U.S. policy since 1967 (although former Secretary of State James A. Baker III insists Obama has tilted the policy towards Israel; as he said two months ago, “I don’t understand how the U.S. can oppose settlements for 30-plus years, then veto a U.N. resolution opposing settlements”); it was President George W. Bush who first rejected the “Jerusalem, Israel” designation; Obama’s ambassador to Belgium is a Shoah survivor and his remarks have been twisted shamefully out of context. The article in question dealt at length with both the Sarkozy and 1967 borders issues, so we will not summarize them here. Jewish voters have real reason to be concerned about Obama. When truth is so cavalierly tossed aside, however, so are those concerns.]

We are grateful to Jewish Standard readers for their response to a survey about reinvigorating the Bergen County YJCC. The request for input from the community was made in a Dec. 9 article about the strategic planning process that the YJCC is currently undergoing (Bergen Y in transition).

We would like to encourage those who have not yet responded to do so. The more we know about what our community thinks, the better prepared we will be to move into the future with confidence. The survey may be accessed at http://www.yjcc.org/survey.

Thank you for enabling us to reach out to the Bergen County Jewish community.