To signers of this statement:

Words have meaning.

It is important that words associated with extremes of human conduct be
used judiciously so that they retain their distinctive meanings, and so
that proper uses of those words (and the experiences properly described
by them) are not diminished through gratuitous overuse and dilution of
meaning.

One such word is genocide.

A second such word, one less extreme but nonetheless powerful and
distinctive, is pogrom.

My own view is that the invocation of these terms to describe the
clearly wanton and evil murder of religious students and scholars at
Yeshivat Mercaz HaRav by a single individual (perhaps supported by
terrorist gangs) is inexact and unhelpful–just as are invocations of
these terms (and “holocaust”) to describe deaths (including those of
civilian women and children, so-called “collateral damage”) caused by
targeted Israeli attacks on Palestinian militants/terrorists in Gaza and
the West Bank, or for that matter by a deranged co-religionist in Hebron
at Purim time some years back. I am making no claims regarding moral
equivalence here, except to say that none of these acts, in my view,
constitutes activity meaningfully or best described as genocidal.

Further, given the current and foreseeable composition and proclivities
of most international institutions in a position to apply such
terminology, I do not think it serves the interests of Israel, or of the
worldwide Jewish community, to encourage the indiscriminate use of such
terminology in the context of the use of lethal force in today’s Middle
East.

The attack on the Yeshiva merits moral condemnation in strong terms. I
also join your expression of sympathy and condolences to its victims and
their families. But the rhetorical escalation of language serves little
good purpose here, and I would urge you to reconsider how best to
express your justifiable outrage at this heinous act.

Sincerely, (Prof.) Alan J. Weisbard, University of Wisconsin