Sir, – In a normal democracy, people who are selected for a
governmental secret operations group have to sign a document that stipulates the
conditions under which they may shoot of their mouths. So now, following in the
footsteps of Meir Dagan, the former head of the Mossad, Yuval Diskin, the former
head of the Shin Bet, makes statements against the prime minister and defense
minister – under whom both were quite happy to work until their personal
extension-of- service requests were turned down (“Former Shin Bet chief slams
‘messianic’ PM,” April 29).
Do Diskin and Dagan not realize the
ammunition they give to our enemies? At least we can now see why their tenure
was not extended. If they really believe our leadership has been misleading the
public, why did they not resign? EMANUEL FISCHER
Sir, – As a member of
the public that Yuval Diskin seems to consider easily duped, let me remind him
that the discussion he raises about the likely effect of bombing a nuclear
reactor could have been raised both at the time Israel took out the Iraqi
reactor and when the Syrian reactor was taken out. However, the fact remains
that on both occasions it was the end of those countries’ nuclear
Can Diskin imagine what the US would have had to contend with
had Iraq been allowed to continue its nuclear program? Can he imagine what the
anti- Assad rebels in Syria might be contending with right now? The public is
well aware that there are risks in any mission and that no outcome is certain,
but Diskin’s demagogic language helps nobody. One expects a bit of common sense
from an ex-Shin Bet chief.
Sir, – Neshama Carlebach’s “statement” in rewriting the words to Hatikva negates
the centuries-old belief in a Jewish homeland (“Neshama Carlebach voices new
‘Hatikva’ at ‘Post’ conference,” April 29).
By “embracing everyone,”
Carlebach is being so open-minded that she has holes in her head. She mistakes
inclusiveness for appeasement, a process that never works and only begs for
Thousands of years of yearning are not to be erased by one’s
mistaken idea of inclusiveness.
You don’t erase God’s gift to His people
and the UN’s reaffirmation of Israel as the land of the Jewish people just to
demonstrate to the world that we’re the good guys.
Perhaps once she and
all the other Jews in the Diaspora have made aliya, the words that sustained and
unified us and gave us hope for 2,000 years might be changed. But not
Sir, – Poor Neshama Carlebach.
so innocent or misguided that she thinks all we have to do is love our neighbors
and they will fall over themselves to make peace? That nonsense has been tried
ad nauseam. But to change the words of Hatikva? Here’s a story for her. In West
Hartford, Connecticut, where I grew up, it was a great honor to sing in the high
school choir, including during the Christmas pageant, with words like, “Worship
Christ, the new-born king.” I decided that my children would never have to sing
such a thing, so we left the US, came to Israel and raised a family very
We know what it means to be in a minority culture. The Arabs
have the same choice that we did. They can sing Hatikva as is or they can find a
state where they can be part of the majority.
There are lots of such
states right in this neighborhood.
Shame on The Jerusalem Post for
sponsoring such a travesty.
Sir, – First and
foremost, Neshama Carlebach needs to heal herself. Her political correctness and
good-vibe mentality is misplaced when directed at her Jewish brothers and
sisters in Israel. She fails to understand that it is all about living proudly
and strongly in our homeland, and never denying or stepping back from who we are
or where we came from.
This is a Jewish country, the only one in the
world. It is not an Israeli country. Everyone else who lives here is welcome if
they accept this simple fact and make peace with it.
father’s name is even more disturbing. Of course Reb Shlomo felt that “we have
to love more,” but how about starting by loving ourselves? How about his concern
and love for his own people? What she has done is the opposite.
Sir, – Your editorial “Replacing Tal” (April 29)
urges a moderate approach to any replacement for the Tal Law by asserting, with
zero supporting evidence, that “in another decade or two, the haredi population
will have changed dramatically and significantly larger numbers will be sharing
the collective burdens of the Jewish nation.”
In absolute numbers there
may be more haredim both in uniform and off the bread line, but in relative
numbers the percentage of those who play a productive and contributing role will
remain the same.
There is no conceivable reason why a population that has
successfully leveraged its demographic representation to its own advantage will
discontinue doing so as its demographic power increases
What most Israelis – the Post included – just don’t get is
that haredim by and large have never accepted the idea of a Jewish state,
although most would not hesitate to use the state’s misbegotten political system
to its advantage. In this respect they are no different from the Arab
What has to change is not the Tal Law. What has to change is the
way we elect our government.
Sir, – It’s about time.
If Israel is a democracy, it is the duty of every citizen to contribute to the
health and safety of the nation.
It is a national disgrace that a third
of Israelis do not contribute to any form of service, whether military or
otherwise, yet readily accept benefits and privileges from the sweat and blood
of those who daily put their lives at risk for the protection of
Those who are fit for the army but unable to serve in combat units
should be compelled to do equal time serving in vital back-up units, such as
those performing catering, cleaning and general duties.
units should be set up for people to serve in hospitals, assist the aged and
infirm, or keep their neighborhoods clean and tidy.
Sir, – Regarding new laws for the induction of haredi yeshiva students into the
army, it seems a good idea to give those brave fighters who throw deadly
missiles at policemen hand grenades to throw at the real enemy.
‘Post’ too right-wing
Sir, – Kudos to reader Michael Brunert
for his letter (“Shame and blame,” April 23) concerning the overload of articles
by extreme right-wingers, which is making it increasingly difficult to read The
Brunert could have been even more critical, for on many
days there is simply page after page of the same kind of propagandistic writing.
The Post never seems to have enough of it – although once in a while it throws a
sop to the other side by giving grudging (but not equal) space to a Hirsh
Goodman or David Newman.
The tilt is without question toward the extreme
right, and recently this has been reflected in the editorials as well. Whatever
happened to the moderate Jerusalem Post of old? A return to the center is