November 12: Four more years
November 6, 2012, could be a date of great historical importance – not because of those of us who opposed Obama’s reelection but because the realities of today’s world dictated such opposition.
Letters Photo: REUTERS/Handout
Four more years
Sir, – I am in total agreement with Caroline B. Glick’s astute
analysis of what four more years of Barack Obama portend not only for Israel but
for the United States (“A time for courage and action,” Column One, November
November 6, 2012, could be a date of great historical importance, for
on that date the US voting population may have committed the gravest error in
its history – not because of those of us who opposed Obama’s reelection but
because the realities of today’s world dictated such opposition.
either ignores or defies reality does so at his own risk.
Sir, – The election is over.
Obama won and will continue to be
president of the United States. We all need to accept this and work toward
So what is the purpose for Caroline B. Glick to write what
she does in the second paragraph of her column?
Sir, – I take issue with David Brinn’s contention that “Netanyahu was
perceived by almost everyone to endorse Romney” (“Accepting the new reality,”
Observations, November 9).
Many others have likewise accused our prime
minister of interfering in the American elections, but we are never given
examples. I myself felt that Netanyahu, throughout the campaign, behaved in a
statesman-like and even-handed way without showing bias in favor of either
In fact, in a recent Post article, a Pennsylvania woman stated
that she was persuaded to back Obama after Netanyahu, at the AIPAC convention,
praised him, saying that his administration had been very supportive of Israel
(“Undecided Pennsylvania Jew waiting until last minute,” November 6).
also query Brinn’s advice to Netanyahu to find a way to work with the US
president, the implication being that our prime minister has been at fault in
his dealings with Obama. In fact, on many occasions Obama has behaved badly
toward Bibi and our country, but not vice-versa.
The tension between the
two is not because of failings on our prime minister’s part but because Obama
feels a far greater allegiance to Muslims than to Israel and would be inclined
to treat any Israeli leader in the same hostile way, except, perhaps, a leader
who shows readiness to make far-reaching concessions.
Sir, – With regard to “Abu who?” (Into the Fray,
November 9), if anyone requires proof that Israel’s political elites on the Left
are delusional, read the column that appeared below it by Uri Savir (“Escapism
and the Palestinian peace process,” Savir’s Corner).
What Savir writes is
a classic example of the political psychosis of the Left. He ennobles
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas as a “moderate” and a partner for
peace. Why? Because during an Israeli TV interview Abbas supposedly nullified
the Palestinian manifesto clause regarding the demand for a right of
Savir, one of the illusional architects of Oslo, doesn’t have the
integrity to mention that one day after the Channel 2 interview, Abbas, in
Arabic, retracted the statement, which had been made in English.
Israelis should be more fearful of our left-wing elites than of our declared
enemies, such as Abbas.
– Concerning your editorial of November 8 (“Shocking situation”), may I add two
points: 1. Since the Israel Electric Corporation (IEC) needs government support
to remain solvent, it is unbelievable that the government does not insist on
reform as a condition – a clear indication that it is powerless to exercise
control over this crucial element of the national infrastructure.
equally unbelievable that, with the IEC in such a parlous state, it salted away
NIS 1.4 billion to fund future perks for employees. What else could so clearly
show that it is controlled by its workers and not by management? 2. Like most
electric utilities, the IEC offers a time-based tariff for cheaper electricity
at night, when there’s less demand. To be eligible, however, the consumer must
have an electrical installation of the same size found in large industrial
Since this arrangement also involves a certain amount of work on
the part of the utility, the IEC takes the attitude of “Why bother?” It knows it
will not be stopped from from passing on additional capital expenditures for
more generating facilities and a larger grid to consumers and the
The staff of the Ministry of National Infrastructures lacks
the technical and economic knowledge to understand how the public and the
government are being milked. The IEC also knows that even if the government did
understand how the electric company was taking the country for a ride, it would
lack the courage to do anything about it.
There is a story, possibly
apocryphal, in which Pinhas Rutenberg, who established the electric company, had
one bookkeeper who asked to have free electricity. When Rutenberg refused, the
bookkeeper threatened to sit in the window in public view doing the books by the
light of an oil lamp. Rutenberg capitulated.
The management of the IEC
has been capitulating to workers ever since.
writer is a member of the Institution of Engineering and Technology.
Sir, – Your editorial “Kosher competition” (November 6) proposes that
kashrut supervision and certification be open to competition, thereby improving
the services, providing incentives for excellence and giving the organized
Jewish religion a better name.
The main complaints the food providers
have against the Rabbinate’s kashrut supervision are the religious demands
imposed on them. The grievances cited in the editorial fade into nothingness in
comparison. How much easier it would be to simply engage a less stringent
In Israel the function of determining and
supervising what is considered “kosher” by law is entrusted to a single
governmental agency, the Chief Rabbinate.
It sets a minimum standard
based on the Code of Jewish Law/Yoreh Dea and related responsa, and issues a
certificate identifying the kashrut level as “regular.” Thus, anyone not
familiar with a particular supplier need not search any farther than the
supplier’s kashrut certificate to ascertain that the product meets this
It is recognized that that are even stricter standards, and
certain communities have additional stringencies (e.g., glatt). In such
instances, many local rabbinates provide a higher level of supervision labeled
“Mehadrin,” or additional entities such as Bet Yosef, Chatam Sofer or Badatz may
be employed. In such situations, efficiency would be served if the Chief
Rabbinate outsourced part of its surveillance activities to these
It is wondered whether the Post also recommends opening to
competition other agencies performing certification and inspection, for example
with such functions as health, auto safety and veterinary
Before extolling the model in the US, I would suggest you
peruse Jewish periodicals of major US cities from the 1930s and 1940s to learn
of attempts by unsavory elements to take over the kosher food industry. It is
hardly a scenario to be mimicked.
name of the group highlighted in “Support groups needed” (Letters, November 6)
was Gamani, and not as initially stated.