We’re not animals
Sir, – “They smashed our hearts and souls” (September 6) devastates all of us. This is not the way to demolish a family home, nor should it have been demolished at all.
We are not animals. Coming in the middle of the night to destroy the Guttmans’ home was not the act of a compassionate civil society. I love being an Israeli, but this makes me heartsick.
We must change this horrible political agenda, although the media and our political system hamstring us.
We do not take down Arab homes that are illegally built while our
government tries to find peace with Palestinians who don’t want peace.
Why can’t we get our priorities in line with reality? DORRAINE GILBERT WEISS
Naive in Ramallah
Sir, – Sefi Rachlevsky, one of the people who met with Palestinian
Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah (“Ross, Hale arrive for
final push to start talks and block PA’s UN bid,” September 6), supports
the PA’s plan for a Palestinian state along the pre-1967 lines because
“this is a realization of the Zionist dream when a people declare their
How can he compare this to the 2,000-year-old Jewish dream to return to
Zion? Rachlevsky says the group that went to Ramallah was deeply
impressed by the “extremely moderate” views expressed by Abbas. What
moderate views? What about all the anti-Israel statements the PA
president makes in Arabic? Rachlevsky also says the West Bank and the
Western Wall should be placed under Palestinian control, and that once
there is a Palestinian state, “Israel can always demand that certain
parts of the West Bank and the Western Wall be placed under Israeli
The Arabs will say drop dead.
The funniest part of the article was when Abbas told his visitors that
the Palestinian state will be “democratic and free, with equality
between men and women.” Sure. Just like in Gaza.
How naive can Rachlevsky or anyone else be to believe this? HARVEY MATTHEW
Sir, – Both sides in the science- versus-religion debate need to come
off their high perches (“Does questioning evolution make you
anti-science?,” No Holds Barred, September 6).
Scientists are wrong to exclude purpose in evolution and to say that the
cosmos and life came about by chance alone. On the contrary, the course
of evolution is predictable based on its constraints, convergences and
And evolution has progressed from simple replicating nucleotides to human beings.
When progress is added to predictability, a powerful argument results: that the world was intended, not happenstance.
This intention includes ourselves.
But religion’s literalists are just as wrong in their insistence that
the first seven paragraphs in Genesis provide the scientific data about
the origin of the natural world.
These stunning paragraphs teach many crucial matters, including divine
order, the unity of all that is and its inherent goodness. But if you
want to know the facts of how the world came about you’ll need the
sciences, from astronomy to zoology.
Of course the world has evolved – this was God’s method of creation.JOEL RUTMAN
The writer is a physician
Sir, – Shmuley Boteach mixes his levels in trying to harmonize evolution and creation.
The former is backed by an empirical confirmation of its findings and is
indeed subject to continuous modification, though its basics have not
as yet been disproved. It can have no bearing whatsoever on biblical
stories, all of which are there to teach us right from wrong and are
totally irrelevant to the fruits of scientific research into evolution
The moral imperative does not depend on empirical confirmation, which in
any case is only temporary. Or as that renowned Orthodox rabbinic
authority Yehezkel Abramsky was never tired of emphasizing at the
conclusion of the Book of Esther: “And as for the acts of Ahasuerus’s
power and might, and the full account of Mordecai’s claim to fame, are
they not written in the archives of the kings of Media and Persia?” If
you are looking for history, anthropology or any other scientific
discipline, go to the universities, but not to the Torah, which is a
timeless guide on how to behave and lead a good and holy life.ARYEH NEWMAN
Sir, – Was Shmuley Botech being deliberately misleading? All science is
theory because it is an on-going process, not an encyclopedia of facts.
Unlike mathematics, which can establish proofs, it seeks to find the
best possible understanding of natural phenomena in such a way that the
conjectures can be tested.
There is a vast amount of DNA evidence to establish evolution and natural selection.
Find it in books and natural history museums. There is also much fossil
evidence to support Darwin’s work. For example, trace the steps through
which a small, five-toed creature turned into today’s large one-toed
horse, or the steps by which a creature related to a modern day rhino
became a whale.
Evolution in action can be seen in the scientists’ struggle to develop
new medicines to defeat microbes that adapt to (and sometimes thrive on)
No one with an open, rational mind can doubt Darwinian evolution in the
broad sense, although biologists argue over bits of the detail.
Perhaps Boteach wrote the piece to trumpet that he had twice shared a
platform with Richard Dawkins. It is a pity that a news organization as
respected as The Jerusalem Post gave space to his nonsense.BOB MCMILLAN
Sir, – Dan Halutz once again raises his voice in favor of failed
policies that continue to harm Israel (“Former chief of IDF General
Staff says Israel should talk to Hamas,” September 4).
Halutz’s command of the 2005 unilateral withdrawal of Jewish settlements
from the Gaza Strip’s strategic Philadelphi line helped bring Hamas to
power and destabilize the frontier with Egypt. His highly criticized
over-reliance on air power against Hezbollah in 2006 led to his
resignation soon after.
And now we have his call to negotiate not with a usual enemy, but with
Hamas. One can only lose in any negotiation with the devil.
The Kadima Party would do well to remove the likes of Halutz from its ranks if it hopes to win the next election.AARON BRAUNSTEIN
Jumping the gun
Sir, – UNRWA spokesman Chris Gunness postulates (“UNRWA on op-ed,”
Letters, August 25) that the US State Department has already conducted a
study of Palestinian Authority textbooks that “found that the textbooks
we use are free of incitement, and that the curriculum is ‘peaceful’
and one in which ‘religious and political tolerance was emphasized.’”
That is not the case.
A State Department official has written to our agency saying it received
reports from two Palestinian-oriented organizations that described PA
textbooks in a positive manner.
However, the official also indicated that the State Department had not
yet issued any report of its own on the subject of text books. The State
Department is currently conducting a study under the auspices of Yale
University’s Bruce Wexler.
It would seem that UNRWA jumped the gun.DAVID BEDEIN
The writer is director of the Israel Resource News Agency.