In an article from April 19, “Three indicted for helping fund Islamist harassers on Temple Mount,” in the photo caption, it states that “Three Israelis are brought yesterday to the Jerusalem District Court to be arraigned for funding the Murabitat movement.”
A casual reader seeing that caption would think and believe that three Jews were behind the Temple Mount violence as is often claimed by anti-Israel propagandists.
When one reads the article, it is learned that the three indicted are Arabs from Umm el-Fahm and Silwan.
Quite different from what the photo caption leads one to believe.
Jerusalem/Los Angeles Same old
How exactly is the prime minister settling accounts with the terrorists? “21 wounded in Jerusalem bus explosion,” April 19.
Is it perhaps by allowing them more freedom to roam our land? Or maybe it is by allowing them to believe that one day they could be given more Jewish land? Or perhaps it is by coming down hard on the Jews that refuse to be intimidated by a hostile world and the Arabs living on our land? Perhaps it is by refusing to destroy Hamas and standing by while they grow stronger, ready for the next attack at a time and place of their choosing, as was seen from a recent development where the IDF uncovered a 30-meter deep Hamas tunnel stretching from Gaza into Israel – incidentally on the same day as the bombing? Perhaps it is knowing that Hamas is still building tunnels that could be avoided had Benjamin Netanyahu not told Hamas he had no intention of destroying them? While the government spends time and money looking for new ways to detect enemy tunnels that are within a few meters of the border with Gaza, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon assures our enemy that Israel is not seeking a confrontation, as though that has not been self-evident for years.
And of course he continues with his childish and pathetic threats that it will be hit hard if it tries to challenge the State of Israel.
What does he think it has been doing year after year after year while actually being treated like some sort of partner in peace where Netanyahu and Ya’alon actually made agreements with it for various ceasefires, always to our detriment.
No excuse Regarding the bus bombing in Jerusalem last week, “21 wounded in Jerusalem bus explosion,” April 19, the disturbing pictures and videos of the burning bus and the skeleton remains of the Egged bus make it necessary to question why both the interior and exterior of public transport vehicles are made of combustible material and not treated with flame retardant chemicals.
How come the Transport Ministry in our hi-tech, start-up nation permits the use of such materials in the construction of buses and coaches, to the public’s detriment.
There can be no excuse. Obviously international standards, just like those applicable to road surface markings, are ignored.
This has to stop immediately.
Public safety is paramount and must not be ignored like this.
COLIN L. LECI
A goal What a joy it was to read David Newman’s column, (19.4.16) For once I fully agree with him.
Please appoint him honorary sports commentator forthwith.
J Street’s Yael Patir claims that, “During his eight years in office [US President Barack] Obama blocked all Security Council resolutions that were critical of Israel...so I don’t think Obama can be accused of being anti-Israel” (‘Is Obama planning his revenge on Netanyahu?, Online Edition, April 14).
Actually, President Obama has supported resolutions both inside and outside the Security Council that harm, or would harm, Israel.
First, in February 2011, President Obama himself sought to condemn Israel in the UN Security Council for the “illegitimacy” of Jewish communities in the West Bank. Only when the Arab states insisted on their own resolution condemning these as “illegal” – a legally baseless assertion – was Obama compelled to veto the resolution.
Second, in 2010, unlike presidents Bill Clinton in 2000 and George W. Bush in 2005, President Obama permitted the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference statement singling out Israel and insisting it joint the NPT.
Third, in June 2010, President Obama agreed to a Security Council statement he could have easily vetoed, which “condemned” the “acts” that led to loss of life on the Gaza flotilla, thereby condemning Israel for the deaths of Hamas supporters who premeditatedly assaulted the Israeli boarding party enforcing the lawful inspection of Gaza-bound ships.
Fourth, last year, President Obama supported Security Council Resolution 2231, which neuters a previous ban on Iranian develop of ballistic missiles that could one day hit Israel.
MORTON A. KLEIN
New York The writer is president of the Zionist Organization of America.Boomerang revolution
I found Mohamed Chtatou’s article “Is the Arab dream of democracy truly broken?” April 20, to be an eye-opener to a certain degree but rather puzzling to another degree.
The analysis of the two major forms of government in the Arab world over the past century: traditional monarchy (Saudi Arabia, Gulf states) and pan-Arabist republics (Egypt, Syria, etc.) was interesting and gives some clear insight into the frustrations that Arab youth have experienced and that led to the “Arab Spring.”
Chtatou goes on to explain the causes of this Arab youth rebellion as associated with strict, archaic, traditional patriarchal systems in which individuality is non-existent. He also mentions the frustration with a society that is highly obsessed with taboo over sexual issues – sex before marriage, homosexuality, flirtation, etc., and of course, “no freedom whatsoever for women.”
I find it very interesting that one of the results of this Arab Spring has been the rise of Islamic State, to which thousands of these frustrated youth have flocked for an answer to their disappointment.
Islamic State is a movement that clearly fosters the concept of a greater cause, erasing any individuality whatsoever.
It seems that the practices in Islamic State – the sale of women as chattel and violent sexual abuse of women and children are not what one would expect of a group of people who yearn for sexual freedom, but then again, I suppose one could say that in a sick sort of way, the male youth who were so frustrated are now able to fulfill themselves.
So why is it that these practices are so enticing to those frustrated youth of the Arab world, and if they crave freedom of speech and a sexual revolution, how will Islamic State provide them with what they wish to achieve? I don’t doubt that revolutions take strange paths before landing at their final destinations.
I can only hope that the Islamic State-complex is a boomerang effect in the completely wrong direction before swinging back toward a much more righteous one – a direction of personal freedoms, individual growth and political representation, along with economic justice.
Somehow I feel we have a long way to go before we begin to see this Arab Spring land in just that place.