Failing grade in Physics
In the article “Conversing towards a shared homeland” (June 20), Tova Hartman draws an analogy between Jews and Arabs sharing the “Land of Israel” and the “Second Law of Physics,” which she believes states that “two solid objects cannot occupy the same space at the same time.” Hartman is the Dean of Humanities at Ono Academic College, which is “the fastest growing institute of higher education in Israel” (or so claimed). She should have consulted with a physicist or a scientist on the staff. There is no such statement in the “Second Law of Physics” first enunciated by Newton, which rather develops a connection between force exerted on an object and the resulting acceleration. Newton is turning over in his grave.
In another article on the same page, “Letters to our extended family members – Fellow Jews,” Gil Troy writes “The gravitational physics surrounding the Israel conversation frustrates me” What does this mean? Wherein lies the comparison? Does he mean the black hole from which nothing escapes, as in the conversation from which nothing results? Or does he mean dark matter that nobody understands, as in the two sides, Palestinians and Israelis, doomed to never understand each other? Or does he mean the planets revolving around each other in a never-ending dance, as in Palestinians and Israelis concerning Jerusalem, the right of return, etc?
Why are pundits who have no understanding of physics drawn to these absurd usages of physical concepts ?
Professor Emeritus of Physics
Equal under the law
Regarding “Court rejects Jewish terror defendant’s confession under duress,” (June 20), extremists, whether Palestinian or Jewish, are terrorists under the law. What is important is getting to the truth and/or saving lives.
The article quotes the prosecution as saying, “all of the uproar is about their being Jewish and their supporters believing Jews committing the crimes they perpetrated should get treated better than Palestinians.” They should not get treated better; they should know better and behave better than these terrorists who kill and maim because of their religious fanaticism. They should get the book thrown at them and be treated in the same way as the system would deal with non-Jewish terrorists.
I, for one, am ashamed of what they did. An eye for an eye and we’d all be walking around blind.
Having grown up in a rugby-oriented country, I had never ever before watched a soccer match (“Russia first to two wins after beating Egypt,” June 20). However, this week I decided to give it a try, and was amazed at some of the discoveries I made.
To begin with, most of the players have wonderful haircuts, stylish and well-kept, even with all their running around, a tribute to the hair oils they must use. I also discovered that soccer balls are never carried, only kicked about. I can only hope that there are orthopedic surgeons hovering in the background, as there are falls and push-overs every few seconds. Yet although many of these victims look unconscious or worse, they manage to get up quickly and are soon running around again.
The audience at the Mondial seems to play a huge part in the games. The fans cheer, cry, clap, scream, sing, dance and hug each other. They seem to have come from every country and corner in the world, and I can only hope they’ve got the money to get back home.
I am also amazed at the ability of the announcer reviewing each game. He knows all the players by name, as well as their past careers and future plans. He can criticize, compliment, notice the faults and offer solutions. He must have studied this subject for months ahead of time, and seems to have done a wonderful job, as some of the names seem impossible to remember or pronounce.
Now that I have a new interest in life, I’m looking forward to the future, and hope that some other games come up soon on the screen.
Regarding “Elkin upset Brits call east J’lem ‘Occupied Palestinian Territories’” (June 19), five Israeli prime ministers, including David Ben-Gurion, Yitzhak Rabin and Ariel Sharon, have warned about either an undemocratic non-Jewish state or bi-nationalism if the occupation continues indefinitely. Sharon said, “You may not like the word, but what is happening is an occupation, to hold 3.5 million Palestinians under occupation... that is a terrible thing for Israel and for the Palestinians... Do you want to stay forever in Jenin, in Nablus, in Ramallah, in Bethlehem? I don’t think that’s right.”
Israel controls the West Bank through the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories and ultimately the Defense Ministry. Settlers are Israeli citizens who may vote on their lives and move back and forth – either to visit or live – across a (for them) nonexistent border, as often as they want to. Israel denies the West Bank and east Jerusalem Palestinian majority both voting and free movement rights.
Even though 97% of east Jerusalem’s Palestinian residents oppose Israeli control over the their part of the city, mayoral candidate Ze’ev Elkin now protests the assertion of Prince William and his government’s assertion that it is an occupation. Does the Post honestly report the news here? Longstanding Western (including British) policy is distortedly trivialized to that of the prince’s “handlers.”
UN Resolution 242 regarding the 1967 war, recognized by Israel and the world, speaks of some, or total (the only dispute is the definite article, “the”) withdrawal from territories “occupied in the recent conflict.” Occupied.
Does Ze’ev Elkin deny what five prime ministers and Israel in its recognition of 242 and most of the world and what (and is this worthy of a real democracy) 97% of east Jerusalem Arabs say?
Why wouldn’t all of us want two states and security and peace instead of non-democracy and chaos – or binationalism and a no longer distinctively Jewish state? That is, why wouldn’t all of us who care for Israel want the first?