Good on Bennett
Sir, – The first thing that came to mind when I read the headline “PM cancels meeting with ‘childish’ Bennett over threats he’ll quit” (April 14) was the tale The Emperor’s New Clothes.
Only a child dared say out loud what everyone saw but didn’t want to say.
Good on you, Naftali Bennett.
Call it as it should be.
Petah Tikva Whose land?
Sir, – Prof. Bernard Lewis, the most prominent of Islamic historians, has spent much of his academic career in an effort to impress upon the Western world that Islam is on the march again toward world religious domination.
During the Dark Ages of European history, Islam was a beacon of civilization, modernity, innovation and the advancement of knowledge. Moreover, many saw it as a bridge between ancient and modern times. Today, though, it is a combination of violent military power and reactionary, fundamentalist fanaticism using Western military technology to restore the historic glory of the Islamic past.
Islam does not leave room for religious tolerance. The infidel is, once again, the Judeo-Christian world whose religious ideas and beliefs are to be stamped out. Erroneously, we continue to use the Western mind-set in an effort to deal with militant fundamentalist politicians. They are permitted to lie and deceive by Islamic law in order to realize their aims.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, a so-called moderate, can never accept Israel as the Jewish state, for in doing so he would be admitting that the State of Israel has the right to exist alongside its Islamic neighbors.
Lands once conquered by Islam remain frozen in time as Islamic holy lands, never to be relinquished. If Abbas tries to compromise the principle of recognition, he will surely be assassinated.JOSH WIESEN
Sir, – The idea of the Land of Israel being Muslim territory is sufficient to prevent the Palestinians from making peace with Israel, as Muslims seem to be very unwilling to cede such territory to non-Muslims and recognize any Jewish sovereignty in such a land.
One way around this is to try and demonstrate that in fact the Land of Israel never became Muslim territory because Jews maintained a continuous presence in their homeland and never surrendered or abandoned it to anyone. Thus, for 2,000 years the Jews were an occupied people in their own homeland.
Although this might seem an unlikely way of making peace with the Palestinians, as they seem very firm on the Muslim nature of the land, if peace will not come from other strategies perhaps a plan of this note could be used.LARRY FELDMAN
Sir, – Technically speaking, for each of the one and a half thousand Israelis who have been killed in the name of peace since the peace process began, two houses should be built.
However, since a Jew is worth a thousand Palestinians (as decided by world opinion, which tends to govern our decisions to some extent), for each Jew killed 2,000 houses should be built.
This of course means three million houses would go up.
Perhaps this could be brought to the attention of US Secretary of State John Kerry. His tireless efforts for peace are to be admired, and as a gesture of our good faith, a reduction of 500 homes would be very appropriate.HARVEY HASS
Jerusalem Unparalleled sight
Sir, – Referring to Stephen Gabriel Rosenberg’s “The Exodus: Does archaeology have a say?” (Comment & Features, April 14), one would think the best way to place the date of the Exodus is to find which pharaoh and his army drowned in a sea under very strange circumstances.
This was a sight unparalleled and remains to this day the central theme of Passover.
Akhenaton was far too late and he did not drown; neither did Ramses, who is considered the most likely candidate, or even Merneptah. To find the right pharaoh we have to go back to the time when the Hyksos invaded Egypt. Too early? May I suggest a look at Ages in Chaos, Immanuel Velikovsky’s companion book to his Words in Collision. Ages in Chaos presents a logical and corresponding history of Egypt and Israel (with even an Egyptian eyewitness to the plagues).
There is much evidence today that the crossing at the Red Sea in fact took place across the Gulf of Aqaba into Saudi Arabia, where huge quantities of chariot wheels have been discovered under the waters and the topography is exactly as described in the Torah. Monuments were erected on both sides of the gulf in antiquity to celebrate the crossing. The Saudis removed the one on their side, but the one on the side of the Sinai Peninsula can still be viewed.
It is such a pity that steps are not taken to verify Velikovsky’s very credible chronology.
As for his evidence in World’s in Collision, he faced many who were brave enough to challenge him in debates. Not one succeeded.
Einstein died with a copy open at his desk.
Rishon Lezion Off key
Sir, – I read with interest David Brinn’s interview with David Broza regarding the musician’s newest album (“David Broza ‘parts the Red Sea’ with Israeli- Palestinian camaraderie”) in your East meets West Passover supplement (April 14).
I was excited, as I am a longstanding fan of Broza’s music, and would say that the idea of recording a record with Jewish and Palestinian musicians is a laudable effort in the area of reconciliation. But seriously, does Broza actually think he can record songs by Jew haters and Israel delegitimizers and boycotters like Roger Waters, Cat Stevens and Elvis Costello and declare that the music rises above politics? There are countless poems and songs of peace that have been written by Jews from our distant past right up to the present day that he could have picked from.
Was it so difficult for him to find such compositions from his Palestinian musical collaborators that all he could do was turn to the compositions of people who have demonstrated their hate for us? I think I’ll be skipping this album.
Sir, – What has happened to academic freedom? There is tyranny by groups as to freedom of thought, expression, argument and counter-argument. A prime example is what has happened in the United States at Brandeis University (“Brandeis reneges on plan to give honorary degree to Islam critic,” April 10).
A Muslim woman who was abused by Shari’a Law and Muslim custom has been able to speak out against all Muslim extremism. Brandeis was going to give her an honorary degree, but pressure from Muslim groups all over America made it rescind this decision. It made Brandeis look ridiculous.
Israel calls every expression of concern about the way Arabs in the Knesset vote against Israel’s national security interests and unity of opinion “incitement against the Arabs.” The Arabs, on the other hand, can say what they want about Jews and Israelis, but that is not called incitement.
If young people do not want academic freedom about thought, information or expression, they will turn into the robots that science right now is working on.
Sir, – Why does Brandeis University allow anti-Israel speakers but not anti-Islam speakers? That’s easy. When Jews don’t like a speaker they don’t go on a rampage, don’t set bombs and don’t kill people. End of argument.