Still gets coverage
Sir, – With regard to “PM, Olmert go head-to-head over Iran”
(December 2), a crook who sold out the city of Jerusalem to real estate
developers and was an abject failure as a war-time prime minister now wants to
criticize our sitting prime minister in favor of the worst US president ever,
and against the interests of Israel.
The amazing thing is that Ehud
Olmert still gets coverage.CHAIM A. ABRAMOWITZ
Cost of living
Sir, – With regard to “Netanyahu’s Jerusalem house costs taxpayers NIS 3m. a
year” (December 2), I can understand this, as his official residence is also
used for functions, dinners and other official activities.
What I don’t
understand is why we taxpayers have to pay for the expenses incurred at his home
in Caesarea and at his private apartment on Aza Street here in
Why do we have to pay for the gardening and water bills in
Caesarea? Netanyahu should cover the costs of his private residences. That is
not the job of us taxpayers. We have enough to pay for our own apartment
Sir, – I live in Caesarea, a few
hundred meters from the prime minister’s privates home.
I know what it
costs to maintain a house here (gardening, water, etc.). The figures you
published are not that outrageous. But I don’t understand why the taxpayer has
to bear these costs. It’s not like Chequers in the UK or Camp David in the US,
where important guests are invited and diplomatic meetings take place. It’s a
private home for the Binyamin netanyahu’s personal use.
security installations, but when he or his family are not in residence there is
no one to man them. I assume the property has an alarm system, as required by
every insurance company, and the closed-circuit TV camera should be more than
enough protection against intruders. A personal security detail for the prime
minister and his family is an acceptable public expense, but nothing
Netanyahu can well afford the upkeep of his villa from his own
resources. Even if not, why does he need another apartment in Jerusalem, also at
our expense? Former leaders of our country, such as David Ben-Gurion, Golda Meir
and Menachem Begin, lived modest lives. Even when he was president, Zalman
Shazar refused to move into the new and grandiose official residence, preferring
to remain in his humble shack.
Let’s put an end to these “snouts in the
trough” for which we all have to pay.
Caesarea Not all
Sir, – Post correspondent Greer Fay Cashman reports on our president’s
trip to Mexico and his statements (“Peres in Mexico: We’ll make peace with the
Palestinians,” December 2). She tells us that at the international book fair in
Guadalajara, Shimon Peres said the following: “Swords kill; books
This is a very quotable and pithy remark. I wonder if this
general statement includes the likes of works such as Mein Kampf.
Sir, – Perhaps, if it weren’t for the
willful blindness of US President Barack Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry,
EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton et al, this Hanukka might not have
become a “time of nightmares of the coming reality of Iranian nuclear warheads,”
as Eli Kavon puts it (“Rome: The Maccabee miscalculation,” Comment &
features, December 2).
We indeed should celebrate our sovereignty in our
homeland along with God’s miracles and Jewish security. However, we cannot do
this while sticking our heads in the sand, as Rabbi Kavon seems to be
Sir, – I am surprised, particularly at this
time of the year, that no one in government has seen fit to quote Simon
Maccabeus: “Then answered Simon: We have neither taken other men’s land, nor
holden that which appertaineth to others, but the inheritance of our fathers,
which our enemies had wrongfully in possession a certain time” (Maccabees I,
It was true then and is true today, and couldn’t be better stated
in regard to settlements, the two-state solution and all the legal debates going
on in the world concerning our history and our just claim to the Land of
For a start, we should stop talking about the “occupied
territories,” which should rightfully be called the “recaptured” or “liberated”
territories of Judea and Samaria.
Sir, – Kudos for “Disturbing imagery” (Editorial, December 1) , which
castigates the silence of US President Barack Obama over violent attacks on Jews
in Brooklyn, and statements by Iran and in Palestinian Authority schools,
mosques, and media outlets that dehumanize Jews.
However, I suggest that
the writer reads Obama’s book before quoting from it. As the urban-legend
debunking site snopes.com points out, The Audacity of Hope does not contain the
quote: “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an
Meaning of ‘negotiate’
The Palestinians are learning fast! They saw how the Iranians managed to have
the P5+1 sign an agreement easing the sanctions without them having to give up
on almost anything. Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif knew the US
was desperate to finalize an agreement and threatened to leave the negotiations
lest Iran’s demands were met.
So, too, the Palestinians. Not only did
they demand that we free scores of terrorists imprisoned for the murder or
intended murder of Israeli men, women and children before they agreed to even
sit down to talk with us. Now they are threatening to leave the negotiations
unless we stop all settlement building, knowing very well that the Americans
wish to push an agreement through – at all cost.
Does not the word
“negotiate” mean that both sides must give up on something? If anything at all,
a stop in settlement building should be used as a negotiating card, not given
away before an agreement is even discussed.
Sir, – Like many of us, Martin Sherman agonizes over US President
Barack Obama’s true intentions behind “the crushing failure of his policies”
(“Will the West withstand Obama’s presidency?” Into the Fray, November 29) Or,
Sherman argues, perhaps his policies indeed reflect his true intentions and
therefore, to Obama, are “a calculated success,” showing “purposeful
Sherman would not dare describe him as a “Manchurian
candidate”; this would attribute to a US president treasonous intentions, an
outrageous accusation! Yet let us remind ourselves that the Manchurian candidate
has no autonomous intentions. He has been programmed to behave in certain ways
to be determined by forces hostile to US interests.
It can be argued that
all of us are “programmed” – by our parents, education and social
As we mature, it is hoped that we develop certain traits
that enable us to assert our own individuality within the parameters of our
previous programming. Occasionally we might move autonomously in novel and
unpredictable ways, confirming intentions that are genuinely our own. But we
dare not underestimate our upbringing.
In The Roots of Obama’s Rage,
Dinesh D’Souza discusses Obama’s family background education and early political
His programming! How else can we explain his bizarre
attitudes and policies reflected in a lengthy series of decisions ranging from
the Fort Hood massacre, described as a “workplace incident,” to NASA’s new
mission to “improve relations with the Muslim world,” the Benghazi fiasco, the
Egyptian betrayal and Syrian embarrassment, and now the Iran-Munich