March 10, 2017: Times have changed

One can hardly blame the present US administration for wanting to avoid the same situation from developing in the United States.

By LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Letters (photo credit: REUTERS)
Letters
(photo credit: REUTERS)
Times have changed
Reader Joe Bialek (“Targeting Trump,” Letters, March 8) describes the successful immigration and integration of his grandfather into the United States.
Over the centuries, the US has accepted and absorbed migrants from probably every country in the world. Apart from some very minor fringe groups, none advocated the elimination of the Constitution and its replacement with something else. Now, the United States is faced with the possible influx of people who wish to do precisely that.
In England, a situation has arisen that has not had its parallel since the Normans overthrew the native Saxons in the mid-11th century and imposed their own regime. Since then, great numbers of foreign groups have entered England and been absorbed, eventually becoming part of “the establishment.” Now there are native-born Britons who openly advocate the removal of all institutions that are not Islamic (such as the monarchy, the Church and bodies down to the lowest levels of administration). There and in Europe, there are cities with “no-go” areas where the writ of the host country does not run, being replaced with Shari’a jurisdiction.
One can hardly blame the present US administration for wanting to avoid the same situation from developing in the United States.
OSCAR DAVIES
Jerusalem
Purim starts early
With regard to “Netanyahu grilled a fourth time as probe winds down” (March 7), I have a Purimesque question: If Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was grilled four times, does that mean he is well done? Would it be correct to say: Well done, Mr. Netanyahu?
Happy Purim!
BENJIE AZIZ
Efrat
Benefits of 2 states
Kol hakavod to Rabbi John Rosove and Rabbi Joshua Weinberg for their insightful “A two-state solution: The only pragmatic path forward” (Comment & Features, March 7). While it will be difficult to obtain, a comprehensive, sustainable two-state solution that emphasizes Israel’s security concerns would have many benefits for Israel, including:
• Enabling it to remain both a Jewish and a democratic state
• Reducing terrorism and the threat of war • Reducing diplomatic criticism and the isolation of Israel, important at a time when almost all the world’s nations are critical of Israeli settlements and control over Palestinians in Judea and Samaria
• Reducing Israel’s need to spend massive amounts for defense and security, enabling it to more effectively respond to its economic, environmental and other domestic challenges
• Enabling Israel to more completely fulfill its moral mission as a model of justice, compassion and peace as a light unto the nations (Isaiah 49:6).
In view of the above, it is essential that Israel refrain from steps that make obtaining a resolution of the conflict more difficult, including creating new settlements, annexing all or part of Judea and Samaria, and encouraging the shifting of the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem prior to an end to the conflict.
RICHARD H. SCHWARTZ
Shoresh
Zero tolerance
I agree with comments by the chairman of the Jewish Agency in respect to the antisemitism link some are trying to lay at the door of US President Donald Trump (“Sharansky: Don’t blame Trump for hate,” March 3).
Right- or left-leaning policies are not on the agenda for these hatecrime perpetrators, as unfortunately they will always raise their ugly heads in jumping at the opportunity for creating discord, especially when a country’s political elite appear at complete loggerheads.
Running is certainly not the answer, as these acts are criminal. As such, the full force of the law is required to deal with them wherever they occur.
They hate us because our beliefs and principles are strong; therefore, we must not let these cowardly acts go unanswered.
STEPHEN VISHNICK
Tel Aviv
CORRECTION
The pre-army yeshiva academy at Eli headed by Rabbi Yigal Levenstein is Bnei David, and not as stated in “Women of valor” (Editorial, March 9). He made the comments referred to in the editorial as a guest speaker at the Otzem pre-army yeshiva academy in Naveh.