March 23: Richly piqued

US President Barack Obama’s pique at Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for pouring cold water on the prospects for a two-state solution is rich.

March 22, 2015 23:05

Letters. (photo credit: REUTERS)


Dear Reader,
As you can imagine, more people are reading The Jerusalem Post than ever before. Nevertheless, traditional business models are no longer sustainable and high-quality publications, like ours, are being forced to look for new ways to keep going. Unlike many other news organizations, we have not put up a paywall. We want to keep our journalism open and accessible and be able to keep providing you with news and analyses from the frontlines of Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish World.

As one of our loyal readers, we ask you to be our partner.

For $5 a month you will receive access to the following:

  • A user experience almost completely free of ads
  • Access to our Premium Section
  • Content from the award-winning Jerusalem Report and our monthly magazine to learn Hebrew - Ivrit
  • A brand new ePaper featuring the daily newspaper as it appears in print in Israel

Help us grow and continue telling Israel’s story to the world.

Thank you,

Ronit Hasin-Hochman, CEO, Jerusalem Post Group
Yaakov Katz, Editor-in-Chief

UPGRADE YOUR JPOST EXPERIENCE FOR 5$ PER MONTH Show me later Don't show it again

Richly piqued

US President Barack Obama’s pique at Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for pouring cold water on the prospects for a two-state solution (“Disappointment in the air at the White House,” March 20) is rich.

Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.

In March 2012, Obama was caught on an open microphone saying to then-Russian president Dmitry Medvedev: “This is my last election. After my election, I will have more flexibility.” He was referring to missile defenses in Europe, and the US media interpreted “more flexibility” to mean going against the will of the American public without being held accountable.

Obama hates and seeks to punish anyone who undermines his vision of the world, no matter how wildly unrealistic. It is inconceivable that he should be allowed to damage a long-term, mutually beneficial relationship merely as a result of his intense personal hatred for Netanyahu.


See the latest opinion pieces on our Opinion & Blogs Facebook page

Some pre-conditions

In “Resetting the peace process” (Know Comment, March 20), David M. Weinberg sets out nine guidelines for any new government to adopt. It is an excellent piece, with which I totally agree.

However, what we now need is a means of appealing to the West and putting the Palestinians on the defensive. I suggest we do so by announcing pre-conditions: • We shall talk only to a Palestinian Authority whose leader and legislature are democratically elected. The incumbent president passed his use-by date when his four-year term expired in 2009.

• The PA would have to acknowledge Israel as a Jewish state and understand it will have no right to flood it with Palestinians.

• The Palestinians should know that we will not talk to anyone whose charter includes a clause for the destruction of Israel and/or Jews.

In my opinion, these pre-conditions would be acceptable to the West. They by no means negate the points made by Mr. Weinberg.


Trampling rights

While I agree with your comment vis a vis our minority Arab population (“Same PM, new era,” Editorial, March 19), I must take issue with your statement: “A strong... Supreme Court is a price worth paying to avoid a situation in which governments [of the Right] trample the rights of minorities....”

I would like to remind you that Kadima was a centrist party that violated the rights of 10,000 Gush Katif citizens. It was the leftist Labor Party that brought us Oslo and violated the rights of Israeli citizens to life itself. One can also add the tyranny of the left-wing media as another example, or that only leftist speech – no matter how inflammatory – is allowed.

You might not like the outcome of the election, but some of us really don’t want another Palestinian state on our door step. We already have enough difficulty in the current situation, where at least missiles don’t fall like rain courtesy of our West Bank neighbors.


Israel must find a way for a twostate solution. You can’t keep the Palestinians subjugated for the next hundred years.

What happens when the Palestinians get smart? All they have to do is declare they no longer want a separate state and want to be full citizens of Israel. No more attacks.

The British beat the Boers in South Africa. But by 1946, the Afrikaners (Boers) became the majority white tribe. They controlled the country until Apartheid ended.

RALPH HATTEM Napa, California

President Barak Obama must reconcile himself to more “hardline” leadership from Benjamin Netanyahu.

Imagine! Israel, a nation the size of New Jersey, elected a hard-line government just because it has a toxic mix on its borders of the battle of Stalingrad, the rape of Nanking and the Spanish Inquisition, as well as 1.3 billion contentious, ungovernable neighbors. The morning after its elections, a Tunisian museum was shot up by... well, does it really matter? Just another day in the non-Israel Middle East.

The main thing is that none of the losers are going to be thrown off tall buildings, vanish into dungeons or be dragged behind motorcycles. Nor are the victors (and their progeny) going to govern until they are unseated by a violent coup.

Jimmy Carter can stay home.Obama can keep his proboscis out of Israel’s politics. And our narcissistic, Nobel Prize-chasing, anti-Israel secretary of state can at least try to work with the only democratic state in the Middle East, the only nation on Earth with the courage to stand up to Iran.

ROBERT SARGEANT Fredericksburg, Virginia

Congratulations, Israel. You have reelected as your leader someone who has done great harm to your relationship with the American people.

The grave insult Benjamin Netanyahu did to our presidency, and his politicizing American support for Israel, were bad enough. But you then reelected him, which reflects on your country.

As a life-long independent who has been strongly supportive of Israel’s right to peaceful existence, I am offended and dismayed by what has happened.

I’m not the only independent American who is troubled.

You are going down a dangerous path if you choose to ignore the American public.

KEVIN DEPIES Sacramento, California

A better use

With regard to “British PM pledges millions for security for Jewish institutions” (March 20), what is David Cameron thinking? Security will only make British Jewry feel like they’re in a prison.

Why doesn’t he just give each British Jew 50 thousand pounds to go to Israel? It’s a win-win situation! Britain won’t have to spend millions every year to keep its Jews out of the clutches of a growing, radicalized Muslim population, and the Jews will finally feel safe and secure in Israel, where they’re wanted and appreciated.


Waste of space

Try as I might, I cannot fathom the motivation of the editorial selection process at The Jerusalem Post that saw fit to include Nicholas Kristof’s article about the factory slaughter of chickens (“To kill a chicken,” Comment & Features, March 19).

First and foremost, it dealt exclusively with the process for non-kosher slaughter by means of mechanically carving open the throats of shackled fowl – a practice entirely alien to shechita (Jewish religious slaughter). One might surmise that an underling on your staff read a few lines without realizing the nature of the process being described.

Maybe the underling is a rabid vegetarian.

Anyway, since it didn’t apply to Jews, it was a waste of good editorial space and served only to highlight the differences between our concepts of the way to treat animals, and other nations’ versions of food processing.


Housing solution

There has been a lot written lately about how the Likud has done much for the economy, but little to ease the lot of the people.

Property prices are too high, which, in turn, makes rents more expensive.

One solution suggested during the recent election campaign is to subsidize property costs for segments of the community.

But helping people buy properties at inflated prices will only drive prices (and rents) higher.

Property is too expensive because non-residents are purchasing it as an investment. The solution is either to ban them from buying property or, at the very least, to charge them a very high tax. If necessary, this could be followed by other measures, such as rent control, taxes on empty properties, etc.

EDMUND JONAH Rishon Lezion

Related Content

August 15, 2018
Election 2018: A Jewish perspective