The article by Nadav Tamir, “The diplomatic horizon is the Zionist horizon” (January 10), once again proves his bias and ineptitude in “diagnosing” his and J Street’s understanding of the perceived failures of diplomacy on the part of his Arab friends toward Israel, and instead placing all blame on Israel.
How does a country, Israel, proceed with diplomatic initiatives toward an entity, not a recognized state, that is hell-bent on our destruction? Why does the world continue to blame only Israel for the supposed intransigence and “occupation?” Simply put, because the J Streeters and their ilk push the occupation and apartheid narrative.
This land, given to us by God, was conquered and occupied by many others before we finally won it back in 1967. The word apartheid never appeared until self-hating Jewish Arabists coined the phrase to mask the defeat of the Arabs among us. Zionist diplomacy doesn’t exist in the minds of these Israel-haters.
So diplomacy in of itself, as well as Zionist diplomacy, will only happen when there are Arab leaders within the Palestinian Authority, and perhaps even Hamas, who truly want better lives for their people. To compare these deniers of the State of Israel to exist to the truly intelligent and skillful leaders of the UAE, etc., is a huge insult.
So, Mr. Tamir, close your office door to all outside noise and rethink the doctrine of the J Street organization. No country disappears because people will it to, and no “Jewish American” organization will determine the fate of this country that fought blood, sweat and tears to diplomatically and Zionistically survive.
That’s what should keep you thinking for some time to come.
Nadav Tamir states that all the polls indicate that the majority of Israelis support a two-state solution above all others. What polls is he referring to? Israel has just held four elections in the space of two years. There is no evidence from the results of any of the elections that the majority of Israelis want a two-state solution. The Palestinians themselves have already rejected a two-state solution on four occasions. Where are the borders of the two states that he is proposing?
What solution is he referring to? Does he really think that Hamas, Islamic Jihad or any of the other Islamic jihadist groups will suddenly change their fanatical obsession of liberating every inch of what they consider to be Palestinian land, by agreeing to hand them a state? Does he think that the PA will suddenly renounce its claim to east Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine and its claim to Judea and Samaria that is now referred to as the West Bank?
Does he think that any Palestinian leader will ever agree to renounce the so-called right of return of Palestinian refugees to Israel? Does he not understand that the stated policy of the PA is that no Jews will be allowed to live in Palestine, and that Israel must accept the return of the Palestinian refugees. The latter will result in a Palestinian majority in Israel, which will be the end of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state. In other words, they want one Palestinian state from the river to the sea. Is this so difficult to comprehend?
To confirm all of the above, all you have to do is read the Hamas Covenant and the PLO Charter. Anyone with average intelligence that reads these documents will understand exactly what the Palestinians want. It is definitely not a two-state solution. Stop deluding yourself with wishful Lalaland thinking. It is devoid of reality. There are enough failed states in the Middle East without adding Palestine to the list. Every day that passes brings more Arab countries to the realization that joining the Abraham Accords is the best way for them to survive and prosper. They understand that the Palestinians have nothing to offer them in terms of improving their lives. They are tired of supporting corruption and the unrealistic demands of the Palestinians. In the words of the prophet Isaiah, peace will come when the nations turn “their swords into plowshares.” Under present circumstances a two-state solution is clearly not on the cards.
It didn’t take J Street’s Nadav Tamir long to spew his mischaracterizations and lies to back his ingenious and attention-grabbing organization’s false positions as a pro-Israel group.
In the very first paragraph, he claims that without a two-state solution Israel will turn into an apartheid state. He then goes on to profess that “all the polls” indicate a majority of Israelis support the two-state solution. This is an outright lie as almost every single poll shows that Israelis favor the status quo over committing national suicide by having an independent PA run their own show next door. Even the PA truly doesn’t want an independent state that would be overrun by terrorists. He, unfortunately, has found a somewhat kindred spirit in Yair Lapid. He praises Lapid for restoring relations with Jordan, another lie because Netanyahu had good relations with the king.
He credits Lapid for improving relations with the anti-Israel and antisemitic EU, and Sweden, in particular, but at what cost. He’s in total agreement with the Israeli government’s employment of appeasement, especially with the US, to gain “friendly relations” everywhere that will undoubtedly blow up in our faces. He lies about our Arab peace partners insisting we make peace with the PA. The accords themselves show it’s not a priority for them. He even espouses we sign on to our own death warrant by appeasing Iran.
This diplomatic horizon is the end of the Zionist horizon. As our government daily minimizes Israel’s Jewish character (changing the conversion process, destroying Jewish building in Judea and Samaria while allowing our enemies to build and flourish there, etc.), Lapid, J Street and so many others are the foils of our eventual destruction unless they are soon stopped. Lapid, Bennett, Shaked, Sa’ar and so many others in today’s ruling coalition have a lot to answer for to the Jewish people as they ignore history along with our Jewish heritage at every turn.
Kudos to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach on his great article (“Only solution to evil is its annihilation,” January 11), extolling the virtues of Jews fighting back when faced with antisemitism. No more cringing; fight back.
It reminded me of the following story: My older brother and I were taking a walk somewhere in Montreal in the 1950s. I was about 12, he was 16. We were accosted by some street toughs who said threateningly “you must be Jewish.” I have no idea how they identified us – we wore normal clothing, no Jewish symbols. Perhaps we looked nerdish, like we knew how to read and write. My brother, to his everlasting credit, shot back “yeah – we killed Christ and we’re gonna kill you too.” Even though we were outnumbered and they messed him up, it was a defining moment for me which I never forgot. Fight back.
Praying for the world
Mr. Joel Cohen is way off the mark in his criticism of what he sees as Judaism being too focused on praying for the health and welfare of only Jews (“Let’s pray for the world’s health,” January 10). He seems totally unaware of the fact that during the High Holy Days, concern and praying for the world’s health and welfare constitutes one of their most central themes.
Rosh Hashanah is considered God’s Day of Judgment for all the entire world, and we are commanded by God to pray for its health and welfare, and not just the Jewish nation. Yom Kippur, as the Jewish Day of Atonement, carries the central theme of repentance on an individual and collective basis, which means correcting and improving one’s moral and ethical conduct not only as a Jew, but also as a citizen of the world. And the entire Temple sacrificial rite for the seven days of Sukkot revolves around the offering of a total of 70 bullocks as atonement and for the entire world and not just the Jewish people.
Finally, it is a universal Jewish tradition to publicly pray for the welfare of the local/national government on Shabbat, and numerous Mishnaic, Talmudic and halachic statements and rulings demand that we both pray and act for the benefit and welfare of the entire world. Perhaps Mr. Cohen should put down his regular “Orthodox siddur” now and then and open his eyes to a broader spectrum of Jewish law and lore regarding very real and fundamental Jewish concern for the world in which we live. He won’t be disappointed.
Barnum & Bailey
Regarding “Netanyahu, Olmert reject court offer to settle suit” (January 11), if Barnum & Bailey were still on the scene they would be rubbing their hands at the main event currently playing out at Tel Aviv Magistrates’ Court. They would view the proceedings truly worthy of a three-ring circus for which they were famous.
Some say all is fair in love and war, and no doubt politics should also be included. However, to paraphrase Henry ll: “Will no one rid us of these troublesome ex-prime ministers?”
Once an official inquiry regarding last year’s Lag Ba’omer tragedy got underway, it was inevitable that sooner or later the blame game would start (“‘Top cop ignored Meron warnings,’” January 10). The top echelon of the police department, the haredi politicians, the unruly haredi community – everybody is bending over backward to avoid accepting any accountability for what happened. So, then, at whose desk does the buck finally stop?
The sad fact is we are all to blame – every single one of us. A Jerusalem Post editorial last week opened by pointing out that Israelis rarely color between the lines and are notorious for ignoring or finding ways to bypass rules and regulations. And to be perfectly honest, we take some pride in this. Drivers smile at the time they save by making illegal U-turns, consumers see nothing wrong with sampling a cookie from a sealed box on a supermarket shelf, and self-employed businesspersons are infinitely creative in hiding taxable income from the prying eyes and greedy hands of the government. Should we, consequently, be surprised that warnings of overcrowding are seen as nothing more than bureaucratic trifles and pooh-poohed away? Hardly.
If the previous coalition was still running the government, you can be sure that the commission – if one would have even been convened in the first place – would have determined that the available evidence was inconclusive as to who ultimately was at fault and would have simply issued stern admonishment against ignoring carefully thought-out warnings and restrictions. The haredim would have gloated at the power they had at their disposal and a sigh of relief would have filled the airways. Things have changed, though. The severity of the disaster very clearly demands that a head or two roll and that there be some sort of punishment. In this case, a scapegoat will not suffice; those responsible for the flagrant disregard of public safety cannot play hide and seek with responsibility.
There’s still the possibility, of course, that the incident will be whitewashed away and that, once again, there will be no consequences for coloring outside of the lines. I truly hope the commission will not go in that direction and wind up sending out an invitation for the next civil disaster. And that the 45 innocent souls who were trampled to death will not have died in vain.