August 7, 2016: Get rid of Bennett

Readers respond to the latest Jerusalem Post articles.

Letters (photo credit: REUTERS)
(photo credit: REUTERS)
Get rid of Bennett...
Regarding “Stop the squabbling, boys!” (Know Comment, August 5), Bayit Yehudi leader Naftali Bennett’s ministerial behavior is non-statesmanlike and downright disrespectful. How can we expect our youth to learn respect when their highest authority, the education minister, personally sets a contemptible example by shouting against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from every public platform?
David Weinberg apportions blame on Netanyahu and Bennett equally. He should be advised, however, that the prime minister and education minister are not equals. It is legitimate to disagree with one’s superior privately, at a closed meeting, but you never attack the boss in public. To condemn the head of the coalition, the man Bennett agreed to work under, is dishonorable!
If Bennett finds the prime minister intolerable, he should leave his position in the government. If not, he should shut up!
...or bring in Lapid
The talk of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wanting to expand his government (“PM still interested in expanding coalition,” August 1) is all well and good. However, the National Union can never be part – can the people of Israel ever forgive its leader, Isaac Herzog, for trying to make a secret deal with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas before the last election? Who does such a thing?
I note with great approval, however, that Yesh Atid leader Yair Lapid is very much concerned with the 2014 war called Protective Edge and has brought many aspects of the war to the attention of the Israeli public. He and Naftali Bennett of Bayit Yehudi are two leading figures; if the coalition needs to be expanded, let’s think about the obvious.
Claim of bias
Congratulations for publishing the excellent and revealing “‘The New York Times’ accuses again” (Media Comment, August 4), about the way that newspaper distorts Israel by using biased editorial material in its news sections. However, it seems to me that The Jerusalem Post is doing the identical thing.
Religious affairs correspondent Jeremy Sharon writes news articles that represent editorial content denigrating the Orthodox Jewish position. As many as three such articles appear in a single days. They present a one-sided, antagonistic view without even attempting to present the Orthodox viewpoint.
I have not been able to find even one article by Sharon that presents any positive aspects of religious life. He also uses the same pejorative words, such as “fanatic,” “extremist” and “incite,” which belong only in editorial content.
Let us not make a New York Times out of The Jerusalem Post.
Jeremy Sharon responds: Derogatory terms such “fanatic” and “extremist” are never used in a news item unless they appear as quotes made by people associated with a story. There have been numerous incidents of late in which public figures have made controversial comments, while contentious legislation has been advanced that has drawn criticism from several quarters, including the attorney general and even members of the coalition. The news media will always cover such criticism, regardless of their frequency.
Surprised by reprint
I am surprised that you saw fit to reprint the New York Times opinion piece “How Netanyahu is crushing Israel’s free press” (Comment & Features, August 2). What follows is the text of a letter I sent to the Times regarding that piece:
“Your headline... is misleading and inaccurate. In fact, Israel has a very free press, as is evidenced by Haaretz’s anti-Israel stance, in particular in the anti-Israel, vicious rantings by Gideon Levy. Your article is another example of your demonization of Israel.”
Tel Aviv
The a-word
Condemning the term “Israel’s Arabs” as patronizing, Gershon Baskin (“The apology, democracy, and peace,” Encountering Peace, August 4) describes the sector as “Palestinian citizens of Israel.”
In what way are they more Palestinian than the Jews? Did they come from someplace located elsewhere called Palestine? No, they didn’t necessarily move an inch. Is it that they or their ancestors once lived in British Mandatory Palestine? Well, the same is true of many Jews, but Baskin distinguishes between Jewish and Palestinian citizens.
Is it that their hearts all belong to the Palestinian Authority rather than to the State of Israel? That would be a false assumption, and Baskin does not make it.
What really distinguishes these “Palestinian citizens” from their Jewish compatriots is one clear-cut difference: They are Arabs, which is no shame and no sin. Why is Baskin reluctant to use the a-word?
What she’ll remember
I am disgusted and ashamed at the actions of the border policeman who harassed an eight-year-old girl riding her bike (“Video of border policeman throwing Palestinian girl’s bicycle in Hebron goes viral,” August 3).
This man must be made to publicly apologize to the family and buy the child a new bike. Hopefully, she will remember the kindness, and not the stupidity.
Kfar Daniel
Loss for the future
With regard to “Law that frees haredi schools of core curriculum expected to pass,” (August 2), the loss is a loss for the future young haredim, which parents may not understand.
How many of us have opened our doors to young men asking for money to get married because they don’t have a way to earn, and I ask myself: If they are given money, what will they do to support a child that will surely be born within the next year?
Why don’t the MKs and the parents of these children wake up to the fact that if the boys learn math, science and English, they will have the ability to go on to further education within the haredi system? No one is trying to make them secular. We are only thinking of them and the future of this country.
The school system in which I taught in America also offered tech courses. Not all students were able to succeed in the academic track, but they were able to find jobs after graduation because they were trained in a technological field. It is no shame to be a car mechanic or a beautician and to earn a living while maintaining one’s dignity and not living on the charity of others.
Beit Shemesh
Trusting Tony
I am aghast that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has the temerity to discuss with Tony Blair confidential state matters that he does not disclose to the citizens of Israel (“Jerusalem silent over reports of possible Cairo summit.” July 12). It is high time Netanyahu realized that Blair no longer represents any official international body, nor the UK or even the failed UN Quartet.
Britain’s recently released Chilcot Inquiry report, seven years in the making, slammed Blair, making clear his unscrupulousness and recklessness. Further, his personal international consultancy draws in many disreputable countries as clients to improve their image and reputation. As such, there can be no plausible excuse for Netanyahu to trust Blair or involve him any longer.
We must not remain silent and must stop this interference by such unethical people.
Regarding “Iran nuclear deal is not Munich 1938” (Analysis, August 7) by Yossi Melman, the statement comparing the US-led deal with Iran to the 1938 Munich Agreement with Hitler was published by the Defense Ministry spokesman, and not by the Foreign Ministry spokesman.