Letters to the Editor April 28, 2021: A note on the vote

“Palestinians reject EU offer to hold J’lem vote online” (April 26) had me rubbing my eyes in disbelief at the outstanding demonstration of Palestinian logic: up is down, hot is cold, night is day, right is wrong. 

Appearing before the European Parliament Foreign Affairs Committee, PA Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh (falsely) alleged that Israel is responsible for vaccinating Palestinians against COVID-19, then, after blaming Israel for failing to do so, said the PA had rejected offers of vaccinations from Israel.

No further proof of their posturing is necessary. The Palestinians and their politicians are determined to present themselves as poor, downtrodden, miserable and even deathly ill victims until the last Israeli “colonizer/occupier” leaves the land of Palestine and “returns” to Poland and Brooklyn. They enjoy and will not give up their hard-earned status and popularity as the most downtrodden people on planet Earth from time immemorial and will fight to the death to protect that status. 

Unfortunately, the article did not describe the reaction of the committee members to Shtayyeh’s self-contradictory statements: cheers, clapping, tears of sympathy, congratulatory handshakes, promises of more diplomatic support and financial aid?

Beersheba

 

The corrupt PA Mahmoud Abbas, amazingly in the 16th year of his four-year term, is an expert at postponing and canceling elections. Clearly, the call for Palestinian voting booths in eastern Jerusalem is more about establishing a Palestinian claim to Jerusalem than ensuring that Palestinian residents of eastern Jerusalem have their voices heard.

The land now often called “occupied Palestinian territory” was, in fact, liberated from illegal Egyptian and Jordanian occupation in 1967, after Jordanian troops fired on the section of Jerusalem under Israeli control, thereby allying with Egypt and Syria in a war instigated with the open intention of destroying Israel and annihilating its people. The founding documents of the Palestine Liberation Organization, issued in 1964, specified that the PLO made no claim to either Gaza or Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria (dubbed “The West Bank” by the Jordanian occupiers).

The world needs to be reminded that the Jordanians ethnically cleansed “The West Bank” of its Jewish residents, destroyed dozens of synagogues and desecrated countless Jewish graves. The world also needs to be reminded that the Palestinians who deny the historicity of Jewish claims to Jerusalem, have used their vantage point on the Temple Mount to attack Jews worshiping at the Western Wall, and even brought weapons onto the holy site with which they murdered two Israeli police officers (and then rioted when Israel dared to try to install metal detectors at the entrances). It’s time to stop blaming Israel for the Palestinians’ problems. Leaders who refuse to negotiate have no right to incite their people to violence – and richly reward them for answering the call.

In “The return of the ‘two-state solution’” (April 25), Alan Baker is correct that the parties – Israeli and Palestinian leaders – need to settle final status considerations via direct negotiations. However, his essay failed to mention a major problem with various leaders expressing support for the “two-state solution.” The problem is that there are very different interpretations of what the term means. Therefore, support for the “two-state solution” doesn’t indicate whose side its proponents are on.

Anyone expressing support for the “two-state solution” should include a description of what is being supported – a Palestinian state, co-existing with the nation-state of the Jews, with members of minority groups having full civil rights in their country of residence OR a Palestinian state from which all Jews have been banished and a Muslim-majority Israel – created by Israel having absorbed millions of Arabs who’ve been indoctrinated to hate Jews and to regard the killing of Jews as the pathway to Heaven but who’ve also been told that they will remain in refugee limbo until Israel gives them the homes these Palestine refugees claim were lost by their forebears during Arab-initiated violence, aimed at preventing the rebirth of Israel, in the 1940s.

There already is a two-state solution in place. It is more than 100 years old. In 1921, Britain lopped off more than three-quarters of Palestine and created the Arab/Palestinian entity it called Transjordan. 

There is no historical or moral or legal imperative to divide the small remaining territory between the river and the sea into two Siamese-twin pygmy countries. Instead, there are other solutions that are more practical and fair, including confederation of the Arab-majority areas in Judea and Samaria with their brethren in Jordan. 

Anyone who advocates a “two-state solution” that forces Israel to 1) capitulate and go back in time more than 70 years to the arbitrary and temporary 1949 ceasefire [“Auschwitz”] lines; 2) relinquish its inalienable indigenous rights to the biblical heart of the Land of Israel and much of Jerusalem; and 3) forcibly transfer hundreds of thousands of peaceful Jewish residents from their homes and towns to the sliver of Israel that will be left to us – is looking to prolong the conflict, not achieve peace.

In the long feature “Challenging the Occupation” (April 22) Gershon Baskin declares as a “fact,” not as an opinion, that Jewish civilian communities and the IDF conduct a policy to ethnically cleanse Area C of its Arab population. 

This “fact” published by The Jerusalem Post – without rebuttal – will circulate around the world as truth, causing damage to Israel. 

Issuing a retraction would have been the right thing to do.

The Jerusalem Post has every right to its editorial positions and it makes that clear by constantly publishing the views of Gershon Baskin, Doug Bloomfield, Ehud Olmert, Gil Troy, etc.

However, it should have an obligation to at least be truthful in identifying its cast of characters. Regarding “Left to their own devices, Israelis, Palestinians on a collision course” (April 27), Commanders for Israel’s Security is known for its left-wing views. Had we listened to them, there would never have been The Abraham Accords and we would have given half the country away in advance.

Promote whatever you want, but at least tell the truth.

It is with great dismay that I read The Jerusalem Post Editorial Board’s call for Israel to recognize the events of 1915 as “genocide” (“Recognizing history,” April 23) as well as the later coverage titled “Turkish diplomat pays respect to Victims of Turkish genocide from 1915” (changed to “Amid genocide row, Turkish diplomat pays respect at ANZAC memorial – analysis”) on April 25.

Regarding the former, we reject the vulgar distortions of history present as well as the accusations against Turkey and her leadership. Turkey commemorates the cherished memories of individuals from all religious communities of the Ottoman Empire – Muslim, Jewish and Christian alike – who lost their lives under the unprecedented, extraordinary conditions of the period before and during the First World War.

Any attempt to conflate genocides with the events of 1915 would be historically and morally erroneous. Any such definition would also never be accepted and open a deep wound in the conscience of the Turkish people. We believe objective assessments by historians, instead of statements that serve narrowly defined interests, would better serve the truth.

Regarding the latter piece of text, it was truly mind-boggling and abhorrent to see any connection attempted to be drawn between the Gallipoli campaign and the events of 1915. To claim that Australian and New Zealand Army Corps troops were “massacred” is an utter disrespect to the memory of the thousands of fallen Turkish soldiers, who gave everything in defense of the sovereignty and freedom of their homeland, Turkey, which was under the severe attack of foreign powers at the time. I would like to put in record that the Australian Embassy likewise has notified us of their disagreement with the assertions made in this text.

It would be expected that a journalist who deserves a column in a newspaper of journalistic integrity would better know these basic historical facts.

According to “Erdogan urges Biden to reverse ‘baseless’ Armenian declaration” (April 27), Turkish President Recep Erdogan does not want the slaughter of at least 50% of the Armenians in Turkey between 1915 and 1922 to be called a genocide.

Erdogan is invited to say which name he wishes to use in place of “genocide.” In his choice, he should bear in mind that this event is listed fifth, in a list of 36 genocides.

If 30 countries call this episode by its correct name, it is time for Israel to do the same.

The systematic annihilation, persecution and displacement of millions of Armenians is a solemn opportunity to bow our heads in memory of the victims of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes everywhere. Terminology does not matter. What matters is the millions of tombstones that stand today as vivid testaments of harrowing scenes, the wholesale destruction of libraries, churches, synagogues, artifacts, lives and livelihoods, the transfer of children and the countless people who were raped, tormented, starved and burned alive worldwide. 

Sadly, there are many wounds bleeding, traumas and collective memories lingering that will accompany us for eternity. Also, civil wars, political upheavals, religious entities, social chaos, economic instability, trans-boundary pandemics and environmental degradation are still raging. The depths of brutality that humans have sunk to are incomprehensible. Time to act collectively to preserve our shared humanity.

In “Pluralism in its full diversity” (Grapevine, April 23), the writer speaks in favor of Jewish pluralism, i.e. in accepting Reform and Conservative Judaism. She claims that those who condemn religious pluralism are encouraging assimilation.

The learned Rabbi J.B. Soloveitchik of Boston said otherwise. He said that Reform Judaism had contributed to a spiritual Holocaust in America. Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi of Israel Isaac Herzog, referred to Reform Judaism as a new Christianity. I suggest what he meant was that Reform Judaism doesn’t accept the divine origin of Judaism and therefore man can change its laws to suit himself. Therefore, it is not Judaism but a new religion, even though its adherents might be Jewish. This is similar to the early Christians who were Jewish.

Once one no longer accepts the definition of a Jew as a person born from a Jewish mother, then each person’s definition of a Jew is as valid as that of someone else. One could even define as a Jew, a non-Jew who decides to marry a Jew since he is thereby showing an affinity for the Jewish people. Voila! That would solve the problem of intermarriage.

I can testify that yeshivot such as Ohr Sameach and Aish Hatorah that cater to baalei teshuva are being very successful in bringing Jews back to Orthodox Judaism without the former compromising their religious beliefs.

The kashrut decision by Café Kadosh (“In Tzohar coup, Cafe Kadosh switches kashrut supervision” (April 20) highlights the farce going on for which ultimately the public suffers and pays. The report is just the tip of the iceberg. Looking at a bottle of kosher wine one will find there are in most cases four or five supervisory authorities, as if they each cannot trust the other or accept the highest standard. The producers charging for this additional supervision!

Moreover, besides the local area supervisory authorities, we have another layer of different rabbinical supervisory authorities. On top of this, overseas authorities such as the OU have decided to set up shop in Israel as if their hechsher is more kosher than those of the indigenous bodies. Why are they needed? If one follows the OU Kashrut notices, one finds constantly reported cases of misleading labeling and their symbol being used illegally by unscrupulous USA manufacturers. To add to confusion one finds on imported food, labels are additionally adhered to the product stating OU supervision. This is not printed on the actual package, yet the OU has confirmed in the past this has to be printed on the package. To make matters worse, this body certifies products that in Hebrew state the item is pareve but in English it says dairy!

All this comes with the approval of the Chief Rabbinate! For how long can this continue?

Regarding “Female car repair shop owner blazes a trail in Emirates” (April 26), a female running a repair garage should not be major news, but when you learn that Huda Al-Matroushi is based in Sharjah in the United Arab Emirates it is certainly an achievement, not only in a male-dominated part of the world but also a profession that one would always associate with a male.

Although other parts of the world, including Israel, may be more inclusive as far as male/female job roles are concerned, females still face major obstacles.

Kudos to Al-Matroushi for leading the charge for Emirati women and the powers that be in the country whose new legislation states that UAE-based companies must have at least one woman on their board of directors.

Such a move bodes well for inclusiveness; one hopes it will soon be replicated in less-enlightened countries around the world.

I read with interest the deeply moving article “Bereaved and Invisible” (April 22). Pini Rabinovich describes how the families of civilian bereavement are unrecognized by society as victims of loss – hence the creation of the wonderful Yakir Li organization and its flagship project “The Eighth Day.”

However, I would like to make it known that there is indeed an organization that counsels the bereaved – and has done so for more than 25 years. Nechama Grief Counseling provides comfort and emotional support to those suffering from all types of loss and trauma and was created specifically for English speakers in Israel.

Our well-trained and experienced counselors are listening ears, providing the bereaved with the tools to help them through difficult times.