Don’t be vague: Blame the Hague
Border policeman Sgt. Barel Shmueli is fighting for his life after having been shot point blank in the head by a 12-year-old Gaza terrorist (“Border officer in serious condition after shot during Gaza riots,” August 22). IDF soldiers are not allowed to shoot in response!
Who is to blame? The IDF? The government? Prime Minister Naftali Bennett?
None of these. The blame rests squarely on the doorstep of the so-called International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague with their rules of conduct applicable only to two countries at war. Don’t kill or torture prisoners, don’t purposely bomb civilians. Vaccinate conquered populations. Israel fulfills all of these.
The IDF and our government are hamstrung by fear of unjust, antisemitic, anti-Israeli prosecution, persecution and public opinion. Its got to stop. We are at war with terrorists, age 12 to 80. Fight the war to win it. At the very least shoot back, even shoot first. Then worry about public opinion and the ICC. We have great lawyers.
YIGAL HOROWITZ, PHDBeersheba
Seeing ‘friends’ through a lens
In “When Bennett goes to Washington” (July 30) Herb Keinon advises that the PM’s advisers “would do well to review tapes of previous first meetings between US presidents and Israeli prime ministers,” adding, “The most important tape to watch was the 2009 meeting between Netanyahu and Obama” (we know how ‘well’ that meeting went for Israel after Obama’s anti-settlement Cairo speech).
On the eve of former prime minister Menachem Begin’s departure for New York and Camp David (September 1, 1978) the prime minister received an academic group led by Paul Eidelberg, warning Begin of the trap awaiting him at his forthcoming meeting with presidents Jimmy Carter and Anwar Sadat.
Bennett was six years old at the time of the fateful outcome that commenced with Begin’s “confinement” at Camp David. Upon his “release” on September 17, 1978, Begin exclaimed: “Thirteen days in a ‘concentration camp deluxe’ the process intended to deliver a ‘Palestinian’ state in Israel’s heartland was set in motion,!
Hopefully, Bennett, his coalition companions and his advisers have studied history.
Undoubtedly, Douglas Altabef’s cri de coeur (“Price of power is not worth soul of the nation,” August 24) is reminiscent of the 1978 Begin-Eidelberg encounter intended to stay Begin’s fateful venture: The prime minister “needs to understand that he is being used by the Biden administration to show a “victory” and accomplishment after the debacle of the Afghan collapse and abandonment.
KARL HUTTENBAUERBerlin
The large mass of words produced by experts, observers and pundits since the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan obscures the two cardinal issues for Israel raised by this event.
First, directly east of Israel there are now two launching pads for transnational violence particularly against Israel: Iran, which is nearing nuclear capability and Afghanistan, which is now a secure base and well-armed breeding ground for Islamic terrorism.
Second, the confusion and lack of preparation exhibited by the Biden administration mean that it will probably be unable and/or unwilling to come to Israel’s assistance in the event of a threat to our very existence.
Our approach to this problem will be presented to Biden in the upcoming visit of Naftali Bennett to Washington. This approach should reflect a short and pithy comment made by US Senator Richard Russell of Georgia in the 1960s at the height of the struggle for civil rights for blacks. When asked why he, a longtime and hardline segregationist, will no longer participate in the filibuster to prevent passage of civil rights legislation, Russell, a realist who understood the political environment, bluntly and picturesquely said, “When the water gets to the second deck, it is every rat for himself.”
Israel has to do what our history and our future demand that it do.
JAY SHAPIROJerusalem
Barkin up the wrong tree
Jordan Barkin (“Leave Chris Cuomo alone,” August 23) misrepresents CNN host Chris Cuomo’s involvement in the scandals involving his brother, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo. Barkin says Cuomo “recused himself from reporting on his brother.” But that recusal, coming only after several women charged Andrew with sexual harassment, was long overdue.
Chris frequently interviewed his older brother without displaying a shred of objectivity, lionizing him for his work in combating the COVID pandemic. Chris never indicated that a regulation signed by Andrew might have caused thousands of unnecessary nursing home deaths, nor that New York State had one of the worst COVID death rates in the country. The interviews were meant to burnish his brother’s failing image against a growing torrent of criticism.
A true recusal would have required that Chris distance himself from his brother’s scandals. Instead, even after the supposed recusal, Chis continued to act as a close adviser to his brother, including helping to strategize for the embattled governor and assisting in drafting a response to the charges against him.
Recall that Chris was a vehement critic of then-Supreme Court Justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh. He argued that Kavanaugh was not entitled to the presumption of innocence even though the allegations of sexual misconduct against him were based on uncorroborated and inconsistent memories of a single accuser going back 30 years.
Similarly, Chris famously criticized president Donald Trump for his weak response to the coronavirus pandemic and publicly televised his own release from isolation after recovering from the disease. It later emerged that he had secretly left isolation and had ridden his bicycle for miles while he was sick, potentially infecting many others.
Rather than making an innocent mistake in supporting his brother while otherwise upholding the highest standards of his profession, Chris’s actions represent a pattern of ethical violations by someone who believes that the rules don’t apply to him. The fact that he was not fired outright suggests strongly that CNN is more interested in retaining someone with good ratings than in maintaining journalistic standards.
EFRAIM A. COHENZichron Yaakov
Not desirous of the virus
Regarding “$15 drug gets COVID patients off oxygen support in under week” (August 23), it is great news that fenofibrate can “dramatically shorten the treatment time for severe COVID patients.” But if Professor Nahmias has been studying it for treating COVID-19 “almost since the start of the pandemic,” why are we only hearing about this wonder drug now? Especially since “the drug is available, and physicians can decide to give treatment with it based on available data.” It was FDA approved way back in 1975!
And this is not the first cheap, approved, safe easily gotten drug to treat COVID-19. An article in the Post three weeks ago (“Israeli scientist says COVID-19 could be treated for under $1/day,” August 2) finally sang the praises of long-ago approved ivermectin, which works to heal people from COVID – even before they are so sick that they have to be hospitalized and ventilated. This has been proven in countries like India and in Africa that can’t afford or get vaccines and only have ivermectin, which works for them!
But go even farther back to the beginning of the pandemic, when Dr. Zelenko came up with a protocol to heal his patients that included hydroxychloroquine – banned because the “experts” didn’t understand that it had to be given early and in combination with other things, and bashed because former US president Donald Trump supported it! Many were saved, many more could have been – and still can.
Of course, Big Pharm and Med can’t make a lot of money from these simple treatments, like they can by letting people get so sick that they have to go to the hospital, after making them take vaccines that seem to be weakening people’s immune systems. If we can’t trust them and the government about these meds, how can we trust them about other things they say?
SARA COHENNew York
Where there’s smoke
Regarding “It could have all gone up in smoke” (August 20), as a Diaspora Jew, I was pained to read of the large forest area near Jerusalem destroyed by fire. It is especially disheartening as green spaces are at a premium in Israel; Israelis fly to Switzerland to enjoy its mountains, lakes and fresh air.
It was absurd to compare the fires in Israel to the forest fires in the other Mediterranean countries of Greece and Turkey because of climate change. There is absolutely no comparison between the forests of those far larger countries and limited patches of forests in small northern Israel, the southern half being desert. Moreover, the possibility of arson, by Jew or Arab, loomed large.
Several days ago, a Palestinian from Anata, near Jerusalem, was suspected of starting a massive fire in Givat Shaul. The enemy wants to cause chaos in Israel, such as what happened, a decade ago, in the days after the disastrous Mt. Carmel forest fire when arsonists lit fires to overwhelm the country’s response network. Israel must never be lackadaisical when it comes to security; these arsonists/terrorists must be punished mercilessly.
JACOB MENDLOVICToronto, Canada
The crowd was allowed
According to the opening testimony of Northern District Police Superintendent Simon Lavi, “politicians blocked all attempts by the police to limit attendance on the site, (Mt. Meron), during Lag Ba’Omer celebrations” (“Politicians refused to limit Meron crowd” August 23).
Former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, in collusion with the haredi parties, dodged the wishes of the majority of families who wanted an independent council to investigate the disaster. They wanted culpability and plans for prevention of deaths for future celebrations.
Instead, what the testimony revealed on Sunday, was a 2017 police report stating that “no more than 9,000 people could be on the Meron site safely,” however, Lavi had allowed 25,000 people on the site. Do the math.
So we have a police superintendent cowed by pressure from haredi members of government to overlook the safety issues that should have been in place, and government officials, including the former public security minister, Amir Ohana “pressing him to be more flexible.”
Without even waiting for additional witnesses, this testimony goes to the heart of the tragedy of 45 men and children crushed to death, just attempting to leave a site fraught with poor infrastructure, bonfires all over, poor egress, and not enough police personnel to supervise and enforce.
What does this say about our lack of holding people accountable? What does it say to the fact this commission is beyond overdue? And what does it say to our most trusted personnel – the police – bowing to “political pressure?”
It speaks volumes!
DEBRA FORMANModi’in
Blood, sweat and fears
Regarding “Health minister lifts restrictions on blood donations from gay men,” most of the enlightened countries of the world either totally negate blood from homosexual men or require a substantial deferral period subsequent to the donor’s last “activity.”
It is a scientifically recognized fact that the chance of blood of from gay men being infected with HIV or other diseases, is far higher than in those who follow natures ground rules.
Once again we see this glitch in our social behavior where the principle of “the public good” is subjugated to the principle of “the rights of the individual.” It is yet another example of the currently propounded claim of a “person’s individual right to refuse to be vaccinated” as against the public’s right to protection against a significant health risk.
Why should the public be put at risk because the health minister feels “discriminated against?”
If, God forbid, I am in need of a blood transfusion, I should be given the right to know whether the blood I am to receive is from a LGBTQ+ person and I should have the right to choose not to accept it.
LAURENCE BECKERJerusalem
Ben, Jerry and Orwell
In an Orwellian statement Ben & Jerry’s condemns the “hateful and violent threats directed against our company, our business partners, our Board, and particularly our board chairman” (“Ben & Jerry’s condemns backlash over Israel Boycott,” August 20).
Their board chairman, Anuradha Mittal, has funneled Ben & Jerry’s funds through the Oakland Institute, an antisemitic think tank, to Bidel, an antisemitic NGO that turned down $6.5 million from the EU because it refused to expressly forswear terrorism against the Jewish people of Israel and continuously publishes Der Sturmer-like images of Jewish people.
George Orwell could not have written a better statement for Ben & Jerry’s.
RICHARD SHERMANMargate, Florida
Reacts to false facts
In “‘From the river to the sea’ – righting the wrong,” Alon Ben-Meir writes “Although the Palestinians have every right to establish an independent state of their own…” From whence this right? Did Ben-Meir grant this privilege to this bogus nation? If the Palestinian Arabs have this privilege, there is no reason why the original Palestinian Jews should not also demand a state for themselves and their descendants, and leave the Jewish immigrants to run their own country. Are not most of the Jordanian citizens Palestinian Arabs? Does this not constitute a Palestinian state?
Another quote: “Although millions of Israelis still sympathize with the Palestinian cause and want to end the conflict on the basis of a two-state solution…” From where does Ben-Meir get this information? Sorry, but the last few elections seem to prove the opposite, that millions of Israelis do not want a two-state solution.
Final quote: “and obscure(s) their legitimate demands to end the occupation and establish a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza.’ On what basis does Ben-Meir declare that Judea and Samaria (the “West Bank”) and Gaza are occupied? Since the Palestinians never had a state and Jordan relinquished its rights to the area after initiating the Six-Day War with Egypt, whose land are we “occupying?” Perhaps our own?
I refer Ben-Meir to the Mandate for Palestine, which is the legal document with the United Nations that clearly states “from the river to the sea” is land designated for the Jewish people. No binding resolution has changed that position.
EDMUND JONAHRishon Lezion
Pilfered pillars
“We are thriving” (August 22) inaccurately states that the famous pillars in the Piazza San Marco in Venice were “imported from Turkey in the 12th century.”
There was no Turkey in the 12th century.
The pillars were looted, along with many other treasures, from Constantinople, capital of the Byzantine Empire (successor to the Eastern Roman Empire) when the city was conquered by the Crusaders of the 4th Crusade in 1204 (13th century).
NORMAN A. BAILEY, PH.D.Netanya
Trips and loose lips
Herb Keinon (“Public’s misplaced rage, envy,” August 21) is right on target about one of Israeli society’s worst ills in terms of both the blame game and envy at anyone who seems to have, do, or receive something that I don’t or even can’t have.
But I would take his point one step further. As was written by Mark Feldman and others in the Post over the past two weeks, the thousands of Israelis who canceled or rescheduled trips to the US and other destinations with return dates at the end of August had nothing to do with altruistic motives of protecting themselves and others against corona or heeding our prime minister’s call to avoid unnecessary travel abroad, but rather with the very personal and real concern of having to be in isolation during Rosh Hashanah upon returning to Israel.
So self-righteous scorn or jealousy toward anyone who did manage to travel abroad is more than just rage and envy: It is hypocrisy through and through.
GERSHON HARRISHatzor Haglilit