August 18: Enlightenment sought

Explain the furor over the deportation of the illegal residents and their children.

letters (photo credit: JP)
(photo credit: JP)
Outwardly worried
Sir, – With every senior IDF officer, the minister of defense, the police and all their bureaus and staff totally absorbed by the “Galant affair” (“Police deem ‘Galant Document’ a fake – report,” August 17), I wonder if anyone is guarding our borders.
Friendly reminder
Sir, – According to all reports, our “friends” in the Quartet want to announce that the any direct talks between Israel and the Palestinians be based on the status-quo-ante of 1967 (“Israel to reject any preconditions set by Quartet for talks,” August 16).
They also expect that a Palestinian state be established within one or two years. So what are the negotiations for? Maybe one should remind the Quartet that there is no UN resolution demanding Israel’s “unconditional surrender,” as was demanded of Germany in 1945.
Enlightenment sought
Sir, – I wish someone would explain to me the furor over the deportation of the illegal residents and their children (“Yishai to meet with Sara Netanyahu over planned expulsion of foreign workers’ children,” August 16).
Surely there is no reason why “illegals” should be allowed to stay in the country, even if they have children who were born here or have been here for five years. Some came illegally with their families, but that does not change their status.
If a permit is given to foreign workers to be caregivers for people with disabilities, the elderly or the seriously ill, they are supposed to work on a 6/24 basis.
In that case, how do they have time to get married or pregnant? In addition, once they can no longer fulfill the terms of their work-permit, they become “illegals.”
So could I be enlightened?
Sir, – The Filipino caregivers all came here legally.
Let Eli Yishai learn something about history. In the darkest hours for European Jewry, the Philippines was one of just two countries in the whole world that admitted Jews freely.

Nothing new
Sir, – Caroline Glick’s “Guide to the Perplexed” (August 13) was a timely reminder of how the present US administration has changed its attitude toward Israel. It is not only not supporting the maintenance of our qualitative edge, but actively reducing it, as Glick has shown, by cutting funds for the Arrow 3, balking at Israeli avionics being installed in the IAF’s future F-35 fighter, denying us US-made bunker-buster bombs, etc.
We have much evidence that President Obama is hostile to Israel. He would also prefer to defang the US and for it to become less of a superpower and more of a low-profile country for all its people.
The US electorate appears to have come to the conclusion that Obama has not been beneficial to America and apparently will not be re-elected. Israel must tread water and pursue a policy best suited to itself, and not be intimidated by the US.
Sir, – While I almost always appreciate Caroline Glick’s viewpoints, her most recent column was just plain silly. Of course President Obama is not going to authorize an attack on Iran – he is the most liberal president in US history, and with a Democratic Congress. He is more likely to ban abortions than attack another country.
We all knew this when he was running for office, yet the vast majority of US Jews voted for him, and a large percentage of Israelis supported him.
When and if Israel is ever nuked by Iran, Obama will shed Clintonesque tears, but that’s about all one should expect. So the real issue is whether Israel has the stomach to go it alone.
Unfortunately, with the country split down the middle between Left and Right, there is no national will to do so.
ABE KRIEGER Highland Park, New Jersey
What’s the difference?
Sir, – As an American non- Jew, I found Michael Freund’s column (“Will Bill Clinton’s grandchildren be Jewish?,” Fundamentally Freund, August 12) very interesting and, unfortunately, somewhat disturbing.
My mother, a gentile, married a Jewish man when she was young. His family figuratively buried him. They held a memorial service. It didn’t matter to them that he had been a good son, a kind person or a smart student, or a veteran of the Korean War who had served his country with distinction and honor.
He was effectively dead to them.
They also rejected the sole child my mother had with her husband, a little girl. They thus deprived my half-sister of her Jewish heritage – in the name of religious orthodoxy – and she has carried this pain of rejection her entire life.
Unfortunately, my half-sister’s father died from a liver disease he had acquired on active duty in Korea. Ultimately, my mother married my father, and my half-sister was given a brother, a non-Jew who loves her as if she were a full-blooded sister.
In college, I met a very beautiful, kind and thoughtful Japanese girl. My mother had always wanted me to find a “good Christian girl” and was not excited. The girl’s parents weren’t excited either. But guess what? They got over it and life moved forward. I have never regretted my decision.
My point is as follows: Regardless of whom Chelsea Clinton decided to marry, I’m sure her parents will love and care for their grandchildren.
Will the grandchildren be raised Jewish or Christian? Who Cares! I am sure they will be taught to respect and love others, even if different from themselves.
Religious orthodoxy, like wine, is wonderful in moderation.
However, when the condition of orthodoxy begins to cloud your judgment and subsequently robs you of your basic humanity, then your religion has failed to serve its fundamental purpose of molding you into a better person.
America has become a more accepting and tolerant society.
Why not Israel? Why can’t Orthodox circles reach out to include innocent children from interracial or interfaith marriages and integrate them into the fabric of Israeli society? Why harden your hearts in the name of religious or ethnic purity? Please don’t misunderstand – I’m not saying that you should forsake the standards or ideals of your faith. All organized religions have rules. All I am saying is, why can’t it be a personal choice as to whether to follow one’s faith to the letter of the law? BILL NETZLEY Cincinnati, Ohio
Sir, – Enough already. This subject has been discussed ad nauseum. So another Jew marries out. The only interest is because of the Clintons. The groom tried to keep his Jewishness alive. It’s just a shame he couldn’t wait till Shabbat was out.
Correct, but misguided
Sir, – Yossi Beilin’s recent oped piece (“The new ghetto,” August 9) is correct in its analysis but misguided in its proposed solution.
Beilin is surely right in stating that Israel needs to pursue the path of peace, to take it away from the “new ghetto path” it is currently on. But as a political solution, praying for salvation from Washington is completely disheartening.
As a leader and spokesman of the disappeared Israeli Left, Beilin needs to ask himself where and how he and his colleagues failed, and, more importantly, to make a renewed case to the Israeli public on behalf of the Left and against the Right.
The only real possibility for change in a democracy – even Israel’s – has to come from within.
Herzliya/Indian Land, South Carolina