March 5: Benizri’s release

"I cannot understand or agree with your overkill on the release of ex-Shas cabinet minister Shlomo Benizri."

Letters 521 (photo credit: Thinkstock/Imagebank)
Letters 521
(photo credit: Thinkstock/Imagebank)
Benizri’s release
Sir, – I cannot understand or agree with your overkill on the release of ex-Shas cabinet minister Shlomo Benizri (“On release from prison, Shlomo Benizri declares: I was framed,” March 2).
We were looking ahead to a crucial week of meetings between US President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu. There was the Syrian tragedy, too. There were many other events more important than the outrageous comments of a convicted criminal.
HENRY WEIL Jerusalem
Sir, – How dare Shlomo Benizri even mention Gilad Schalit’s name! How can he compare his incarceration with that of Schalit?

Hardly appetizing
Sir, – In “Put women in bus ads, state demands” (March 2), it is the state’s position that “The exclusion of women from billboards and announcements on the basis of sex violates public policy, the basic principles of our transportation, and the fundamental rights of women and advertisers.”
Accompanying the article is a photo that shows an advertisement on a bus stop for a Jerusalem restaurant that depicts a skimpily-clad female model licking a plate in a sexually suggestive manner.
Please explain to me what licking a plate on a billboard has to do with “the basic principles of our transportation.”
If anyone is worried about women’s dignity, it certainly is not this restaurant or anyone involved with the ad. The ones whose rights have been violated are those, especially parents with children, who cannot get away from these ads.
Letters about letters
Sir, – Upon reading “That’s what it is” (Letters, March 2) regarding stone throwing incidents that do not receive proper attention, my initial feeling was relief. I was relieved to find that I’m not crazy for having experienced a similar stone-throwing attack and being shocked and appalled by a unwilling security response and zero media coverage.
This attack occurred about two months ago in the early afternoon hours on the road from Ma’aleh Adumim to Jerusalem, and was directed toward a non-bulletproof Egged bus. The perpetrators were a group of hooded youths who bolted into the desert hills after they shattered the front door of the bus.
It turns out that attacks like this are not rare, which perhaps explains the difficulty the bus driver had in convincing the police to respond and investigate. I was thoroughly shaken by the incident, but my feeling quickly switched to outrage, then confusion, as I searched for media coverage about the attack and found nothing.
I couldn’t fathom why attacks such as this were not considered newsworthy. I started to think that maybe I was crazy, that maybe this really wasn’t a big deal and there was no need for me to make a fuss about such a routine occurrence.
Of course, that is absurd. Every attack that doesn’t end catastrophically is nothing short of a miracle, and we must not allow ourselves to think that this reality is normal.
So, thank you, Ari Solomont, for reminding me that I’m neither alone nor crazy.
M. JACOBS Jerusalem
Sir, – Regarding “Waste of space” (Letters, March 2), the US Civil War or, better stated, “War of Northern Aggression,” was not all about slavery. It was about states’ rights.
The North depended upon southern slavery to fill its mills with cotton. There were non-white slave owners, and blacks were in many cases treated even worse in northern cities than on plantations.
Not quite parallel Sir, – Chief Rabbi Warren Goldstein sees a close parallel between the hanging of ten Nazis at Nuremberg and the hanging of Haman’s 10 sons (“Purimshpiel, 1946,” Sinai Today, March 2).
I cannot, however, share his enthusiasm, as these Nazi arch-murderers had been allowed to do their worst to six million of our people before finally facing justice.
Had they actually shared the same fate as the would-be-murderer sons of Haman – by being hanged before carrying out their genocidal plan – we might have been spared the inferno of the Shoah.
That would have been a parallel worth noticing.
Citing Savir
Sir, – I normally skip the Friday column Savir’s Corner – I have little time for fiction. However, I was surprised last week to find stuff that made sense (“Unmasking our leaders,” March 2).
Uri Savir’s criticism of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was bang-on – appeasing his right-wing supporters by making nice about settlements without actually doing much, and then appeasing his boss, Obama, by de facto building freezes. All this with careful backward glances at his coalition supporters in the Knesset.
Savir was equally scornful of Tzipi Livni, the apparent leader of the opposition, for squandering all her chances and changing direction as the wind blows. He also managed to savage lesser lights like Ehud Barak, Eli Yishai and Ahmed Tibi.
The only politician he praised was Avigdor Liberman, who says what he believes and sticks to it.
When Israel Beiteinu wins in the next election and Lieberman becomes prime minister, we will know who to thank: Uri Savir!
Ma’aleh Adumim
Sir, – Uri Savir criticizes just about every Israeli leader for being adloyada – unable to distinguish between right and wrong, reality and fantasy. He does however, neglect to mention perhaps the two most important people in this category: Shimon Peres and Uri Savir.
Peres brought us the adloyada fantasy of peace in the “new Middle East,” and Savir brought us the adloyada obsession with the failed policy of land for peace, which resulted in territory for terror.
Savir concludes by saying that “we are in need of an honest and courageous leadership, not that of the Purim scroll but one that is loyal to that other megila, the Independence Scroll.”
Perhaps that is the biggest adloyada of them all.
One-state of mind
Sir, – Dan Diker (“Laundering anti-Semitism at Harvard,” Comment & Features, March 1) identifies the problem of the conference at Harvard about a “one-state” solution.
For anyone to call it an expression of views by “progressives” is an insult to decent and openminded voting Americans. Progressive toward what? The obliteration of a nation recognized by the United Nations since 1948 and a people that has existed for almost 6,000 years is not progressive.
ED DAVIE Philadelphia
Sir, – Dan Diker is be thanked for alerting us to the sham Harvard University conference. Yet it is important to realize that the power and potency of the one-state solution is in part due to the avoidance by the Zionist world, particularly Israel, of the need for a true two-state solution. Avoiding that solution is in fact the pursuit of a one-state solution, and it is long past time we realize that the only one-state solution on the political horizon will be an Arab Muslim state.
It is time for our government and other Zionist agencies to promote the “two states for two peoples” resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. As the Arab and Muslim worlds continue to reject the second part of this mantra – “for two peoples” – this would totally transform any future conference on the subject into a discussion of Arab and Muslim intransigence.