March 12, 2017: Why a ‘setback’?

Too often I find that the press feels that one of its goals is to find someone guilty, and the higher up, the better.

Letters (photo credit: REUTERS)
(photo credit: REUTERS)
Why a ‘setback’?
Regarding “Billionaire softens testimony in Netanyahu investigation” (March 9), you call it a “setback for police” in the sub-headline.
Why is finding the truth a “setback for the police”? Their job is not to find someone who is guilty, but to find the truth. If the truth is that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not guilty, then Arnon Milchan’s testimony is not a setback – rather, it is getting closer to the truth.
Too often I find that the press feels that one of its goals is to find someone guilty, and the higher up, the better.
Women of valor
In the argument of whether women should serve as soldiers in the IDF (“Women of valor,” Editorial, March 9), there is one consideration that seems to have been ignored.
During the course of a war, everything is possible. What would happen if some of our brave women soldiers became prisoners? I don’t even want to think of what the result would be.
Petah Tikva Sensationalist trash Why does The Jerusalem Post continue to print virulently anti- Trump cartoons like the one the March 9 paper? It shows someone asking Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: “Bibi, how can we negotiate with someone who lives in an alt-universe?” An image of US President Donald Trump is shown stating: “Obama tapped my phone.”
There has been a call for an investigation into the extent of the US government’s wiretapping. It may well turn out that it is the anti-Trump writers who have been living in an alternative universe, unwilling to accept and respect the outcome of the election.
Until the investigation is completed, the Post should not print such blatantly derogatory and sensationalist trash.
Third way
With regard to Michael Freund’s “Stop calling it the ‘Old Testament’” (Fundamentally Freund, March 9), may I suggest forgetting the expressions “Old” and “New” when referring to the Bible, and instead using “First” and “Second Testament”? ANTOINETTE HASLETON Sde Nitzan Famously correct The visiting delegation of Evangelical Christians got it famously correct (“‘Jerusalem belongs to the Jewish people,’” March 9).
Jerusalem was established as the Jewish capital 1,600 years before Muhammad was born.
Jerusalem is not mentioned in the Koran, and Muslims turn to Mecca when praying, not toward Jerusalem.
Jerusalem has been occupied by many foreign powers, including Persia, Greece and Rome, and for 400 years by the Ottomans, ending with the British entry into Jerusalem in 1917. Our country has never been an Arab province, nor has Jerusalem been the capital of any people other than the Jews.
These facts have been determined by archeologists and historians, not by politicians.
Call it what it is
I read with dismay the confused words of Jon Finer and Robert Malley, advisers to former US secretary of state John Kerry and former president Barack Obama, respectively, in the reprint of their New York Times opinion piece “How terrorism gave us Trump” (Comment & Features, March 8).
The reality is that it was the weak leadership and lack of commitment by Kerry and Obama in confronting terrorism that led to the rise of Trump.
This is proven in the last sentence of their piece: “A more honest national conversation about terrorism would be better for our security, and healthier for our politics.”
This is precisely where their party lost. They represented officials who would not hold an honest conversation about terrorism and refused to identify the threat. It is Trump who calls it what it is: radical Islamic terror.
Only fair
I always like to read Yonah Jeremy Bob’s helpful articles. However, in all fairness, “Court shuts down Fair Trade platform, rules binary options sector must register with ISA” (March 7) should have mentioned that the Times of Israel website fearlessly and incessantly took on this Israel- embarrassing grand theft for months, in fact forcing politicians to start dealing with it.
A question arises
From the numerous fans of New Jersey Sen. Robert Menendez (“Glick and Menendez,” Letters, February 23; “Back to Menendez,” Letters, February 26; “Glick on Menendez,” Letters, February 28), it seems likely that his questioning of ambassador- designate David Friedman’s loyalty to the US did not derive of antisemitism, as columnist Carolyn B. Glick suggested in “Senator Menendez and the Pollard effect” (Our World, February 21).
Menendez’s question was predicated on the assumption that there could be a conflict of interests for someone who feels a loyalty not only to the US, but also to the State of Israel. On the other hand, the close friendship between the two countries suggests that on a great many issues, the interests of the two countries are closely aligned.
And the question arises: Why would peace negotiations with the Palestinians be a source of conflict between Israeli and American interests? President Donald Trump has told us on numerous occasions that he does not insist on any particular formula, and since the two-state solution has been in a stalemate for so long, the possibility of a new formula might be considered.
All of the previous US presidents were anxious to be credited for making peace between Israel and the Palestinians. But in view of the intransigence of Palestinian leaders, it seemed more likely to accomplish a deal by applying pressure on the Israelis. Those presidents took gratification from forcing Israel to offer concessions even though such moves rarely brought the Palestinians even to the negotiating table.
Apparently, both Trump and Friedman are excellent negotiators and, as such, they try to understand what the sides really want and where they are willing to compromise. Given that any Palestinian leader who signs an agreement with Israel is likely to suffer the same fate as Egypt’s Anwar Sadat, it won’t be easy to accomplish.
Though I’m not too optimistic, it does seem clear that trying the same failed method repeatedly and expecting different results is the definition of insanity, so if Trump believes Friedman should try a new tactic, this would surely be in the interest of the US, as it would for Israelis and Palestinians.
Special meaning
In 1989, The Jerusalem Post published a letter written by my late husband, Yehudah Landesman, after he attended a 13th Maccabiah Games baseball game at Kibbutz Gezer. In it, he wrote about his surprise to see Jewish players remove their caps during the national anthem, a custom in America, but not a Jewish way to show respect.
It was especially heartwarming for me to see our baseball team in Seoul remove their caps to show their heads covered in kippot during the playing of “Hatikva.”
We came on aliya three years after that sabbatical year, and while unpacking late at night I heard “Hatikva” played on the radio at the closing of Reshet Bet’s programming. As tired as I was, I listened to it in its entirety, with tears in my eyes. It brought me back to Communist Romania in the 1950s when my Poalei Aguda rebbi, with his long beard, stood up behind dark-curtained windows after each secret lesson and sang “Hatikva” with us.
May our team continue to earn respect for the Jewish nation.