September 24: Very good news

Yariv Oppenheimer’s main job was to monitor settlement activities and file petitions to the High Court of Justice to force the demolition of buildings over the Green Line.

Letters (photo credit: REUTERS)
(photo credit: REUTERS)
Very good news
It was very good news for a change to read “Peace Now’s Oppenheimer resigns post” (September 21).
Yariv Oppenheimer’s main job was to monitor settlement activities and file petitions to the High Court of Justice to force the demolition of buildings over the Green Line. What a job for a Jewish boy! Immediately adjacent to this article was a piece headlined “To walk in an Islamic country and feel safe like I was in Tel Aviv was amazing.”
The piece describes the visit to Azerbaijan by Likud MK Oren Hazan and Mendi Safadi, an Israeli Druse, and how officials there expressed deep friendship with Israel.
After Friday night’s synagogue service and a meal at the Chabad house, attended by Azerbaijani Muslim leaders, the singing reminded Hazan of being in Jerusalem.
At the synagogue they attended, there were no guards, unlike in France and other European countries, where there is a heavy police presence at Jewish institutions.
What good news!
Waste of newsprint
With regard to “Sara Netanyahu’s former employees continue testimony claiming abuse” (September 21), when will this craziness stop? So much money, time and newsprint is being wasted on such nonsense.
Guy Eliyahu admits to padding his work hours but blames his supervisor, Ezra Seidoff. He is guilty of theft and fraud, and should be in prison. Meni Naftali says he was abused and underpaid.
Please define abuse whether his work sheets were accurate.
In addition, Mrs. Netanyahu has the right to drink alcohol in her own home. She needs her down time.
On the world’s stage, Sara Netanyahu always appears beautiful, regal and in control. She makes us proud, a gift to the prime minister and Israel.
Petah Tikva
Most interesting read
“Are Labor MKs racist?” (Think About It, September 21) was a most interesting read. It would be unfitting to lecture someone of Susan Hattis Rolef’s stature, but her analysis does need a correction.
When being accused in a subtle way of being racist, one must not become defensive. Rather, one needs to listen and ponder until the penny drops. And the criticism was subtle, as it pointed out that Laborites are more racist than right-wingers – not that all Jews are oppressive.
The writer defends her fellow left-wingers as simply being too busy with world change to be polite. After all, most of them ignore her, too, so this should be just general bad manners. No, it is not. Toward their Arabs colleagues it is racism; toward her it is sexism or ageism.
Most of the regular Left in Israel happens to be most arrogant, while the common Right is often refreshingly anti-intolerance. In Israel, everything is upside-down.
She was born here. She should know.
Coulter’s cracks
With regard to Ruthie Blum’s “Cracks in Ann Coulter’s armor” (Right from Wrong, September 21), when you have a confrontational style and talk a lot, you risk getting yourself in hot water.
Coulter’s tweet was obviously some of her thinking that came to the surface.
It’s so easy to jump on the hate-the-Jews bandwagon. It takes no nerve. I always am amused by the picture of Muslims slipping into Israel to get medical care from Jewish doctors; somehow, they can set aside their hatred by going under anesthesia and trusting a Jewish doctor with a knife – before going home to plan the demise of Israel.
Israel doesn’t need this attack from such a high-profile pundit.
It reminds me of the disappointment many of us felt following the actor Mel Gibson’s rants against Jews.
We really need to know who the enemy is. It is radical Islam, and it will kill Ann and the rest of us as soon as it gets its hands on us – or when Iran goes nuclear, making it capable of killing us at long range.
Sterling, Massachusetts
Concise summation
In reference to “Core legal shortcomings of Obama’s Iran agreement” (Comment & Features, September 21), the Chofetz Chaim (Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan) said that God allotted a person a certain number of words, so don’t use them up too quickly! Therefore, I am summing things up with the fewest words possible.
The Iran agreement is Chamberlainism.
It expresses a phony “peace for our time” once again, and has so aptly been brought up to date with the expression by Israel’s ambassador to the UN, that it means waving the white flag.
By deferring the inevitable acts of the malevolent intentions of Iran, we are leaving our old folk and infirm, together with the next generation, to be put at risk. Let us hope we have the ability for at least a preemptive strike before even one missile, nuclear or non-nuclear, comes down on us.
Jerusalem instead
As I read about the tragic death of Amir Ohana (“Missing Israeli found dead in Uman,” September 20), it brought back memories from long ago.
The daf yomi (page of the day) class I attended in Manhattan for many years was taught by a Sanzer hassid, Rabbi Faivel Mashinsky. When I asked him why Sanzer hassidim didn’t make a pilgrimage to their rebbe’s grave, as the Breslov hassidim did, he told me that he and a group of friends actually began planning such a trip, but were counseled by a senior member of the sect against it.
Why? “At his grave, you will be praying over the rebbe’s bones. Go instead to the Kotel in Jerusalem and pray over his neshama [soul].”
They heeded the advice. They came to Israel and prayed at the Western Wall.
We mourn the passing of Amir Ohana. I only pray that this tragedy will serve all of those who make an annual pilgrimage to Uman to come to Jerusalem instead.
Kochav Yair
Disturbing content
The content of “The Temple Mount is in danger” (Comment & Features, September 20) is disturbing. It says that “the State of Israel has invested great effort to make freedom of worship possible on the Mount – even at the cost of harming Jewish visitors who wish to ascend to the site.”
Not only is it a monstrous notion that harm to Jewish visitors is a valid price to pay for freedom of worship on the Temple Mount – even with this total disregard for the welfare of Jewish visitors, freedom of worship has been secured only for Muslim worshipers. In making such a statement, the rabbi of the Western Wall is glossing over the fact that the State of Israel is systematically refusing to enact the decision of its own High Court to make provisions for complete freedom of worship on the Temple Mount.
The canard to excuse the failure of cleaning up the Temple Mount is the need to maintain “the status quo.” This ill-defined but politically convenient cry is used to justify capitulation to terrorism and anti-Semitism.
Where has the status quo been during the large-scale destruction of antiquities there? The rabbi of the Western Wall seems guilty of misrepresentation when he says that “the Chief Rabbinate, which I represent, forbids Jewish entry to the Temple Mount.” In fact, the Chief Rabbinate states its interpretation of Torah law as forbidding anyone’s entry to the Temple Mount.
Beit Shemesh