web analytics
April 18, 2014 / 18 Nisan, 5774
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘Myron Hecker’

Letters To The Editor

Wednesday, April 25th, 2012

Romney Versus Obama

In refreshing contrast to President Obama’s recent and belated (and no doubt temporary) change of course in his Mideast policy, it seems clear we can expect a decidedly pro-Israel policy from Mitt Romney from the moment he takes office (“Romney Triumph Signals Return to Traditional GOP Foreign Policy Approach,” front page news story, April 20).

In fact, it was not too long ago that Romney said it would be inappropriate for an American president to make decisions about the Middle East without consulting the Israeli prime minister, for which he was roundly criticized.

Arthur Bergman (Via E-Mail)

 

Bibi And Hebron (I)

Thank you for publicizing Prime Minister Netanyahu’s earlier statements on Hebron and showing how they differ from his current attitude (“The Hebron Expulsion,” editorial, April 20).

Not that anyone should be surprised. Despite his stated commitment to give his all to protect the Jewish interests in the oldest Jewish city in the world, he gave away more of it in his first term as prime minister than any other Israeli prime minister before or since.

And now he is acquiescing to the turnover of buildings there to Arabs – even buildings owned by Jews. How can there be any question about who owns Beit HaMachpela when an Arab has been sentenced to death for selling the property to the Jew claiming ownership? It is a scandal. Things are not looking good for Israel’s future with this kind of leadership.

Yerachmiel Gordon Jerusalem

 

Bibi And Hebron (II)

Your editorial was justly critical of Benjamin Netanyahu, whose pledges of support for Hebron in 1994 and 1995 belied his current craven capitulation to Ehud Barak’s blatantly political decision to forcibly remove the Jewish occupants of Beit HaMachpela even before the “legitimacy of the purchase” was investigated and verified.

The ultimate betrayal was that this forced evacuation of Jews was carried out just days before Pesach, leaving scant time to find alternative accommodations and despite a mutual agreement to delay the eviction.

Barak’s confession that his decision was primarily based on his anti-settler mindset – “I won’t allow settlers to dictate how the government runs the country” – raises the question of whether the current Israeli government represents all Israelis.

Sadly, Bibi in effect colluded with self-aggrandizing Barak by piously pontificating that “no one is above the law,” thereby relegating his previous Hebron promises null and void.

Fay Dicker Lakewood, NJ

 

Bibi And Hebron (III)

I will never understand why the Israeli government accepts the claims of Arab ownership, even from those who have valid deeds. Why doesn’t Israel follow the American model of monetary compensation for disputed land rather than land transfers?

No one would dream of saying the U.S. has to return downtown Denver to some Indian tribe. Compensation is another thing, though. That’s what you call nation-building, especially when the “occupied land” was seized in a war the other side began in an attempt to destroy the state of Israel.

Sharon Weissman (Via E-Mail)

 

Editorial ‘Way Too Kind’

You were way too kind to Hilary Rosen (“Hilary Rosen on Women,” editorial, April 20).

While I can appreciate trying to cast her comments in the best possible light so that your criticism would be all the more compelling, others in the media had no problem slamming her without any qualifiers for her slur of stay-at-home moms.

Perhaps your criticism was more pointed – you were right that it wasn’t quite that simple a matter – but I don’t think you captured the moment, certainly not the political one. Her attitude is representative of elitist feminists who look down their snooty noses at women who live a more traditional lifestyle. Remember Hillary Clinton’s arrogant statement, when Bill was first running for president in 1992, about her decision not to stay home and bake cookies?

Martin Sarles Los Angeles

 

The Academic Left And Israel

Dr. Richard L. Cravatts (“How the Academic Left Came to Hate Israel,” front page essay, April 20) offered an interesting take on the anti-Zionist/anti-Jewish academic Left.

To my mind, however, that ilk is substantially made up of those who rebelled against the political and perhaps religious orthodoxy of their day and saw academia as an acceptable way out. Israel, as a close ally of the U.S. and a military power in its own right, was natural fodder for individuals desperate to identify with so-called oppressed peoples in underdeveloped parts of the world.

Ellen Klineman (Via E-Mail)

 

MDA And The Star Of David

Jonathan Feldstein’s carefully nuanced and seemingly fact-filled opinion piece on the Magen David Adom controversy (“Truth, Lies, and Saving Lives,” op-ed, April 2) left me wondering. It’s still not clear to me as to why the Star of David standing alone is no longer MDA’s identifying symbol across the board, and what it was that prompted the change? Was it the agreement with the International Red Cross? Or is there another reason? It really should be a simple question to answer.

Letters To The Editor

Thursday, April 12th, 2012

Shameful French

The shameful efforts by the French media to discourage reports identifying the gunman in the Toulouse murders as a Muslim (“Whitewashing Islamic Terror in Toulouse,” op-ed, March 30) is just more evidence that when it comes to choosing between Muslims and Jews, the French will choose the Muslims every time.

I’ve read reports that Jews are being advised to leave France. They should. We have all been sent a terrible message.
Dani Kadar
Jerusalem

Israel’s Judges
Kenneth Levin’s March 30 front page essay, “Israel’s Dictatorship of the Judiciary,” is an informative case study in how a country with the greatest potential can be thwarted in its religious and national destiny by a legal system dominated by a coterie of anti-religious, anti-Zionist and anti-democratic judges.

In recent years, despite what the majority of Israelis wanted for their country, the court systematically empowered those seeking to undermine the Jewishness of the Jewish homeland. Peace Now has been systematically and shamefully coddled and the Palestinian narrative embraced at almost every turn.
Perry Garfield
(Via E-Mail)

Inaccurate Press Release?
I’m not sure the Orthodox Union’s statement hailing the Supreme Court’s decision in the Zivotofsky passport case is all that helpful. As you reported (“Supreme Court Jerusalem Passport Issue a Matter for Lower Courts,” news story, March 30), the court did not accept the idea that a federal law entitling Americans born in Jerusalem to have their American passports record “Israel” as their place of birth necessarily represents a Congressional intrusion into the executive branch’s constitutional prerogatives in the area of recognizing foreign countries.

However, the OU statement, which was among the first to be circulated, said: “With the ruling by the high court, Congressional policy on Jerusalem, ignored by successive administrations, will get its day in court.” To the contrary; Nathan Lewin, the Zivotofskys’ lawyer, successfully argued that the passport provision had nothing to do with the U.S. policy on the status of religion.

Being first with a press release is not always a good thing. Being accurate is.
Elliot Scheer
(Via E-Mail)

Secular Israeli Store Owners And Shabbat
Re: “Secular Tel Aviv Storeowners Sue City to Protect Shabbat Rights (news story, March 30)

So non-religious Tel Aviv storeowners are suing because they want the labor laws that prohibit round-the-clock operation of supermarkets and other retail outlets to be enforced; otherwise they feel the business permits of 24/7 chains should be revoked.

Lest one think those secular storeowners have experienced an epiphany, their lawyer said: “The independent merchants are not doing this for a holy purpose so much as for social and cultural purposes. Everyone, including secular Jews, has the right to enjoy Shabbat and a day of rest in their own manner.”

Similarly, according to your story, Labor Party head Shelly Yachimovich told a radio interviewer that this was not a struggle between secular Jews and haredi Jews: “Every working person deserves at least one day off a week.”

I wonder what the reaction from those folks would have been had frum merchants initiated the action to close the stores on Shabbat.
Shmuel Glazer
New York, NY

Church And State
As I read the March 30 editorial on the decision by the State University of New York at Stony Brook to no longer cancel classes on Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, and certain Christian holidays, several questions occurred to me.

For one thing, why would it not have been sufficient that students and faculty simply not be penalized for being absent in observance of those days? Why was it necessary in the first place for the school to close in order for their observances to be accommodated?

And how is it possible that teachers in a public university can be paid for taking off in honor of their religious holidays? It seems to me that this constitutes a clear violation of the required separation between church and state.
Irving Wasserman
(Via E-Mail)

Obama’s Open Mike (I)
President Obama`s indiscreet words at an open microphone will come to haunt him (“Campaign Rhetoric,” editorial, March 30). For Obama to tell others, especially non-Americans, that he will be more flexible in his dealings with them after he is reelected is a signal that basically he would like to act differently but is restrained by political realities.

In other words, his agenda is hidden from the American people and from the nations he interacts with. What a sad reflection on the American presidency.
Toby Willig
Jerusalem

Obama’s Open Mike (II)
“After the election, I’ll have more flexibility,” uttered Barack Obama to Russian president Medvedev. Obama thought a mike had been turned off. Medvedev was clearly pleased, promising to “tell Vladimir.” They were referring to the nuclear weapons reduction talks between Obama and Russian premier Vladimir Putin.

The flexibility in question is something that troubles most Americans and virtually all our military and security chiefs. “Flexibility” in this case means doing the wrong thing in the future, since this is an election year and there are people who need to be fooled again.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/letters-to-the-editor/letters-to-the-editor-210/2012/04/12/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: