Letters to the Editor, November 1, 2023, Hypocritical remarks

Hypocritical remarks

US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan is quoted as providing self-righteous advice to Israel: “It is important for Israel to distinguish between going after terrorist targets, to take out terrorists who continue to threaten Israel, and going after civilians” (“White House: Israel must fight Hamas terrorists, protect civilians,” October 30).

Sullivan seems to hope that our conduct in the current war will not be modeled after that of the Allies in World War II. Shockingly, the Allies never opened a “humanitarian” corridor to ship water, food, and fuel to the Axis powers. The Allies never considered that the average German or Japanese might not have approved of their government’s actions.

After all, in the last free German election (November 1932), the Nazis got just 33% of the vote down from 37% in the previous election. Didn’t that prove that the Nazis were growing even less popular? As for the Japanese, no one voted for emperor Hirohito or dictator Tojo, so why punish the innocent German and Japanese civilians?

And punish, the Allies did. Germany was hit by bombings day and night, with about 30,000 civilians killed over a two-night period in February 1945, when the war was almost over. As for Japan, on March 9, 1945, the bombing of Tokyo killed almost 100,000 in just that night alone. And that’s not even counting Hiroshima and Nagasaki or the fact that Japan had no ability to actually invade the continental United States.

So, Mr. Sullivan, until you publicly call for posthumous war crimes trials for Roosevelt, Churchill, Air Force General Hap Arnold, and the crew of the Enola Gay, please keep your hypocritical “humanitarian” remarks to yourself.

DAVID GLEICHERJerusalem

Draw their conclusions

The Jewish world is slowly but surely beginning to realize the full impact of the fallout from the present war against Hamas. Zvika Klein’s “‘72% in France fear large-scale attack’” (October 31) exposes the fearful situation of the Jews of France, as expressed in the recent survey conducted by CRIF.

Right next to that article is another by Zvika Klein (“Attacks on Jews rising globally after October 7 – Lipstadt”), regarding Ambassador Deborah Lipstadt’s exact same concerns regarding Jews across Europe, North America, Australia, and South Africa.

A third article by Klein, “Six former Australian PMs support Israel,” includes concerns voiced by the former prime ministers for Australian Jews, saying that the community has been “directly affected by the terrible crimes of Hamas, and not only has to endure the loss and suffering of their families in Israel but also witnesses the use of these events by some to spread ancient hatreds.”

Just as the Jewish residents of these countries are beginning to draw their conclusions, so too will their host governments begin to realize what they have done. Those many countries who have enabled and indeed encouraged Muslim immigration through their borders have now to face the likely consequences of a substantial “exchange” of populations.

The Jewish communities will (hopefully) start to move out and come to join their fellow Jews in the safety of Israel, and the countries which they leave will lose a vibrant, educated, innovative, productive, peaceful, and fully integrated community. They will be replaced by Muslims who refuse to integrate, but frequently demonstrate, often riot, instead of innovating, and rather than being productive, constitute an enormous burden on the welfare services of their hosts.

And so I say to these countries: Wake up and look around you. Put political correctness aside; profiling is not racism, it is a matter of preserving your national values and facing the future with a little more realism.

LAURENCE BECKERJerusalem

Good, clean fun

One can understand the frustration of the thousands of demonstrators around the world waving Palestinian flags and shouting for the death of Jews and Israelis (“Stirring up anti-Israel protests,” October 31). After all, slaughtering Jews has always been good, clean fun, which is no doubt why it has been so popular through the ages among the type of people who enjoy shooting fish in a barrel.

The Jews are not supposed to strike back and wipe out the slaughterers. That definitely detracts from the benefits of this time-honored cure for feelings of insecurity, depression, and boredom, and requires a wrenching shift inworld view.

NAOMI SANDLERJerusalem

Anti-Jewish

“A wake-up call” (editorial, October 30) refers to the worldwide pro-Palestinian protesters and their slogan, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” As you point out, this means the destruction of the State of Israel.

In the first place, it is doubtful that they are really pro-Palestinian; a more correct description would be anti-Israel or, better still, anti-Jewish. I propose a counter-slogan: “From the river to the sea, Palestine will never be!”

MERVYN DOOBOVJerusalem

Your editorial makes reference to the anti-Israel rallies that were conducted in 2014, during which time an unheeded connection between Hamas and ISIS was first made. It seems to me, though, that what’s now taking place throughout much of the world is more reminiscent of the threat to Jewish existence by the pogroms of Eastern Europe during the early years of the twentieth century and the wave of Central European Nazism that was typical during the thirties.

Pro-Palestinian demonstrations are reaching a very dangerous point of no return. Placards will soon be replaced with firearms, and explosives will be taking the place of loudspeakers and bullhorns. It will make little difference on which side of the fence you stand; the Jewish community – people, institutions, culture – are being viewed as defilements that need to be destroyed.

There was a time when I accepted the argument that being anti-Israel did not necessarily infer antisemitism. I believed – and still very much do – in freedom of expression, and was not blind to the other side of the coin in the ongoing struggles that Israel has been engaged in from the outset of its independence.

But while debating and protesting against legislation and policies are most certainly legitimate, threats of physical harm and injury most certainly are not. Even more shocking is that it is the Jews – with instructions to keep a low profile and to stay out of areas where mobs have become uncontrolled – and not the rabble-rousers who are being made to suffer.

What we’re seeing here is more than a wake-up call. Waving before our eyes is a flag as red as can be, which will most likely be ignored by members of the Jewish community who have established comfortable, assimilated lives – until it will be too late. 

BARRY NEWMANGinot Shomron

Comfort and support

Regarding “Does Gaza war offer Republicans a chance to entice pro-Israel voters in 2024?” (October 30): This is highly unlikely. As the article mentions, “President Biden hit a home run – maybe even a grand-slam home run,” by “offering comfort and support to Israelis, moving carrier strike groups into the Mediterranean, and even traveling to Israel during the war.”

By sharp contrast, former president Trump has sharply criticized Prime Minister Netanyahu for a lack of readiness; he stated, without any evidence, that if he was president now, Hamas would not have attacked Israel, and called Hezbollah “very smart.”

In addition, the vast majority of Democratic Congress members, including all its leaders, have consistently supported Israel and have voted for military aid many times for Israel, including funding the Iron Dome.

There are many more reasons why US Jews are likely to continue to support Democrats in the 2024 elections. They believe in the truth so are unlikely to support Trump who is still telling the big lie that he actually won the 2020 presidential election, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

They believe in democracy so are unlikely to support a Republican Party that has tried to overturn the results of a democratic election and just elected a speaker of the House who was a leader in that effort. They also believe that climate change must be properly addressed, so are unlikely to support a party that is in denial about climate threats and has done everything possible to overturn legislation designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

RICHARD H. SCHWARTZShoresh

Personal responsibility

It is shocking to see the head of our government refusing to feel any personal responsibility for the terrible tragedy Israel has undergone and all the suffering that still lies ahead (“On responsibility and apportioning blame,” October 30). Leaders of other countries understand the meaning of their office.

Netanyahu would do well to finally adopt former US president Harry S. Truman’s motto displayed in a sign on his desk in the Oval Office of the White House that declared that “The Buck Stops Here.”

LINDA DAYANAshkelon

Like everyone else in the country, I am profoundly shocked by the massacre which took place on Simchat Torah, and even a few weeks later cannot absorb the full horror of that day.

We supposedly have a government and we supposedly have a head of that government; his name is Benjamin Netanyahu and he must accept full responsibility for what happened on Simchat Torah. He must resign in disgrace. Anything else would be a travesty of justice.

BRENDA GOLDBLUMJerusalem

Not the only principle

Regarding “The emotive American Zionism” (October 29): Yes, President Biden’s announcement that the US stands with Israel was helpful. In addition, the repositioning of US ships was a clear warning that America would work to stop Hezbollah from firing on Israel and trying to disrupt Israel’s attacks on Hamas.

But American Zionism is not the only principle guiding President Biden’s actions. He is, in contrast, also heavily influenced by the extreme left-wing branch of the Democratic Party, which views the Palestinians as victims of Zionist oppressors, a key point of woke philosophy. Biden also very much wants to undo any remnants of Donald Trump’s policies.

Thus, immediately upon entering office, Biden softened sanctions on Iran and resumed payments to UNWRA and the Palestinian Authority that had been canceled during the term of the Trump administration. These moves by the current president emboldened Iran and allowed Tehran to fund the very same terrorist groups which are now fighting Israel.

TOBY F. BLOCKAtlanta

Equal justice

While correctly explaining why Hamas must be eradicated, Barry Leff unintentionally reaffirms a calumny that has plagued the Jewish people for many centuries (“It’s not revenge, nor is it an eye for an eye,” October 30).

Leff quotes Mahatma Gandhi’s misleading maxim, “An eye for an eye will leave everyone blind,” and then notes, “People are saying that the death toll in Gaza is because Israel is exacting revenge, or is following a biblical prescription of an eye for an eye.” Both of these statements reinforce the common misunderstanding that this biblical injunction calls for blood-thirsty vengeance.

In fact, at the time that “eye for an eye” was propounded, it was a revolutionary step toward a value we now embrace – equal justice under the law. Never interpreted as requiring physical retribution, it was always understood in terms of monetary compensation. It meant the substitution of legal punishment and exact equivalence in payment for an injury, rather than runaway revenge.

As a law of justice, not hatred, it was a statement of equitable relation between crime and punishment, requiring that all citizens are equal before the law, and that the injuries of all people should be valued according to the same standard. As one commentator observed, “it is a law appropriate only for free peoples.”

Misinterpreting this rule libels the Jewish people and ignores one of the most important contributions we have made to modern society. 

EFRAIM COHENZichron Ya’acov

True colors

Regarding “FM accuses UN chief of justifying Hamas attack, cancels meeting” (October 25): The unqualified words of UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres are in line with the UN’s “Zionism is racism” resolution, applauding arch-terrorist Yasser Arafat, and maybe worst of all, the special item concerning Israel on the agenda of its Human Rights Council.

The secretary-general has easily forgotten that Israel left Gaza in 2005, and for almost 20 years the leaders of Gaza have been pursuing a genocidal program; that the Palestinian Authority has always refused offers of peace because then they would have been accountable for the millions they siphon off from the world’s largesse for their personal gain; that time and again the Palestinian Authority and their offshoots send their minions to murder and destroy. Must I continue? In fact, the secretary-general has shown the true colors of his antisemitism.

DANIEL BRAUNSCHVIG

Jerusalem