Wednesday, July 30, 2014 Av 3, 5774

Letters week of August 3, 2006

August 3, 2006
Posted In 
Comment0

 

Pro-Israel 'Fatigue' -- A Fatal Disease for All!

As usual, the Jewish Exponent's front-page editorial quickly separates the wheat from the chaff ("Drawing Lines in the Sand," July 20).

The fatigue that some feel about standing up against anti-Israel terror to which it refers is dangerous and provides a cover to those whose deep anti-Semitism would otherwise be self-defeating for their "cause."

I pray that good people of all faiths maintain the courage to resist that fatal disease.
Jack Mulliken
Carnegie, Pa.



More U.N. Involvement? Are They Kidding?

What planet does the Israel Policy Forum inhabit? Its recommended solution as articulated by M.J. Rosenberg (Opinion: "What's Needed: America the Activist, Not America the Bystander," July 20) for stopping Hezbollah raw aggression is "a new U.N. resolution."

Wow! That really ought to get their attention -- much like the dormant U.N. Resolution 1559. Any resolution that could actually pass the Security Council would be ineffective.

A new intervening U.N. force might be mandated to replace UNIFIL, which would better have been named UNifutil. UNIFIL has watched now for decades as the border burned, even aiding the terrorists and concealing their crimes.

Were the usual suspects now working to prematurely stop the violence successful, the border would return to the status quo ante, with more and more portions of Israel held hostage to Hezbollah's rocketry whims.

One should expect no better stance from the United Nations or the European Union. This stand ill befits a supposedly pro-Israel group.

Bravo to "America the Bystander" for thwarting such moves and allowing Israel the time to do what must be done -- destroy Hezbollah.
Richard D. Wilkins
Wilmington, Del.



Rally for Israel, but Don't Call Hezbollah Names

I attended the rally at Love Park because I believe it's important to be counted among those who support Israel (Cover story: "Stand Strong -- and They Did!" July 27).

I was impressed with Rabbi David Gutterman's speech. And I would have hoped the rest of the speakers would have followed his lead and announced their support for Israel in a civil way.

Unfortunately, this was not to be. I should have realized when the podium contained only men -- not even one token woman -- that this rally would be a way for organizers to incite the hundreds of people assembled with jingoistic, chauvinistic phrases.

I was nauseated by former Philadelphia controller Jonathan Seidel's referring to Hezbollah "animals," reducing human beings to subhuman status, the way Jews are often depicted. Also demeaning was the way Rep. Curt Weldon and David Brog referred to "Islamso-fascists" in the same way that "Jewish terrorists" is used by Hezbollah.

I attended to show the world that American Jews stand with Israel in her time of need. I enjoyed hearing the consul general of Israel in Philadelphia, Uriel Palti, and sent donations to Magen David Adom and other groups in need of funds.

But the rally organizers didn't have to add fuel to the fire by portraying support for Israel in a narrow, bigoted way.
David Broida
Haverford



Embrace of Appeasement Leads Only to the Grave

Letter-writers Ben Burrows and Cy Swartz seem anxious for peace, as though the division between Jews is between pro-peace and pro-war advocates (Letters, July 20).

What blather! We all want peace.

The disagreement is one between pro-appeasement and anti-appeasement advocates.

We are reliving the contest between Neville Chamberlain and his belief in "peace in our time," and Winston Churchill, known at the time as "The Warmonger."

The pro-appeasement point of view prevailed at that time, a deal with Hitler was struck, and as a result, 40 million people died, including almost 500,000 American soldiers and 6 million European Jews.

The peace that appeasement will bring to the Middle East is the peace of the grave for the Jews of Israel -- make no mistake about it!
Alan Molod
Elkins Park


History and Faith Dictate Exit of Jews From Europe

 

As the grandchild of survivors of the mass murder of Jews in 1940s' Europe, Noomi Weinryb, growing up in Sweden, asks, "Should Jews Stay in Europe?" (Opinion, July 6).

Her answer is an optimistic "yes," based on the creation of a Swedish-sponsored European Institute for Jewish Studies.

The purpose of the institute is for the participation of "Jewish activists," who would then return to their European countries of origin to "help change their societies."

Presumably, the change would be from anti-Judaism to pro-Judaism.

Although the Swedish intention is well-meaning, the creation of an institute for Jewish studies, attended by Jews, misses the mark.

After 19 centuries of anti-Jewish polemic and legislation -- increasingly punitive in degree -- that encouraged physical violence toward Jews and culminated in the murder, by Christians, of millions of innocent Jewish men, women and children in 20th-century Europe, it's not "Jewish activists" who need an "Institute of Jewish Studies."

Rather, it is Christians who need an "Institute of Christian Studies," in order to examine the Christian need for the denigration of Jews as a validation of the Christian faith.

That said, Jews cannot and should not stay in Europe.
J. Kligman
Philadelphia



War on Terrorism's Being Fought in Wrong Place

Jonathan Tobin wrongly assumes that some Democrats' opposition to the war in Iraq and Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) means they are isolationists opposed to fighting the war on terrorism (A Matter of Opinion: "Pushed to the Extremes," July 13).

There were no terrorists in Iraq until the Bush invasion.

The war on terror should be brought to where they are -- namely, Afghanistan.
Eileen Gerson
Bryn Mawr

 

Comments on this Article

Sign up for our Newsletter

Advertisement