Monday, September 1, 2014 Elul 6, 5774

Letters Week of July 21, 2011

July 21, 2011
Posted In 
Comment0

Writer Is Correct: 1967 Lines Are Indefensible

U.S. Rep. Patrick Meehan is absolutely right: The 1949 armistice lines, often called the "1967 borders," are indeed indefensible; numerous military experts, from Israel and the United States, have said so over the decades (Editorial & Opinions: "Standing Strong With Israel," July 7).

Indeed, President Barack Obama did more than call upon Israel to return to these indefensible lines. He called for a "full and phased Israeli withdrawal," including from the Jordan Valley, a strategically vital land barrier whose possession by Israel makes it possible for the Jewish state to repulse an invasion from the East. All Israeli governments have regarded it as vital to Israel's security.

Obama has also refused to endorse the 2004 George W. Bush letter, which stipulates that a negotiated border must take account of Jewish communities that have risen over the years beyond the 1949 armistice lines and also that Palestinian refugees and their descendants would not settle within Israel.

Instead, Obama calls for Israel to first set up a Palestinian state -- and only then discuss the vital issues of Jerusalem and the Palestinian refugees.

Morton A. Klein 
National president 
Zionist Organization of America

Congressman's Viewpoint Won't Lead to Peace

Congressman Patrick Meehan's support for right-wing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will not move Israel any closer to a viable peace plan (Editorial & Opinions: "Standing Strong With Israel," July 7).

As the Wiki leaks showed, the Palestinian negotiators were fully willing to make any concessions necessary for peace.

Also, it has been pointed out over and over that President Barack Obama's reference to the 1967 borders as a negotiating starting point has been a staple of U.S. policy for decades.

So let's end all of the Republican hysterics over this reiteration of our long-standing position.

When Meehan goes to Israel again this summer, I hope he will deviate from the planned government tour and observe firsthand the disgraceful and oppressive conditions under which many Palestinians are forced to live.

Finally, the uncertainty of the "Arab spring" makes it much more important for Israel to abandon it's obstructionism and sincerely seek peace now rather than continue to expand settlements in Palestinian areas.

Elkan Katz 
Philadelphia

Palin and Friends Simply Aren't Politically Kosher

If it is tactically beneficial for the right wing to be uncritically supportive of Jews and Israel, consider that such support can turn on a dime and has done so before.

It might be recalled that Mussolini started out as a Zionist until it no longer suited his tactical purposes.

Simply because some Jewish politicos are packaging Sarah Palin and holding forth on right-wing radio doesn't make their product politically kosher, nor good for the health of the politics of America, the last best hope for our historically vulnerable people (Editorial & Opinions: "Look Who's Finding a Voice In the New Media on the Right," July 14).

Take time to listen to our boychick Michael Savage late at night and hear his guttural rants for a holy war against the Islamic world.

Just listen to Mark Levin and hear his sneering contempt for liberal Americans and the very concept of liberalism.

And do listen to Palin's core message, which, no matter how kashered by the fact that she has some Jewish media advisors, nonetheless directly appeals to know-nothingness in America and dismissively attacks people who have committed the offense of having been educated and informed.

No Jewish fig leaf can hide or sanctify the dangerous demagoguery of the new right media.

If they succeed in ruining respectful political dialogue in this greatest country on God's green earth, will it really be good for the Jews?

Jerrold Bonn 
Elkins Park

Comments on this Article

Advertisement