Letters
The two-state solution is a trap for Israel
In an August 21 article, Rabbi Shammai Engelmayer asserts “Israel’s future depends on ousting Bibi.” Basically, he is referring to the stakes in the upcoming October election in Israel, where a new parliament will be elected and its members will choose a new Prime Minister or re-elect Benjamin Netanyahu. Politics is always a hot issue in Israel and this year the war with Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, hostage negotiations and relations with the United States are on front burner for all sides. Netanyahu is down in the polls and his critics in Israel and in the U.S. are pouring on the complaints.
I suspect Rabbi Engelmayer ‘s article is probably a rehash of opposition arguments against Netanyahu. Perhaps Rabbi Engelmayer has dual citizenship, but I am not an Israeli citizen and will not be voting in the Israeli election. However, as both a Jew and an American, I worry about Israel’s security, Therefore I must respond to Rabbi Engelmayer’s most serious complaint, namely, blaming Bibi for not settling the Arab-Israel conflict and particularly for his opposition to the two-state solution mantra and creation of a Palestinian state along Israel’s longest and most vulnerable eastern border.
In making the argument for a Palestinian state . Rabbi Engelmayer cites a recent poll by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research. This poll reports somewhat confusing results indicating that 44% of Palestinians support negotiations with Israel with 50 % opposing and 52% prefer two states based on the 1967 border compared to one binational state. As Rabbi Engelmayer admits, “These numbers hardly prove peace is at hand but they do prove the idea is not dead.”
Since the Rabbi is looking to polls to gauge Palestinian attitudes toward Israel, I wonder why he ignores the numerous polls showing the continued popularity of Hamas in the West Bank and its prospects for taking control if PA President Abbas is willing to allow elections after 20 years. Obviously, based on the Hamas record as ruler of Gaza with implacable determination to destroy Israel, the threat of Hamas in charge of a Palestinian state cannot be ignored or overridden by some ambiguous poll or pundits seizing any possible argument to oust Netanyahu.
Of course, I am not accusing Rabbi Engelmayer of any intent to harm Israel. But due to his support for a two-state solution without firm evidence of Palestinian peaceful intentions, I have to question his judgement. I suggest Rabbi Engelmayer turn his attention to fighting record levels of antisemitism in America. I recommend checking the websites of CAMERA.org and Honest Reporting.org to understand and expose the role of corrupt biased media such as NPR, the BBC, and PBS in peddling lies about Israel such as phony genocide accusations in Gaza which is now the mantra of feckless politicians and candidates seeking high public office with no particular qualification except an anti-Israel agenda. I also recommend the August 14 article by Max L.K leinman titled “Whatever happened to our Socialist party?” to understand how a “toxic mixture of neo-communism, Jew-hatred, and Islamic radicalism has now infiltrated the Democratic party” and how members of this movement will undermine America “by boring from within.”
Antisemitism is a threat to Jews and a threat to America. Anti-Israel politicians such as Senator Bernie Sanders and Senator Cris Van Hollen are determined to stop vital weapon shipments to Israel and to end the historic U.S. Israel bi-partisan alliance. If they and other colleagues succeed, they certainly will endanger not just Israel but also America since the U.S. is a major beneficiary of advanced Israeli technology in defense, environmental protection, medical breakthroughs and computer security. Israel is also America’s most reliable and best ally in the Middle East and bulwark against a complete Iranian takeover of this region and its vital oil supplies. Accordingly, if Rabbi Engelmayer wants to protect both Israel and America, I trust he will focus his attention on fighting antisemitism at home in the USA while he remains an interested observer of the democratic process in Israel and the campaign battles ahead.
Larry Dvores
Livingston
When can we fib?
Lonye Debra Rasch raises an interesting issue and an important concern (“A grandmother’s dilemma,” Aug. 21). The issue is if and when is it OK to tell a fib (aka a white lie). Ms. Rasch concludes that fibs are acceptable when they “serve a higher moral purpose.”
To illustrate her conclusion, Ms. Rasch relates a conversation with her granddaughter, who, when questioned about her motivation to call grandma, honestly admits she calls because her mom tells her to. Ms. Rasch seems to suggest that her granddaughter should have fibbed and said she calls because she wants to. Perhaps the more appropriate fib might have been offered by grandma herself. Instead of, “That’s disappointing,” Ms. Rasch might have said, “I love speaking with you regardless of why you call!”
The anecdote also raises a significant concern for me. I think it is very unhelpful to encourage children to fib to spare parents or grandparents disappointment or anger. In fact, it is crucial for children to be honest with us, especially when their responses might anger or disappoint us. Children are tempted to lie or fib when they have done something inappropriate, used poor judgement, or are being victimized. Being honest with parents and grandparents keeps kids safe.
Peter Herbst, MSW, LCSW
Montclair