Victor Gordon to The Business Day

BUSINESS DAY

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

 

 

Philip Lloyd’s letter (“Israelat fault, notIran”) provides a perfect example of how one blames the potential victim instead of the cause of the threat. When it comes toIsraelthis is nothing new.

 

Lloyd claims that ”Iran’s only “crime” is its failure to comply with conditions to which it has never agreed. Yet, rationally, would he not regard it criminal for the leader of a major power to make very public statements expressing a clear intention to “wipeIsraeloff the map”? The link between this mildly troubling plan and the weapons needed to achieve it, are quite obvious.

 

It is strange that Lloyd displays no apparent concern in the knowledge that a world leader who displays such irrationality while supporting international terrorism, should be allowed within a mile of enriched uranium. Also strange is that an unstable country likePakistandoes not even rate a mention.

 

The last time the world ignored the utterances of a world figure who openly threatened the very right of Jews to exist, it resulted in 6 million dead Jews, 1,5 million of which were children.

 

While Lloyd may not be bothered much by this, comfortable ensconced in far awayCape Town, those in the direct firing line have other concerns. To claim that “Israelis banging the war drums” is a direct inversion of the truth as it was notIsraelwho launched this latest threat to its very existence, but an unstable fanatic named Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

 

However, when faced with the sort of appeasement that the world has adopted so frequently in the past and the sheer indifference displayed towards her welfare,Israelhas had to face these sort of realities virtually on her own.

 

What the greater world fails to acknowledge is that the threat posed by a nuclearIranis not aimed atIsraelalone but at the entire civilized world.Iran’s active links with international terrorism makes it the very worst candidate to be entrusted with an arsenal of nuclear weapons. WhileIsraelmight have such an arsenal she has never, ever threatened any other country with nuclear attack and would harbor this type of weapon merely as a deterrent.

 

Hypothetically, were one last nuclear weapon to exist in the world, would Philip Lloyd sleep better at night knowing thatIsraelorIranhad access to it?

 

Lloyd remarks that sanctions impoverish the people, while enrich those in power, while sanctions againstIranare unjust.”  Would his antipathy towards sanctions include those that are currently being promoted againstIsraelthrough the current BDS campaign?

 

He has some interesting questions to answer.

 

Victor Gordon

Allan Wollman to The Business Day

Sir
Your correspondent Philip Lloyd seems completely out of touch with the reality of the Middle East today.
Indeed the Iranians signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty, back in 1974 when the country was still under the rule of the Shah, in 1979 he was deposed by the Islamic regime of Khamenei who became Iran’s ‘supreme’ leader, that same year saw that country’s political about turn and the occupation of the U.S. Embassy resulted in its break with western values.
Lloyd generosity towards this despotic dictatorship is somewhat simplistic. In 1980 Iraq seized an oil rich province of Iran with the resultant war costing an estimated 1 million lives. It is a well-known fact that Iran pressed children into its army armed with plastic keys with the promise that these were the keys to paradise! But perhaps Mr. Lloyd was not aware of just how highly the Iranian regime holds the value of life – especially its own citizens.
However since the 1979 revolution Iran has honored precious few of its international obligations and has been a major sponsor of world terrorism. It is a country that has precious little regard for human life or human rights so how can Lloyd believe that it would behave responsibly regarding its nuclear aspirations given that it has threatened to wipe Israel off the map?
Mr. Lloyd seems well informed about Israel’s ‘formidable nuclear arsenal’ he also seems well informed on just how much influence tiny Israel can influence mighty America, and if he believes this surely the tooth fairy will be visiting him soon.
Israel is indeed the problem it is the problem for the Arab world as they find it difficult to have a Jew in the neighborhood. So Mr. Lloyd Israel has been attacked on numerous occasions with overwhelming and disproportionate force from the day of its independence and when it is threatened with annihilation you may perhaps forgive this nation for taking such threats seriously and reserving it’s right to defend itself, yes even at the cost of your petrol bill increasing.

Allan Wolman

Victor Gordon to The City Press

(Ref: “Lessons for solidarityPalestinecan teach”)

 

No doubt, Ahmed Kathrada’s heart is in the right place – based on his own unique experiences during the struggle, his concern for the Palestinians is understandable. There is no denying that their lives are not easy, made all the more difficult by the history of the past 64 years. However, the essential elements missing from Kathrada’s speech are the reasons why.

 

It might come as a surprise to Kathrada that both Palestinians and Jews alike desire nothing more than to live their lives in peace in harmony should they only to be given the chance to do so. As simple as this sounds it is complicated by the continual stoking of mutual distrust and antagonism that result directly from the sort of sentiments expressed in Kathrada’s speech, delivered during “International Israel Apartheid Week” at UJ.

 

Sadly, Kathrada ignored a valuable opportunity to come up with a single original thought that would further the aims of peace and tolerance, other than accuse Israel of the practice of apartheid while quoting some well-worn passages from speeches by Nelson Mandela (in 1977) and Desmond Tutu (in 2010). Supporting this was a reference to Professor John Dugard, an avowed opponent ofIsraeland the highly discredited Russell Tribunal which trotted out a pre-ordained verdict of “guilty” following its staged deliberations in November 2011, about the veracity of Israeli apartheid.

 

The determination displayed byIsrael’s detractors to pin this label on her chest would be commendable were it only based in fact and common sense. However, context, facts and history are of no apparent interest to those determined to pursue the destruction of the Jewish State in their apparent zeal to achieve what they regard as freedom for the Palestinians. In doing so they simply ignore uncomfortable, fundamental issues.

 

For example, “Freedom House”, a highly respected NGO instituted by Eleanor Roosevelt in 1941 in order to determine the levels of freedom of all nations, has rated Israel the only completely free country in the Middle East as well as the most politically and socially democratic.

 

If, as Kathrada claims, he has a true understanding of apartheid (based on his own experiences), how is it possible to be concurrently “free and democratic” yet still apply a policy of apartheid?  The two systems are fundamentally incompatible. One cannot have it both ways.

 

Also, surveys have revealed that, while only 26% of Israeli Arabs feel a personal  commitment to the State of Israel, 86% value living under its ethos of freedom and universal democracy. Who knows better? Desmond Tutu, John Dugard and Ahmed Kathrada or those who experience, daily, the system under which they live?

If the argument is made thatIsraelapplies some policies of separation in theWest Bank, the answer is simple and sad. Measures that exist are a direct result of attacks directed against Israeli citizens from within those areas ever since the birth of the state and which show little sign of abating. Every measure in place is a direct result of the need for security. Remove the threat and the need disappears.

 

What Ahmed Kathrada should preach is a message of common sense directed at the Palestinians. “Stop your terrorist activities and sit down for peace talks without pre-conditions.Israelextends a genuine hand of friendship. You will be surprise how much you will accomplish towards attaining a new way of life.”

 

Victor Gordon to The Star

Firoz Osman has, predictably, gone to some trouble to validate his accusation thatIsraelpractices apartheid and is thus guilty of crimes against humanity. Anyone following the daily discourse about the conflict in this region has heard or read it all before.

 

According to Freedom House, a highly respected NGO that came into being in 1941 at the behest of Eleanor Roosevelt, Israel is the only democracy in theMiddle Eastthat can be also regarded as fully free. My question therefore is, ifIsraelpractices apartheid how can she also be a fully free democracy? As the two systems are anathema to one another they simply cannot co-exist. You either have one or the other.

 

However, if one is determined to accuse a nation of something outlandish, with a little effort you can manage anything, and sadly, you will be believed by those who fail to think for themselves.

 

For example, Osman accusesIsraelof issuing ID cards to her citizens identifying the individual by race and religion. The truth is that this regulation did in fact exist but was cancelled in 2003. Even prior to that it had no application to the rights of the citizen which are secured by law. There are no distinguishing racial nor religious characteristics on Israeli ID documents.

 

Further, he accuses the Israeli Supreme Court of dismissing “practically all cases which dealt with equal rights for Arab citizens”  In fact, the Israeli Supreme Court is highly respected throughout international judicial circles for its integrity and even-handedness when deliberating over all issues involving all sectors of the population, as well as those brought forth for consideration by Palestinians.

 

While castigating Israel for the practice of apartheid, Osman conveniently ignores statements made by Mahmud Abbas that a future Palestinian state would not accept a single Jew on its soil.

Nor does he refer to the insular religious policies of countries likeSaudi ArabiaorPakistanwhich allow only Muslims to immigrate and practice their religion. Christianity, Hinduism etc are banned and can earn the cohort a sentence of death. InIsraelthere is total freedom of religion, association, speech and the rights of women who need not fear being stoned to death for having been raped.

 

Osman’s fervor in attackingIsraelcarries some elements of fact.Israelis not a perfect society and makes no claims to be. But considering the threat she has existed under for the past 64 years she does incredibly well in terms of her respect of human rights.

 

Allan Wollman to The Star

Both Messer’s E Qasim and Firoz Osman continue to attempt to accuse Israel of the crime of apartheid. Nothing new yet no doubt they live by the adage of telling the lie often enough and even they will begin to believe it.

Their scurrilous claims and attempts to draw parallels between apartheid South Africa and Israel, repeated “ad nauseam” by these gentlemen, have been argued and countered many time in these columns and do not warrant repetition. I will however attempt to prove that these people are not in the least concerned about the plight of the Palestinian people but only with the demonization and destruction of Israel and what better weapon but the apartheid slur.

So lets consider the hypocrisy of their accusations and examine the following:
I together with some other readers have highlighted in previous correspondence, but conveniently ignored by both Osman and Qasim the blatant apartheid practices being perpetrated today in almost every Arab country.

The abuse of human rights and raw apartheid laws enshrined in the law books of Lebanon where over half a million Palestinians still holed up in poverty riddled camps, deprived of their basic rights. Where the law determines where they are allowed to live, what kind of work they are allowed to engage in, what schools they can attend, and prohibits attendance at universities. Basic medical care is placed out of their reach. Sound familiar?

Similar conditions exist in Jordan where Palestinians are discriminated against on the basis of their ethnic make up.  Palestinian camps in Syria have recently come under fire from Assad’s regime that have practiced discrimination of their various ethnic groups for years and are now slaughtering anyone who opposes him.

One can go on and mention the discriminatory (apartheid) practices in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Libya, Gulf states etc where religious intolerance is rife and in many cases enshrined in law. Where gender apartheid is practiced in the most inhumane manner. Iran not only guilty of some of the most inhumane acts of violence against its own people still executes children under the age of 18 years and stones to death women victims of rape!

Now if these gentlemen where sincerely concerned about the plight of the Palestinians in Israel why discriminate against the plight of their brothers living in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and elsewhere. Do they not exist? The plight of these people is far worse than what Qasim and Osman are accusing Israel of. It is not about the Palestinians it is about the Jews – Oh they will indeed argue that there are Israeli’s and Jews who also accuse Israel – yes and Israel and Jewish society have no qualms about dissent as freedom of speech is enshrined in Israeli law, juxtaposed to this any dissent in the Arab world would bring about a Fatwa and death sentence!

However one last consideration that your readers need to bear in mind, regardless of what mindless accusations these people conjure up, how can they justify the most vile of all human rights that is ever present in Palestinian schools to this day. Little children inculcated with a culture of aspiring to become suicide bombers and glorifying death instead of a life of hope and fulfillment! What have our human rights champions to say about this?

Allan Wollman to The Sunday Independent

Robert Fisk has a long and well-documented history of anti – Israel, anti – Zionist diatribe which, despite his protestations cannot be denied. In this way he hides his true sentiments, as it is certainly not politically correct to espouse open anti-Semitism in today’s world and his particular left leaning audience.
 
Together with a number of other journalists writing for the Independent Group Fisk has time and again been exposed for his many fabricated reports demonizing Israel at every opportunity even in the face of atrocities of a far greater magnitude of what he accuses Israel of. He falls into the very same frame of accusing Israel of what all its neighbors are guilty of, thus turning truth on its head and spinning the normal venom which when challenged he finds no answer.
 
We have yet to read anything of a critical nature by Fisk of any Arab country remotely aligned to what he accuses Israel of, yet these countries are and have been perpetrating some of the most horrific abuses of human rights imaginable for years and continue to do so – one needs only to look at Syria, Egypt and Libya. The comparisons of what goes down in most of the Arab world is simply painted over by the likes of Fisk in his single minded crusade to do his utmost to destroy Israel. His disappointment with the outcome of the hopeful Arab Spring seems too much to swallow so again he falls back on what he knows best. Hatred of the Jews.
 
How ironic that he takes such offence at being compared to the likes of George Galloway who he calls a ‘jerk’ – at least Galloway doesn’t disguise his true anti –Semitic sentiments by hiding behind journalistic diatribe. At last he has found a terrorist juxtaposed to the stereotype that the world has come to know and he is certainly milking the right wing Norwegian mass murderer for what he can – almost with delight!

Gill Katz to The Cape Argus

Sir

re “A pacifist’s prayer for a peaceful solution:

Whilst I earnestly share Abe Parker’s prayer for a peaceful solution with all my heart, I would like to offer him the following thoughts.

The deaths of any civilian – man woman or child – in conflict is horrible. When  men pick up weapons, no matter whose side they are on, or what cause they fight for – those innocent ones caught up in the conflict inevitably pay the price.

During the last world war, millions  of innocent civilians  died. The Jews perished  – not because they were caught in a cross fire between Germany and  those who wore a uniform of  countries which did not want  a victory for Hitler – They perished  because they  were Jews. 

Today, there is a thriving Jewish community in  The State of Israel. The people of Israel – the only Jewish state in the world – have learned through horrific bloody attacks for thousands of years that survival is desperately important, and that they will never again go as ‘lambs to the slaughter’   They were finally granted their state by the United Nations, and there,  they have not only turned desert into orchard – they have  thrived economically , scientifically, medically , militarily  and educationally.

Mr. Parker –  Jews will not  risk another mass murder. They will not accept the loss of one drop of blood, caused by attacks against their precious people. Therefore,  they have made it law that everyone  has access to a bomb shelter. The safety of her citizens is paramount.  There  have been fewer casualties, Mr. Parker because of this law.

In Gaza – where the Palestinians lead a  terrible life – (one they could have avoided had they clasped hands instead of firing missiles at innocent babies )  billions of dollars pours in, and is spent not on the peoples’ safety  but rather in arming terrorists.

I urge you in your prayers, Mr. Parker, to pray for those in Gaza to put their children first. Ask them to recognise  that HAMAS has caused their misery.  Ask them to learn from the  Israelis who love their children more than they love war

Don Krausz to The Sunday Times

Robert Fisk’s article of 18 March refers.

I have been writing letters to newspapers since the days of the Rand Daily Mail. This is a pastime that I enjoy, as well as the research that it often involves for the sake of veracity. Should my letter be published, then I consider that a bonus.

 

I am a Jew and a survivor of concentration camps. I lived in Israel for a number of years and consider myself a Zionist. So when certain people attack that tiny country I am happy to pick up my cudgel and defend it.

There are certain people who specialise in attacking Israel and I keep an eye open for  their names in the newspapers. Replying to them is a challenge, like returning the ball in a tennis or cricket match. For me it is a game; there is no hatred involved.

 

So when I saw that Robert Fisk had an article in today’s Sunday Times I looked forward to reading it with relish.

What a disappointment! Instead of attacking those I defend he listed many of the horrible things that people have said about him in the past. That took the wind out of my sails; I could hardly have improved thereon.

Fisk did take time off from licking his wounds in order to bewail what he called the “appalling sloppiness of the English grammar” of some of his critics. I sympathise with him, although the subject matter should not hinge on grammar but on the truth and moral content of the letters.

 

I come from Holland and am sure that my English is better than Fisk’s Dutch.

 

Another thing that I have noticed about Fisk’s articles is that they are frequently stained with blood, Palestinian blood. Somehow Israeli blood seldom seeps into his writings.

Fisk states that the accusations of anti-Semitism made against him are libellous. The history of Israel has been described by people of note as one of the most remarkable success stories since the Second World War. Fisk is entitled to his opinions, but one would think that he would have something complimentary to say once in a while, if only for the sake of fairness and to prove his lack of bias.

Gill Katz to The Star

The letter  ‘Serious lack of civil equality in Israel’ refers.

I was delighted  with E Qasim’s final statement in his letter, which reads,
“These and other facts need to be debated, discussed and laid bare”

E Qasim does what  Dr. Ozman   has failed to do.
(Dr. Ozman regularly challenges the  ever-exciting, ever-popular Holocaust survivor – Mr. Don Krauz. I have yet to see  him offer to sit down face-to-face and talk.

E Qasim offers a discussion and a debate!

For as  long as I have followed the Israel – disputed territories ‘tennis match’ on the “Letters Page” in “The Star” and other reputable newspapers, I have never seen anyone argue –  and then offer to sit down and discuss and debate. What a giant step for all!
E Qasim – I have no doubt Mr. Krauz will meet you anytime, any place, and  I am hoping I get an invitation too.
P. S.  Maybe you could ask  Dr. Ozman to join us?

Rolene Marks to the Business Day

To the Editor

The cartoon published on March 15th refers.

I live in Israel. On a daily basis we face the scary reality of war with our neighbours. This past week over 230 rockets and mortars have been fired at our southern citizens from Iranian-sponsored groups in Gaza, sending a million people into bomb shelters. Where is the commentary or is that reserved for any kind of Israeli response?

On our northern border we face credible threats from Hizbollah who fire their Iranian-sponosred missiles on our Northern citizens. On our northern border, Syrian President Assad,  allows for the uninterrupted transportation of missiles that place Israeli citizens under threat. Assad is also responsible for daily massacres of the citizens of Syria. 

And then we have Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. We have not heard such anti-Semitic rhetoric coming from a leader since Hitler. This is a man who denies the Holocaust and calls for the elimination of Israel. Calling Israel “a cancer that must be eradicated” is beyond comprehension. Given that Israel is a Jewish state, these types of comments can only be construed as anti-Semitic. 

Lumping Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu in the same group as two totalitarian leaders who are united in their shared hatred of Israel and the west shows a complete lack of understanding of the Middle East and the complicated dynamics of the region.

This neighbourhood that I live in is hostile and unpredictable. We are surrounded by bullies and tyrants. Our little country is plucky and strong and our hope for peace is eternal.

Pity the cartoonist fails to understand that.