Letters (August 21)

A selection of letters published in the AJN print edition of August 14, 2009

MESSRS Rapoport, Herzog, Gersh and Alhadeff (AJN 14/08) are entitled to their views on interfaith, just as I’m sure they would accept that others who disagree with them should not be silenced.

There are many people from a broad spectrum who share my views, but due to political correctness remain silent about this taboo topic. I speak to many Jews who have concerns about interfaith and doubt any benefits to the Jewish community. All agree it is Jews not Muslims who instigate these interfaith meetings, because they feel they must be “seen to be doing something”, no matter how misguided.
After reading Rapoport’s interfaith report, “The Tribulations of Islam”, commissioned by the B’nai B’rith Anti-Defamation Commission, I seriously question his understanding of Islam and the political reality we all face. He suggests that Islam is a victim of senseless hatred, analogous to anti-Semitism, and that Islam’s reputation of belligerence is unwarranted “media spin”. In fact, the opposite is true — Islam’s texts mandate hostility towards non-Muslims, especially Jews, and current statistics show that most virulent anti-Semitism and worldwide attacks on Jews are of Muslim origin. How can Rapoport compare anti-Semitism to the world’s justifiable concern about Islamic violence?
Rapoport absolves the Muslim world of any responsibility for Islamic extremism, as though Islam and radical Islam are unrelated species, and he dismisses the “apparent” hostility that emanates from the Middle East towards Israel. He denies Islam’s agenda to convert non-believers to Islam and misrepresents the way Islam accords Judaism “special status”. Perhaps he is not aware of the abysmal “dhimmi” (second class) status of Jews in Islamic societies, as described by eminent scholar Bat Ye’or.
These few examples from Mr Rapoport’s apologist report deepen my concern about Jewish representatives appeasing Muslims at interfaith meetings. The lack of reality and awareness makes these activities worse than merely a waste of time.
Michael Burd
Toorak, Vic

Outreach is failing
REALITY testing best answers critics of Michael Burd’s questioning of the value of Jewish outreach to Australian Muslims (AJN 14/08).

Citing civility from Muslims when confronted by anti-Semitism in their societies is hardly a success, particularly when the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils’ (AFIC) Ikebal Patel has yet to apologise for comparing Israel to Nazis. The sincerity of Muslim groups involved in interfaith activities, which have not repudiated Patel’s remarks, must also be questioned.

Why boast of honest exchanges with Muslims without asking why they are necessary and what they have accomplished? When the Jewish community needs to hire security, why does the Australian Human Rights Commission website refer to only Aborigines and Muslims?
That Hizb ut-Tahrir’s ridiculing of interfaith dialogue is underscored by the Australian Arabic Council’s support for al-Manar and this should concern all Australians, as should the equating of Jewish and Muslim communities. The Jewish community has no terrorist groups and demands no special privileges.
The Jewish community stands up for other communities, instead of attacking them. Until Muslims protest against the haters among them and acknowledge the concerns of others, instead of capitalising on victimhood, outreach will continue to fail.
Paul Winter
Chatswood, NSW

Interfaith doubts
MICHAEL Burd was roundly condemned for writing that interfaith meetings with “so-called moderate Muslims” were a waste of time, as contentious topics were avoided, with any dialogue consisting of meaningless platitudes, as Judeo-Christian understandings were diametrically opposed to Islamic ones.
No less than four writers rushed to attack Burd, variously describing him as boorish and parochial, even suggesting his ideas were infantile, simplistic and disconnected from reality (AJN 14/08).

While, as one writer pointed out, it is certainly true that not all Muslims, Arabs and Palestinians are the same, it is equally true that there is only one Islam. When scholarly authors such as Dr Andrew Bostom in The Legacy of Jihad: Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims and The Legacy of Islamic Anti-Semitism use evidence from original Islamic texts such as the Koran, as well as writings from influential Muslim scholars from the Middle Ages through to contemporary times, to conclude that jihad and Islamic anti-Semitism are a sacralised element of Islam, surely we should consider the possibility that Michael Burd has a valid point of view.

Pam Hopf
Kew, Vic

Humour and the Holocaust

THOSE very words make me cringe to the point that I feel like screaming. I am a sole survivor of my entire large family.

It seems that besides dealing with Holocaust deniers — which is painful enough — now we have our own Jewish people playing with our sufferings and trivialising this most horrific tragedy that we, the European Jews, were stricken with (AJN 14/08).

How low and vulgar can people fall?

It does not surprise me that it comes from America. American Jewry have a lot to answer for their cool behaviour during the Holocaust era. What does surprise me really is that Steven Spielberg, who has done so much for the memory of Shoah, is now dipping his hands in it. More money?

I do not even appreciate Kron’s cartoon (AJN 14/08).

Holocaust does not belong to any humour, nor to cartoons, nor to fictions.

HELEN LEPERERE

Elsternwick, Vic

Answering Malcolm Fraser

MALCOLM Fraser castigates Israel for not resolving the dispute with Hamas by negotiation and claims that “too many Israelis believe that Muslims generally will not accept the fact of Israel’s existence and that their objective is to establish a fundamental Islamic domination of the entire region, and thus the destruction of Israel”. (“Israel must not be cowed into an uncritical view of Israel’s actions” The Age 11/08). He appears to believe that Israel should negotiate with Hamas – a political party that is recognised by most nations in the democratic world as a terrorist organisation.

Fraser, and those who support his argument, should read and reflect upon the Hamas Charter. This document, published in 1988 (the year Hamas was founded), remains to this day the political creed of Hamas. Central statements of the charter include:

“Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.”

“The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Muslim generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up.”

“There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavours.”

Can one honestly read the Hamas charter – and examine the fanaticism of this organisation – and see a potential partner for peace? How can Israel make peace with a political party and regime that is sworn to destroy it?

Dr Bill Anderson

Surrey Hills, Vic

Spencer Street sinks further

BAD enough was Malcolm Fraser’s loopy rant in defence of Hamas in The Age (11/08) last week, simplistically arguing that one election result validates Hamas as a bastion of democracy in the Middle East. Not for our erstwhile PM were those other fundamentals of democracy that Hamas overtly discards, such as an open press, rule of law, and the democratic right to speak freely without violent consequences.

But far worse was the way The Age failed to balance Fraser’s comments the following day with any counter argument, either in an article or in the letters page. The Age received several quality letters exposing Fraser’s bias and subjectivity, but it was only two days later, and possibly the result of some external pressure to senior executives, that a good letter by Johnny Baker was finally printed.

The departure of Ed O’Loughlin two years ago offered a glimmer of hope that <I>The Age<P>’s bias against Israel may finally be curtailed, however, Jason Koutsoukis is following steadily in his predecessor’s footsteps.

My observation is that any feature article written by Koutsoukis will always be from the Palestinian perspective and never favourable to Israel. He always portrays the Palestinians as long-suffering victims of Israeli aggression, with perhaps only a cursory mention of the violence that may have necessitated Israeli action.

The Age never surprises by sinking to new lows, and although they are unlikely to be bothered by a few Jewish families cancelling their subscription, they may sit up and take notice if Jewish businesses cancel any advertising dollars they may be spending with them.

Alan Freedman

St Kilda East, Vic

Wolf in sheep’s clothing

FATAH’S Bethlehem conference has revealed it to be a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Its supposedly feuding parts have shown themselves to be united in their support of terrorism against Israel, the return to 1949 armistice lines and the acceptance of millions of Arabs as so-called refugee migrants. The Obama policy of appeasing the so-called “moderates” of Fatah will clearly lead to a Hamas-controlled unity government bent on the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state. Nothing wrong with appeasement if it results in a shifting of positions and an accommodation suitable to the warring parties. Where is the benefit to Israel? Appeasement didn’t do it for anyone in World War II and the new 21st century Chamberlain is on the same track. Israel is expected to do all the giving – return the Golan Heights for nothing in return, accept Iran as a nuclear power, resettle literally millions of refugees into Israel proper. Appeasement will please the Palestinians, the Arab world and the enemies of Israel – and result in its dismemberment as a Jewish state. Negotiation yes, appeasement no.

E Moses

Caulfield South, Vic

And the winner is…

WITH career Israel basher John Pilger being awarded the Sydney Peace Prize (AJN 14/08), Dr Colin Rubenstein and others, who made a fuss about Hanan Ashwari receiving the honour several years ago, have been truly vindicated.

And who knows, maybe next year they will give the prize to Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah or, maybe even Antony Loewenstein, for their contribution to world peace.

Henry Herzog

St Kilda East, Vic

Public testimonies needed

A COUPLE of years ago The AJN advertised in late July-August requesting readers write articles for the Rosh Hashanah issue.

These articles were edited and published in between the regular Rosh Hashanah advertisements.

It’s a well-known fact that readers put more attention on announcements if they are on the same pages as interesting articles.

On the other hand, it gave the opportunity for writers to appear in the only English Jewish newspaper of Australia.

And another thing! Holocaust testimonies are fewer and fewer each year. The generation is dying out and most of the survivors are very old now.

In my opinion each testimony of this kind should be taken seriously. Even if an article needs editing, a Jewish newspaper shouldn’t refuse to publish testimonies from the Holocaust.

Arje Singer

Castle Cove, NSW

Easily answered

I MAY have missed news of Stephen Langford’s self-appointment as AJN movie reviewer (14/08), but the questions he raises after seeing an obscure film in Melbourne are easily answered.

Criticism of Israel is most often, but not always, driven by anti-Semitism. The accusation of anti-Semitism against Israel haters is nothing to do with Israel’s benign treatment of Arabs calling themselves Palestinians.

And the March of the Living is not about indoctrination, it’s about education. Because, Mr Langford, as a result of anti-Semitic propaganda against Israel, many people now try to deny the truth of six million Jews being slaughtered by Nazi Germany during World War II.

Mr Langford may not realise that Jews are pretty intelligent on the whole. I don’t think we even need to see a film about anti-Semitism masked by anti-Zionism, Israel’s very fair treatment of certain Arabs, or Holocaust education, in order to answer simple questions that clearly seem to puzzle Mr Langford.

Terry Davis

Lindfield, NSW

Thanks to Wolper

I have a long history as a patient in the health system. My first taste came at a young age when I had to undergo treatment for a degenerative eye condition.  Since then I have had many more eye operations.

In 2002, I had a very bad accident and was in hospital for 10 months. Although most of the doctors and nursing staff were great, others were not so nice. When the nurses reacted grumpily when I asked for simple things like a drink or assistance, it really made me angry and made my recovery harder. It was hard enough to find the mental strength to recover from my ordeal, without having to feel as though I was a burden to people who are paid to help.

I have returned to hospital on several occasions since and have felt the same way.

Recently I underwent surgery for carpal tunnel. As I am a blind double amputee, the prospect of only being able to use one hand made me really anxious. The thought of hospitalisation and unsympathetic nurses in this situation made it seem almost impossible. Some hospitals flatly refused to have me because of my disabilities.

Wolper Jewish Hospital was the only one that stepped up and agreed to admit me and the service I got was really amazing. They facilitated my recovery and lifted my spirits. The nurses were genuinely caring and willing to help. At Wolper, new nurses starting their shifts would introduce themselves before each shift and check on me regularly. When I did buzz, they came within a few minutes. They always had a kind word for me.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the staff and management at Wolper Jewish Hospital for making my stay so pleasant and relaxed. More importantly, I’d like to point out that I left Wolper without feeling dehumanised or that I was a burden. I actually felt good about myself and better about the medical system as a whole.

Today I walk, with prosthetic legs, and lead a full life. I believe that my disability is not an obstacle to enjoying life, provided that other people accept this in the community.

Rachel Lazarov

Bondi, NSW