Letters to the Editor

[Gatorade]

I have learned a lot from reading different perspectives from people here. Instead of limiting your opinions here, I would encourage people to write to newspapers so more people can be educated.

So, if I find an interesting article and letter, I will post it on this thread and hope people will respond here and also email the paper with the response.

Last Sunday, my local newspaper published an article called “Roots of Discord” that tried to summarize the history of Israel. I thought it was pretty fair but am no expert.

http://www.ocregister.com/commentary...20020519.shtml

Here is a letter published in today's paper in response to this article:

Both Israelis and Palestinians owe peace to their children.

Mr. Bock expects the Palestinians to accept a foreign people in their land who aggressively displaces them, takes over their homes, removes them from their country and then he wonders why Palestinians did not accept living forever in refugee camps and why they did not accept 30 percent for their homeland.

Jews and Palestine Arabs lived in Palestine peacefully for hundreds of years. The problems began in the late 19th Century, when the Zionists chose Palestine instead of Argentina to become an exclusively Jewish homeland, irrespective of the people living there.

It is true that Palestinian methods of reclaiming their homeland have been full of errors, misjudgments and corruption; however, that does not justify the continued occupation and suffering of the Palestinians by Israel. Initially, the Palestinians wanted 100 percent of the land.

However, since the late 1980s the Palestinians officially accepted
Israel in pre-1967 borders. It is likewise time for Israel to accept the Palestinians and get out of the remaining 22 percent of their homeland and let them live in dignity. They both owe peace to their children.

Tareq Risheq

I would enjoy reading anyone’s response here and would encourage you to email your response to letters@ocregister.com Remember, newspapers like short responses.

[Morpheus]

I once wrote at letter to the Jerusalem Post as reply on their article 'Belgian Waffles'. The article was full of wrong and/or twised information, which I thought - was my duty - to inform them. Instead they chose to remain silent and never wrote back.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by Morpheus
I once wrote at letter to the Jerusalem Post as reply on their article 'Belgian Waffles'. The article was full of wrong and/or twised information, which I thought - was my duty - to inform them. Instead they chose to remain silent and never wrote back.

Have you tried writing to CNN instead? or the BBC?

[L@mplighterM]

Quote:

Jews and Palestine Arabs lived in Palestine peacefully for hundreds of years. The problems began in the late 19th Century, when the Zionists chose Palestine instead of Argentina to become an exclusively Jewish homeland, irrespective of the people living there.

LOL

The author must be kidding or perhaps my history books are distorting the facts.
Quote:

It is true that Palestinian methods of reclaiming their homeland have been full of errors, misjudgments and corruption; however, that does not justify the continued occupation and suffering of the Palestinians by Israel. Initially, the Palestinians wanted 100 percent of the land.

I don’t think for one moment that Israel is the Palestinians homeland. I would venture to say that killing your neighbor is a slight error in judgment and that this justifies the occupation in the WB and GS.

[Morpheus]

Originally posted by NewsGuy

Have you tried writing to CNN instead? or the BBC?

No, and it wouldn't make any difference. I always thought that the JPost - even though it was biased - was a respectable newspaper, but now I've seen everything. Wrong data, accusations to the Belgian public opinion ...

I once wrote to CNN, but that had nothing to do with the ME. CNN is a good newschannel, just as BBC. Fox network is supposed to be very biased against the Palestinians.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by Morpheus
I once wrote to CNN, but that had nothing to do with the ME...

I was just making the point that it is very difficult to get a letter published in the press, even when the letter expresses a valid opinion.

It is usually a matter of logistics and training. Most people would be surprised at how low-level some of the people who screen letters to the editor are, even at many reputable news organizations. It is rarely a matter of bias against the content of the letter.

In other cases, they may have already selected a letter for publication on a particular point and then will simply disregard further letters in that topic, no matter how good the letters may be.

[Mediocrates]

I'm on a letter writing crusade against CNN and NPR - they never respond.

[Iori Yagami]

What`s NPR?

[cerulean]

Originally posted by Iori Yagami
What`s NPR?

National Public Radio - in the United States. It has a reputation for being on the highbrow side. It's publicly funded.

They have tended to take an Arabist viewpoint for some time now, from what I have read. This situation is discussed in this article, but I've also read other articles.

http://www.jpost.com/NASApp/cs/Conte...=1021813214334

The NPR web site: http://www.npr.org/

[Gatorade]

These weren't the kind of responses I was expecting or looking for.

Newsguy, you have the wrong attitude. You can reach a lot more people with your ideas through a newspaper than through an obscure, but informative website.

I have had success in the past in getting my letters published. One I was especially proud of called Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, who tries to create an image of himself as a surfer, a kook for not supporting an initiative that would have protected water quality at local beaches.

This is the same Congressman Rohrabacher who voted against the House resolution to stand by Israel. And the same Rohrababacher without any evidence said on Alan Keyes’ show, “I‘m just trying to tell you that there‘s been acts of terrorism committed against the Palestinian people as well. You have got people on both sides that have been willing to kill noncombatants in order to get their way.”

http://www.msnbc.com/news/747463.asp

Anyway, here is one letter I came up with.

Tareq Risheq states, “It is true that Palestinians methods of reclaiming their homeland have been full of errors, misjudgements and corruption.” Since September of 2000 when Ehud Barak presented a peace proposal that would have created an independent Palestinian state, which Yassir Arafat rejected without a ever presenting a counter offer, militant Palestinians have intentionally targeted Israeli civilians, injuring 2829 and killing 340. It is a gross mischaracterization to call these actions merely an “error, misjudgment or corruption.”

Golda Meir, the former Israeli prime minister of Israel, said, “We will have peace when the Palestinians love their children more than they hate us." When will someone teach Palestinian children, "However you feel, even when our cause is just, resolving disputes through intentionally killing innocents cheapens our cause and diminishes our moral stature"?

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by Gatorade
Newsguy, you have the wrong attitude. You can reach a lot more people with your ideas through a newspaper than through an obscure, but informative website.

Gatorade, I am not against sending in pro-Israel statements to newspapers. I think you got the wrong idea.

But this forum is not so obscure as you might think, and many of the ideas expressed here are being read by journalists who work for major news agencies, including the OC Register, btw.

Anyway, I would urge anyone who is so inclined to use pro-Israel information from this site to circulate to as large an audience as they are able. The material here may be used freely for the purpose I just mentioned.

In fact, I intend to open a section on this forum exactly for the purpose of offering pro-Israel content for free redistribution on the Web and in print. When the section is opened, please feel free to send content to any newspaper you'd like. The more the merrier.

[L@mplighterM]

Last week I read that an Israeli candy company (can’t recall the name) spends more on PR than the Israeli Government.

In my opinion much of the difficulty that the Israeli Government is facing now stems from the lack of getting their points across.

I could talk to a 1000 non-Jews and I believe that most would say that the conflict in the ME stems from Israel’s refusal to hand the occupied territories back.

The other day I spoke to a neighbor who I happened to attend High School with. So I asked him what he thought of the ME conflict. I heard the same standard Arab rhetoric well he said “the suicide bombers are using the only means at their disposal, the IDF has tanks, helicopters, etc.”. I’ve heard the same story so many times and I’ve read it countless times. I’ve heard it from Japanese, Chinese and Whites.

So you might get 10 anti-Israeli letters to a newspaper and 1or 2 pro.

There has to be mass communication of a simplified message from Israel to the world.

[Vic]

Originally posted by NewsGuy
In fact, I intend to open a section on this forum exactly for the purpose of offering pro-Israel content for free redistribution on the Web and in print.

Great idea!

[Gatorade]

Willaim Safire wrote:

Powell's Trial Balloon

Building on an idea from Egypt's Hosni Mubarak, Colin Powell went on Arab television last week to launch a trial balloon.

Speaking of "a Palestinian state called Palestine," he said "it may be necessary to have a provisional state, an interim step. . . . something that we can create that is, that can be called a state." This was followed by a six-column headline: "Bush Is Said to Tell Saudis He Will Offer Plan for Creation of a Palestinian State."

But when asked about this notion of recognizing a state on West Bank and Gaza land now occupied by Palestinian forces unwilling to control suicide bombers, President Bush's press secretary said only "the president receives advice all the time."

Here's my advice: Don't step into this trap. It's a lose-lose idea.

1. Statehood, even if qualified as provisional or interim, confers a degree of sovereignty. That means control of borders, the ability to make treaties, and to import arms from Iraq and by sea from Iran.

2. Partial statehood would give Arafat control of an airport. A plane loaded with fuel or explosives could hit a major Tel Aviv building within three minutes, too quickly for Israeli jets to scramble. Ritual condemnation would follow.

3. Any form of statehood would limit Israel's ability to search out bomb factories and arrest terrorist leaders. What is now a tolerable sweep into disputed territory would be denounced in the U.N. as invasion pure and simple. That would trigger European economic boycotts and draw Arab allies into a wider war.

Why, then, offer Arafat's autocracy this pre-emptive prize? State Department Arabists claim it would show "movement" away from solid Bush support for Israel and, in the still-dovish Shimon Peres's phrase, offer a "political horizon" to Palestinians. But some of us see recognition of an unreformed P.L.O. as offering a taste of triumph to jihadists from Netanya to New York.

Nobody doubts that statehood will be part of an eventual settlement. That goal provides a powerful incentive for Palestinians to take command of their destiny. Responsible Palestinian leaders are less likely to fight a civil war being waged against them now by Hamas and the Islamic Jihad — whose stated goal is to drive Jews out of the Middle East.

What about Mubarak's "timetable" for full statehood, with a down payment of the 40 percent of the West Bank and Gaza now under Palestinian control, including almost all the Arab population? That is similar to the territorial timetable dreamily agreed to at Oslo, which assumed that regular concessions of land would lead to mutual trust and peace. Instead, Israel's calibrated concessions led to Arafat's insatiable demands and ultimately to war. A timetable for a state of Palestine would become a deadline for Israeli negotiators.

Why didn't Ariel Sharon, last week in Washington, strongly and publicly oppose it? Maybe because he trusts Bush and underestimates Powell's media savvy; maybe Sharon did not want to appear to be following Likud's recent unequivocal lead against talk of statehood now. I reached him at his farm last night.

"The Bush administration knows very well our position," the prime minister said. "It is premature now until the full cessation of terror and its incitement, and until there is real reform. I was willing to discuss cease-fire under fire, but I cannot discuss political developments under fire. Many things must happen before that is discussed."

He wouldn't say what he told Bush on this, but his use of "premature" suggests that once violence subsides and a peace partner emerges, Sharon would be willing to tie the long-term interim agreements he seeks to interim or provisional forms of Palestinian sovereignty. I think statehood should be the deal-closer, and such salami slicing of statehood would be a mistake for the reasons enumerated above, but to strain an old metaphor, it's hard to be more Catholic than the pope.

A more truculent reaction to Powell's trial balloon of phased statehood comes from Saeb Erekat, Arafat's top negotiator, who demands all or nothing. What if the only statehood Bush offers leaves Israelis at checkpoints between Palestinian cities looking for suicide bombers? He told The New York Times: "I'm afraid that you're going to have a bigger explosion than you're having now."

In a response in the Orange County Register the following letter was published.

Give Palestinians their land

It is not a "preemptive prize" to give back the occupied Israeli territories, as William Safire said in the article, "Too early for Palestinian statehood" . International law, U.N resolutions (which Israel is signatory to) and the European Union condemned the illegal 1967 occupation of Palestinian lands by Israel on which Palestinians have lived for centuries.

Mr. Safire, it is as much a right for Palestinians to have their 1967 land back as it is your right to live here and not have your home stolen away or demolished.

Sam Ibrahim
Long Beach

Anyone want to write a letter to give your opinion? Write an email to: letters@ocregister.com

[rhodescholar]

It apparently is not known here about long beach california, or Rep Dana rohrbacher's background, so i will do some enlightening.

That city on the coast of california is a hotbed for 2 main groups; the IHR, or the Institute for Historical Review, a Holocaust denial organization well known to anti-hate groups. The second significant group there are a large number of arabs muslims, who are primarily working-class to poor.

These 2 groups, who i should say are added to by a large number of working-class to poor whites, are the primary constituents for human filth like Rohrbacher, who basically ended any hopes for office outside his district after that Alan Keyes appearance. He came across as an utter moron, spouting lines like the one posted above, but when fervently pressed by Keyes and Rep Gary Ackerman for ANY evidence of Israeli terrorism, he just hardened his face and kept repeating the same lie. They must have asked him 4 or 5 times, but he never ventured even one example. For those interested, the transcript of his appearance is on the msnbc site. if not, i have a copy and can email it to u if u want.