James Adler vs. Martin Sherman: The Difference Between Light and Darkness

Sir, - In the Talmud, the Rabbis explain the necessity of having the Havdallah prayer placed in the midst of the fourth blessing in the Amidah portion of the evening service that marks the end of the Sabbath. It is the fourth blessing in which we express our gratitude to the Almighty for granting us intelligence and knowledge, and it is precisely those gifts that enable us to distinguish between the holy and the profane, light and darkness, Israel and the nations, the seventh day and the six days of labor.

James Adler asks why the Jerusalem Post continues to print the articles of Martin Sherman whom he labels an extremist. Adler himself, however, has displayed a remarkable, Pavlovian persistence in blaming Israel for all the ills of the Middle East. There has never been any indication that he possesses the ability to distinguish between light and darkness, truth and fiction, or reality and propaganda when writing about the Arab-Israel conflict. There has never been any evidence of his equanimity being at all upset by terrorist atrocities, hundreds of rockets falling on Israel's civilian population, vicious anti-Israel messages of hate emerging from PA schools and mosques, massacres of innocents in Syria, Egypt, and Lebanon, and turmoil in the whole region. One honestly wonders why his thoughtless letters get published in the Jerusalem Post.

Adler apparently cannot tell the difference between the support and justification of terrorism provided by Larry Derfner and the noncoercive, economically incentivized emigration proposed by Martin Sherman. The former supports death, while the latter attempts to find non-violent solutions to deal with the realities of the issues. His articles are analytical , deeply insightful, and well-argued, while the letters of James Adler are completely inane and offensive.

ZEV CHAMUDOT

Petach Tikva

[Image credit: Alexander Smolianitski]

J.Post April 8: Obama's Peace Offensive in Israel

Sir, - Martin Sherman remains peerless. The intelligent reader who seeks a deeper understanding of rapidly unfolding events beyond their superficial reportage, depends a great deal on the likes of Martin Sherman for an insightful glimpse into the depth of serious meaning that often lies hidden in the simple description of events. His article "Obama in Israel: The sinister subtext?" is a prime example of Sherman's gift of articulating that which many Israelis suspected after being overwhelmed by Obama's charm offensive.

Sherman offers cogent arguments, supported by impeccable logic and an incredibly rich vocabulary to make his points, which he further strengthens by a fertile array of quotes from the subjects of his articles or literary sources. He begins his thesis with a most valid question concerning Obama's decision to bypass Israel's Knesset and deliver a message to a pre-selected group of students whom he urges to organize pressure for the promotion of peace, and if necessary even circumvent their democratically elected officials. What indeed is the nature of this aforementioned peace?

Is this the peace agreement that the government of Israel has been insisting must be negotiated by both sides without pre-conditions, and which the PA has for many months refused to accept but rather has chosen to stir up violent attacks against Israeli civilians and IDF personnel? Or is this rather Obama's subtext peace plan based upon indefensible 1967 borders and the release of hundreds of terrorist prisoners, totally ignoring the growing hostility that surrounds Israel?

Martin Sherman has got it right!

ZEV CHAMUDOT

Petach Tikva

[Image credit: Flickr user DonkeyHotey]

Martin Sherman, Articulate Defender of Israel

Sir, - Two letters appear in today's paper (June 27) that are critical of Martin Sherman's article "Stupid, seditious or suicidal?" What is common to both letters is the accusation of the impracticality of Sherman's one state solution, which the writers claim will incur the wrath of world opinion against the Jewish State.

It is of the utmost importance to note that neither letter presents any substantive argument in disagreement with Sherman's very cogent and lucidly presented thesis. Do either of the writers feel that the alternative two-state proposals have enjoyed acceptance by the Palestinian side? If the truth be stated, the P.A. has rejected any program presented to them that is not based on their preconditions that demand our  acceptance of the 1947 indefensible borders, the Palestinian Right of Return that will overwhelm Israel with an Arab majority, and the freeing of Palestinian terrorist prisoners. If 'practicality' is the issue, I find Martin Sherman's plan to be far more attractive.

It also must be noted, that despite all of Israel's concessions to the advancement of peace such as the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, a 10 month freeze on building settlements, the return of Palestinian bodies and additional "gestures", none have won the appreciation of the P.A. or recognition by world opinion of Israel's concrete efforts toward a just solution of the conflict.

Martin Sherman in addition should be commended for being one of the most literate, knowledgeable, and articulate defenders of Israel in the public media.

ZEV CHAMUDOT

Petach Tikva

Haste in Judging: The Eisner Episode

Sir, - While the controversy about the Eisner episode continues, it seems to invite some rather dubious comments. An example of this appears in a letter to the editor of The Jerusalem Post of April 30th, under the banner "It just looks bad." The author criticizes Martin Sherman's requirement of the need to examine the provocation and the nature of the organization the protestors belonged to before condemning and dismissing a dedicated career officer who has served his country with distinction and heroism.

I unequivocally share Martin Sherman's opinion and am appalled by the words at the letter's end, "It doesn't much matter what the background of the story is. What matters are the graphic pictures the world saw. We can definitely do without this type of publicity."

The letter's author seems far less concerned and disturbed by what actually took place, than the fact that it just looks bad. In view of Israel's bitter experience with fraudulent pictures from hostile sources, the not wanting to know the full background of an event before passing judgment is highly problematic.

ZEV CHAMUDOT
Petach Tikva

Obama Enigma: Four More Years of Him?

Sir, - Martin Sherman presents us with a most sobering challenge concerning the behavior of Barak Obama as a second-term president. "The prospect of a White House incumbent with an inherent affinity for Israel's adversaries and unshackled by considerations of reelection is one that must be considered with the utmost seriousness."

Sherman impeccably presents both sides of the Obama enigma by noting the fact that his administration has acted forcefully and frequently to preserve critical Israeli interests, while also reminding us of his initial outreach to the Muslim world and his belligerence toward Israel and its prime minister. Martin Sherman possesses rare analytical skills and the ability to present his arguments with linguistic precision and unassailable logic. These qualities serve to reinforce his thesis and should cause both Americans and Israelis to carefully weigh the risks involved.

ZEV CHAMUDOT

Petach Tikva 

[Image credit: Flickr user DonkeyHotey]