Letters to the Editor: Rona Ramon, Trump and the Occupation

Rona Ramon listens as President Bush speaks at a memorial service February 4, 2003 for the seven astronauts killed in the space shuttle Columbia disaster.
REUTERS

Rona Ramon, heroine

In response to “Rona Ramon, cultural heroine?” (Gideon Levy, Opinion, December 20).

I have an admiration for Gideon Levy’s uncanny ability to always, but always, bring to light the underbelly and the shadow side of each situation or personality that he is investigating in his articles.

I usually respect that and think his voice is a very necessary one in the daily collection of articles on the opinion page in Haaretz. In the case of Rona Ramon, though, Gideon Levy has taken his “abilities” in a very wrong, simplistic and destructive direction.

We all know parents and wives who have lost their dear ones. Each case is different. Each mourning process is unique.

I do think of Rona Ramon as a kind of heroine in her own right. From what I understand if my information is correct,

she understood very, very early on in her mourning that only by helping others could she continue to live a life that was worth living. Given the magnitude of her loss, yes, it was uniquely heroic.

Shirley Faktor Rozov
Jerusalem

Trump’s climate of hate

With all the troubles swirling around President Trump and his administration, apparently he still thinks this whole thing about rising seas and melting snow (aka climate change) is a hoax, so in order to detract from scientific facts that prove it is not a hoax, he has created a climate change of his own making. It’s called a climate of hate and he proves it every day by sowing the seeds of mistrust and fear, including his defense of Mohammad bin Salman, who, according to the CIA and other members of the intelligence community, ordered the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and by lashing out at the very tenets and doctrines that make this nation great. We cannot exist in a climate of hate, fear and mistrust. Impeach President Trump and put an end to this embarrassing chapter in our history. 

Herb Stark
Mooresville, North Carolina  

What ‘occupation’?

In response to “Occupying troops: legitimate targets” (Kobi Niv, Opinion, December 21).

I beg to differ with Kobi Niv. There is no “occupation.” In 1967, Israel liberated areas which had been illegally held by Egypt and Jordan for 19 years. Israel did so in a defensive war, only after Jordan allied with Egypt and Syria, states which were clear in their intentions – to destroy Israel and annihilate her people.

Today, all Palestinians in Gaza and 95 percent of Palestinians in Judea and Samaria (aka the West Bank) live under Palestinian jurisdiction. Both Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas flatly rejected Israeli proposals for the establishment of the first-ever Arab State of Palestine, even with the possibility of shared governance in parts of Jerusalem. Neither Arafat nor Abbas made a counteroffer. The unilateral withdrawal of all Jewish communities from Gaza has been reciprocated by the lobbing of missiles at Israeli population centers, the digging of tunnels to facilitate the abduction and murder of Israelis, and the flying of incendiary devices into Israel to set crops and nature reserves ablaze.

Leaders who reject offers to settle conflicts by peaceful, diplomatic means do not have the right to incite their people to violence. The way to end the dispute is not by Palestinians’ being given license to attack Israeli soldiers and civilians. The conflict will end only when Palestinian leaders turn their attention toward building a state (in which Palestinians, including descendants of Arabs displaced by Arab-initiated wars against Israel) will become citizens, a state willing to coexist with the nation-state of the Jews.

Toby F. Block
Atlanta, Georgia

Letters should be exclusive to Haaretz and must include the writer’s name, address and telephone number (an e-mail address is not sufficient). Please note that letters are subject to editing.