Letter to The Washington Post

Re: "Israel says it won’t forcibly deport illegal African migrants, but it wants them to leave" (12/21/13) Dear Editor, Instead of a front page article about Syrian children receiving life saving medical care from their sworn enemy Israel, The Washington Post published yet another critical piece on how Israel responds to illegal African immigrants, actually extremely compassionate compared with its neighbors. Curiously, there has yet to be a Post story on why the African immigrants don't stop in Egypt, which is closer, and that is because they are robbed, raped, or murdered there. Further, in Egypt there is no freedom of Press, so Post reporters wouldn't be able to write such a piece and live to tell about it. Ironically, in Israel, the only nation in the region with freedom of the press, journalists exploit this freedom to find fault with the country. So Israel, which has taken in millions of Jewish refugees, many of whom with no place to go otherwise, is vilified for not taking in Muslim or Christian refugees. Israel, a country that makes up .1% of the Middle East shoulders the blame for what the 99.9% of the Middle East should be doing, courtesy of The Washington Post. Michael Berenhaus

Letter to The Washington Post

Dear Editor, In "Iran questions you were embarrassed to ask" (12/1/13), The Washington Post should be embarrassed with its answers. The Post whitewashes the existential threat posed by Iran on Israel by saying that "the dislike is mutual." There is nothing mutual here. I haven't heard Israel saying that Iran should be wiped off the map. The equivalence drawn is abhorrent! The Washington Post even defends Iran's motivations saying that Iran is "so insistent" on a nuclear program because there is a "huge symbolic importance for Iran, allowing it to affirm, to itself and to the world, that it is an advanced and sovereign nation." The Simon Wiesenthal Center sees Iran's motivations another way: "If Iran's only goal was to develop a nuclear ability for civilians use, as it claims, then it has no need for centrifuges and heavy water - these are only needed to create a nuclear weapon. There are 19 countries in the world from Canada to Indonesia that produce nuclear energy for civilian use without enrichment, centrifuges and heavy water." Lastly, The Washington Post says that "setting off a nuclear bomb in Israel would guarantee the Iranian regime's immediate and total destruction." My question to the Post is, by whose hand? The United States, under the current administration, has backed away from many a confrontation and in regards to Iran, they just arguably took a position of strength and turned it into a position of weakness, just to make a deal. Not exactly the sign of a side that would respond decisively in a military fashion. Michael Berenhaus cc: Rabbi Abraham Cooper, Simon Wiesenthal Center

Published in Washington Jewish Week

http://digital.washingtonjewishweek.com/i/221928/17 Dear Editor, DCJCC artistic director Ari Roth defends his recent selection of "The Admission", a fictional play which everyone agrees depicts Israel in a very unfavorable light, to be shown at the DCJCC [ "Controversy at Theater J." (11/21/13)]. Mr. Roth states, with respect to Israel, that "Art can be the gateway to a mature engagement with the country and with each other as we celebrate and grapple with its founding." And that is the essence of Ari Roth’s thesis: to project his personal grappling of the founding of Israel in his selection of plays. And this is who the DCJCC has chosen to curate? He further states that Art "has the potential to make us more humane..." which further illustrates his problem with Israel. If we need to be "more humane" about Israel, then he implies that we are less humane in our current thinking about Israel. If there ever was an anti-Israel artistic director, Ari Roth wins the prize. It is a fact that Mr. Roth has turned down at least one play by a well-regarded playwright who had his plays performed throughout America. The play, "A Tiny Piece of Land", happens to be Pro-Israel. If Mr. Roth is so bent on airing his problems with Israel, perhaps he should work at a Palestinian Community Center. Michael Berenhaus

Letter to The Washington Post

Dear Editor, What should have been titled, "Israel thwarts terror attack," was instead titled "Israel bombs tunnel in Gaza" (11/2/13). In doing so, The Washington Post reverses culpability, portraying the aggressor as the victim and disregarding the significance of Israel's achievement. The Post did mention that Egypt has also been destroying tunnels, but these tunnels were smuggling goods. To the contrary, this was not the purpose of the tunnel that Israel destroyed. The purpose, as evidenced by the tunnel’s endpoint - a civilian community - was clearly meant for terror and/or kidnapping, as Hamas is wont to do. The Post also states that "Israel and Hamas are bitter enemies." In reality, Hamas is at war with Israel, not the other way around, nor is it mutual. Hamas has launched thousands of rockets and mortars in an attempt to destroy Israel, whereas Israel just wants to live in peace. Is it that difficult to get this story right? Michael Berenhaus

Letter to The Washington Post

Dear Editor, In "High above Nazareth, an Israeli mayor wants to keep his city Jewish 'now and forever'"(9/20/13), The Washington Post publishes a story about a Jewish mayor who also happens to be a bigot. In the report, The Post inverts reality by publishing the exception rather than the rule by finding such a mayor from some obscure town in Israel. In actuality, Israel has greater rights for minorities than any other country in the Middle East has. Arabs, for example, have greater freedom of speech, freedom of press, and even freedom of religion in Israel than they do in any Arab nation. Of course it would be difficult for the Post to do a similar story interviewing Jews in an Arab country who are discriminated against and that is because there are nearly none left. And those who are left value their lives. Speaking out against the majority, unlike in Israel, puts them at serious risk of death. And don't even attempt to become a citizen of Saudi Arabia if you are Jewish or Christian; that is illegal. So when it comes to Israel, The Washington Post publishes the exception. When it comes to the rule, in Arab nations, The Washington Post is silent. Michael Berenhaus

Washington Post responds to previous letter with "Clarification"

WASHINGTON POST RESPONDS! ...in a wimpy way true to their modus operandi. On page A2, my recent letter received a published "Clarification". In typical Wash Post fashion, it wasn't much of a clarification. They missed the point - the caption contradicted the story and blamed the origins of the Holocaust on a Jew! "A photo caption with an August 11 Outlook review of Jonathan Kirsch's book "The Short, Strange Life of Herschel Grynszpan, a Jewish teenager who killed a Nazi diplomat in 1938, as sparking the Nazi rampage against Jews known as Kristallnacht. One sentence in the review included similar wording. As the review made clear, while historians disagree about how much of Kristallnacht was spontaneous and how much was planned, the author believes that the killing was seized on by Adolf Hitler and his regime as a pretext for the pogrom."

Response to letter from 8/13/13

Hi Michael, Well put and right on target. History again takes a beating at the Post. As someone who with his family endured Kristalnacht, I’m especially grateful to you for making the Post aware of what really sparked the Holocaust. Shabbat Shalom. Leo