Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 7:39 AM
To: letters@washpost.com
Subject: Diversionary Strike On a Rights Group (Aug. 30, 2006)
In a 49-page report, Human Rights Watch claims that Israel conducted two dozen “indiscriminate” attacks against Lebanese civilians and is therefore guilty of war crimes [Diversionary Strike On a Rights Group (Aug. 30, 2006)]. Hezbollah, on the other hand, conducted 4000 rocket attacks designed to kill and maim Israeli civilians. But no such charges of war crimes have been levied against Hezbollah.
During the fighting, Israel dropped leaflets, blared warnings from loudspeakers, and in some cases made personal phone calls calling on Lebanese civilians to leave areas of impending attacks. Israel has denied the Human Rights Watch charges of indiscriminate bombing of civilians. Hezbollah, meanwhile, loaded rockets laced with ball bearings and nails to cause maximal civilian casualties. They make no denials about targeting civilians.
In short, Human Rights Watch has singled out two dozen disputed attacks by Israel as war crimes without implicating the 4000 undisputed attacks by Hezbollah. Yet Kathleen Peratis, member of the board and key defender of Human Rights Watch, seems surprised that critics “have been ferocious.” Go figure.
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Monday, August 28, 2006
Letter to The Washington Post
From: Dr. Michael Berenhaus
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 9:33 AM
To: 'letters@washpost.com'
Subject: letter to the editor
Dear Editor,
Dennis Sandole (letters Aug. 25, 2006] asks what Israel (and the United States) has gained by “killing more than a thousand Lebanese, displacing nearly a million people, destroying Lebanon’s infrastructure and perhaps the Lebanese state itself…” Good question but he is blaming the wrong party. It was Hezbollah that caused the killing, the displacing, and the destruction of Lebanon and the Lebanese people by attacking Israel from their midst. This twisting of culpability has plagued Israel since its birth, as world opinion, the UN, and Amnesty International consistently blame Israel for merely defending itself. No other country has ever been so castigated for similar actions. This "piling-on-Israel" scenario is ironic, since it is done against the most discriminated people in the history of the world.
In one sense, Sandole is correct when he further blames Israel for the lack of stability in the region. It is true that as long as Israel continues to fight back against the surrounding Arab countries that continually try to annihilate her and refuse to recognize her right to exist, the region will never be stable. However this is more twisting of culpability. If this is indeed the case, though, I can only say - “long live instability in the Middle East.”
Michael Berenhaus
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 9:33 AM
To: 'letters@washpost.com'
Subject: letter to the editor
Dear Editor,
Dennis Sandole (letters Aug. 25, 2006] asks what Israel (and the United States) has gained by “killing more than a thousand Lebanese, displacing nearly a million people, destroying Lebanon’s infrastructure and perhaps the Lebanese state itself…” Good question but he is blaming the wrong party. It was Hezbollah that caused the killing, the displacing, and the destruction of Lebanon and the Lebanese people by attacking Israel from their midst. This twisting of culpability has plagued Israel since its birth, as world opinion, the UN, and Amnesty International consistently blame Israel for merely defending itself. No other country has ever been so castigated for similar actions. This "piling-on-Israel" scenario is ironic, since it is done against the most discriminated people in the history of the world.
In one sense, Sandole is correct when he further blames Israel for the lack of stability in the region. It is true that as long as Israel continues to fight back against the surrounding Arab countries that continually try to annihilate her and refuse to recognize her right to exist, the region will never be stable. However this is more twisting of culpability. If this is indeed the case, though, I can only say - “long live instability in the Middle East.”
Michael Berenhaus
Saturday, August 26, 2006
Letter to The Washington Post
Dear Editor,
David Ignatius says he is a "proponent” of terrorist TV (aka Al Jazeera), despite “its tendency to spin coverage.” [Al-Jazeera’s Tricky Balancing Act, Aug. 23, 2006]. “Tendency"? It’s more like their mission. Much of Al Jazeera's coverage revolves around blaming the US and Israel for all the ills of the Arab world. Any problem in the Arab world can find it’s origin in Israel or the United States on the fiction of Al Jazeera TV. What Ignatius doesn’t seem to get is that it is this coverage that contributes to the incitement of the Arab world against the West – the same incitement that caused the Sept 11 attack.
David Ignatius says he is a "proponent” of terrorist TV (aka Al Jazeera), despite “its tendency to spin coverage.” [Al-Jazeera’s Tricky Balancing Act, Aug. 23, 2006]. “Tendency"? It’s more like their mission. Much of Al Jazeera's coverage revolves around blaming the US and Israel for all the ills of the Arab world. Any problem in the Arab world can find it’s origin in Israel or the United States on the fiction of Al Jazeera TV. What Ignatius doesn’t seem to get is that it is this coverage that contributes to the incitement of the Arab world against the West – the same incitement that caused the Sept 11 attack.
Wednesday, August 23, 2006
Published in The Washington Post
The Failings of a Lebanese Leader
Wednesday, August 23, 2006; A14
In his Aug. 16 column, David Ignatius said, "The surprise hero of the conflict was Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora." Mr. Siniora was a "hero"?
When his country was being blown to smithereens, he chose to reject a cease-fire offer outright and then made new demands that had nothing to do with the conflict at hand. He applauded Hezbollah's efforts when it was launching rockets from civilian neighborhoods, which led to the deaths of many Lebanese and the destruction of Lebanese cities. If this is a hero in David Ignatius's world, who else is on his list -- Attila the Hun?
MICHAEL BERENHAUS
Potomac
© 2006 The Washington Post Company
Friday, August 18, 2006
Letter to The Washington Post
From: Dr. Michael Berenhaus
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 10:35 AM
To: letters@baltsun.com
Subject: letter to the editor
Dear Editor,
In a surprise move this past year, Israel unilaterally deported its own people from the Gaza Strip in the hopes of peace. What does it get in return – countless Kassam missile attacks and a tongue lashing from George Bisharat [See Unilateral action by Israel spawns violence in Gaza, (August 17, 2006)].
Once again, Israel is damned if it does and damned if it doesn’t. It’s damned if it keeps land, damned if it gives it away. And that is the strategy of pro-Arabist propaganda: Alienate the world against the one Jewish state (a state which makes up just 1/10th of one percent of the Middle East) and put it in a no win situation. That way, the Arabs can win politically what they have not been able to win through terrorism and war – that last fraction of land that they don’t have but want so badly - because it’s not theirs but the re-born homeland of the Jewish people.
Michael Berenhaus
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 10:35 AM
To: letters@baltsun.com
Subject: letter to the editor
Dear Editor,
In a surprise move this past year, Israel unilaterally deported its own people from the Gaza Strip in the hopes of peace. What does it get in return – countless Kassam missile attacks and a tongue lashing from George Bisharat [See Unilateral action by Israel spawns violence in Gaza, (August 17, 2006)].
Once again, Israel is damned if it does and damned if it doesn’t. It’s damned if it keeps land, damned if it gives it away. And that is the strategy of pro-Arabist propaganda: Alienate the world against the one Jewish state (a state which makes up just 1/10th of one percent of the Middle East) and put it in a no win situation. That way, the Arabs can win politically what they have not been able to win through terrorism and war – that last fraction of land that they don’t have but want so badly - because it’s not theirs but the re-born homeland of the Jewish people.
Michael Berenhaus
Monday, August 14, 2006
Letter to The Washington Post
Dear Editor,
In Young Muslim Rage Takes Root in Britain [Aug. 13, 2006], the sub-headline reads, “Unemployment, Foreign Policy Fuel Extremism.” What about hatred taught at home or in the Mosques? It is well-known that Fundamentalist Mosques are havens for incitement to hate. You have repeated the verbiage and propaganda of the extremists: ‘It’s not our fault.. it’s society… it’s the policy.’
Unemployment doesn’t make someone a murderer, nor does policy. The hatred that makes people kill, while killing themselves in the process, occurs from brainwashing – and this is religion-based. It’s time for the world to hold these Muslim extremists accountable for their actions, instead of giving them an ‘out’ by letting them blame others. Accepting this ‘out’ gives them carte blanche to create havoc and murder throughout the world. And it’s articles like this that provide that cover. Let's say instead - no more!
In Young Muslim Rage Takes Root in Britain [Aug. 13, 2006], the sub-headline reads, “Unemployment, Foreign Policy Fuel Extremism.” What about hatred taught at home or in the Mosques? It is well-known that Fundamentalist Mosques are havens for incitement to hate. You have repeated the verbiage and propaganda of the extremists: ‘It’s not our fault.. it’s society… it’s the policy.’
Unemployment doesn’t make someone a murderer, nor does policy. The hatred that makes people kill, while killing themselves in the process, occurs from brainwashing – and this is religion-based. It’s time for the world to hold these Muslim extremists accountable for their actions, instead of giving them an ‘out’ by letting them blame others. Accepting this ‘out’ gives them carte blanche to create havoc and murder throughout the world. And it’s articles like this that provide that cover. Let's say instead - no more!
Thursday, August 10, 2006
Letter to The Washington Post
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 4:13 PM
To: letters@washpost.comCc: ombudsman@washpost.com
Subject: Aug 9, 2006 Prime Minister Fouad Siniora
Dear Editor,
For a country that Lebanon's Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, in his Op-Ed
[Aug. 9, 2006], claims has been "ravaged", "shattered", and is an
"environmental disaster", he sure comes up with a lot of demands before he
would consider accepting a cease-fire. If Siniora really represented the
welfare of the Lebanese people, and was not a puppet of Iran, he would
accept an unconditional cease-fire without a long list of demands.
Apparently, that is not the case.
To: letters@washpost.comCc: ombudsman@washpost.com
Subject: Aug 9, 2006 Prime Minister Fouad Siniora
Dear Editor,
For a country that Lebanon's Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, in his Op-Ed
[Aug. 9, 2006], claims has been "ravaged", "shattered", and is an
"environmental disaster", he sure comes up with a lot of demands before he
would consider accepting a cease-fire. If Siniora really represented the
welfare of the Lebanese people, and was not a puppet of Iran, he would
accept an unconditional cease-fire without a long list of demands.
Apparently, that is not the case.
Letter to The Washington Post
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 4:39 PM
To: 'letters@washpost.com'; 'ombudsman@washpost.com'
Subject: To the Editor
Dear Editor,
I am all for free speech, but free propaganda? Lebanon’s Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, in his Op-Ed [Aug. 9, 2006], starts by referring to the current war in his country as “Israel’s savage war on Lebanon and the Lebanese people.” He curiously omits any reference to Hezbollah’s kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers, killing of eight others, and the firing of rockets into Israel – the reason the war started.
In a mis-direction play that would make a football coach proud, Siniora states his version of the “root cause of this war –Israeli occupation of Lebanese territories and its perennial threat to Lebanon’s security.” Really? No mention of Hezbollah’s raison d’etre – to destroy Israel?
To: 'letters@washpost.com'; 'ombudsman@washpost.com'
Subject: To the Editor
Dear Editor,
I am all for free speech, but free propaganda? Lebanon’s Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, in his Op-Ed [Aug. 9, 2006], starts by referring to the current war in his country as “Israel’s savage war on Lebanon and the Lebanese people.” He curiously omits any reference to Hezbollah’s kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers, killing of eight others, and the firing of rockets into Israel – the reason the war started.
In a mis-direction play that would make a football coach proud, Siniora states his version of the “root cause of this war –Israeli occupation of Lebanese territories and its perennial threat to Lebanon’s security.” Really? No mention of Hezbollah’s raison d’etre – to destroy Israel?
Monday, August 7, 2006
Dialogue with Washington Post Ombudsman
Correspondence with Washington Post Ombudsman:
To:
cc: ombudsman
Subject: Lebanon 08/07/2006 10:25 AM
Dear Editor,
According to your news reports, Lebanon is suffering horribly from Israeli air-strikes, on the verge of humanitarian crises, desperate and pleading
for a cease-fire. They are finally offered that cease fire. Their
response: immediate rejection followed by a list of conditions. What does that suggest about the accuracy and completeness of your reporting?
-----Original Message-----
From: Deborah C Howell Ombudsman
Internet DropBox
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: Lebanon
Just because Lebanon rejects a ceasefire doesn't mean that there isn't suffering.
Deborah
Deborah Howell
Washington Post Ombudsman
To: 'Ombudsman
Subject: RE: Lebanon
08/07/2006 01:25 PM
Thanks for your response but why wouldn't they then accept an immediate
cease fire if it would immediately end suffering? Perhaps your staff
could investigate this.
-----Original Message-----
From: Deborah C Howell Ombudsman
Internet DropBox
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 4:30 PM
Subject: RE: Lebanon
Stay tuned. They are looking into it.
Deborah
Deborah Howell
Washington Post Ombudsman
To:
cc: ombudsman
Subject: Lebanon 08/07/2006 10:25 AM
Dear Editor,
According to your news reports, Lebanon is suffering horribly from Israeli air-strikes, on the verge of humanitarian crises, desperate and pleading
for a cease-fire. They are finally offered that cease fire. Their
response: immediate rejection followed by a list of conditions. What does that suggest about the accuracy and completeness of your reporting?
-----Original Message-----
From: Deborah C Howell Ombudsman
Internet DropBox
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: Lebanon
Just because Lebanon rejects a ceasefire doesn't mean that there isn't suffering.
Deborah
Deborah Howell
Washington Post Ombudsman
To: 'Ombudsman
Subject: RE: Lebanon
08/07/2006 01:25 PM
Thanks for your response but why wouldn't they then accept an immediate
cease fire if it would immediately end suffering? Perhaps your staff
could investigate this.
-----Original Message-----
From: Deborah C Howell Ombudsman
Internet DropBox
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 4:30 PM
Subject: RE: Lebanon
Stay tuned. They are looking into it.
Deborah
Deborah Howell
Washington Post Ombudsman
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)