Letter to Washington Post

Dear Editor, The Washington Post can't even write obituaries without injecting anti-Israel bias. In "Preserver of the Jewish Community inside Egypt's capital" (4/14/13), The Washington Post states that "Egypt's once thriving Jewish community largely left more than 60 years ago at a time of hostilities between the country and Israel". Hostilities between the two countries? In 1948, Egypt attacked Israel the day that Israel declared Independence! Egypt was dropping bombs on Tel Aviv. It was an organized attack by Egypt in an attempt to destroy the nascent Jewish state - not a mutual disagreement between the two sides - as inferred by the Washington Post statement. And to say that these Jews "left" Egypt also creates the wrong impression. The Post refers to Palestinians displaced during the Israeli War of Independence - a war the Arabs started - as being forced to leave. In the case of the Jews in Egypt, who were living peacefully side by side with their Arab neighbors, The Post says they merely "left" - as if on their own volition. They were truly forced to leave -a fate that has befallen Jews in almost every other Arab country. Jews of Arab countries are now virtually extinct whereas Arabs make up 20% of Israel. (For more on the fate of Jews Indigenous to Arab countries - see JIMENA.ORG). The Washington Post has a record of consistently distorting history and choosing words to cast blame on Israel and whitewash Arab misdeeds. Not even the obituaries are safe. Michael Berenhaus

Letter to The Washington Post

Dear Editor, In "Kerry, Netanyahu see steps toward new peace talks" (4/10/13), The Washington Post states that "Netanyahu is considered hostile to negotiations despite public assurances that he would talk under the right conditions." May I ask The Washington Post staff, who or what entity considers Netanyahu hostile to negotiations, other than The Washington Post, of course? What evidence did The Washington Post staff use to come to their conclusion? What scientific report or data does the Post use to support this accusation? Is the Post not aware that Netanyahu offered unparalleled compromises to bring the Palestinians to the table, only for his measures to be ignored. The Israeli Prime Minister has stated that he will negotiate with the Palestinians anytime and at anyplace. What part of that statement can be "considered" hostile to negotiations? Michael Berenhaus