‘Sharansky Resigns’

Natan Sharansky made the right decision to resign but for the wrong reasons [“Sharansky Resigns,” Editorial, May 3, 2005]. He is opposed to “disengagement” because it is not linked to democratic reforms in a Palestinian society.

He should be opposed to “disengagement” because it compromises the security of Israel, violates the human rights of the 9,000 Jews who will be driven from their homes, misuses and demoralizes the armed forces, and allows Prime Minister Sharon to give away land that is not his to give.

Mr. Sharon is willing to surrender Gaza and northern Samaria for nothing in return. Mr. Sharansky would give the land away if the Palestinians agree to implement democratic reforms. No other people would give away their nation’s land under any circumstances without losing a war.

Mr. Sharansky demonstrates a fatal flaw of Israel’s leaders, who have always been willing to give away the land of one of the smallest and most endangered nations on earth in exchange for reversible promises.

GEORGE E. RUBIN
Manhattan

‘Absolutely Absurd’

A recent Andrew Wolf column suggests that Speaker Gifford Miller and the City Council should have taken no action in the Allan Jennings matter [“Weiner Poised To Move Ahead of Miller as Council Considers the Nuclear Option,” Andrew Wolf, New York, April 27, 2005].

That’s absolutely absurd.

Not only did the council have the obligation to conduct an investigation, it was the right thing to do.

And what were the results? A serious investigation of an independently elected official, tough and unprecedented punishment for outrageous behavior, and strong zero-tolerance policies that will help make the council a safe and secure workplace for decades to come.

Taking action is not easy. But Speaker Miller faced the situation and the criticism that comes with taking action, and he and the council got results.

STEPHEN SIGMUND
Communications Director
New York City Council
Manhattan

‘Freedom Tower?’

Considering what has happened since September 11, and in the last few days, undoubtedly the World Trade Center site plan should not be rethought, but dumped. In fact, the Libeskind plan has already been rejected by everyone except the powers that be. In every public poll, including the official Lower Manhattan Development Corporation poll, Mr. Libeskind was a loser.

Governor Pataki overruled the decision of his own appointees and autocratically imposed the Libeskind plan upon us. All public comment fell on the deaf ears of the LMDC.

Better to restore the site where some 50,000 people joyously worked, where thousands from around the world did business, and where all celebrated life.

Build two new twin towers, as tall or taller than the originals, on the footprints from which they were taken.

JOE WRIGHT
Manhattan

‘Mr. X Agonistes’

Re: “Mr. X Agonistes,” Opinion, April 27, 2005. X refers to a small wind of change that a few bold folks have evolved and are speaking out against the Upper West Side grain, even if in soft tones. I am so glad to hear this. Personally, I have developed a wary stance, after some explosive and unpleasant political discussions with liberals.

I have been told the following: that “It is arrogant for America to occupy Iraq in order to protect and steal oil”; “Because the Bush ‘dynasty’ has such a historically close relationship with the Saudi royals, Bush should’ve seen 9/11 coming and stopped it from happening.” And this friendship-ending bit of “insight,” from an Italian journalist former-friend: “The American military is made up of the stupidest, poorest people in the U.S.A.” (You’d think that a professional journalist would have the integrity not to lift a widely criticized quote, based on ignorance, by a widely discredited professor and claim it as his own). And this, on the day Saddam Hussein was caught (a day that felt like a holiday to me), from a woman in my neighborhood who said she “wasn’t sure how she felt about it yet.”

Each of these comments was delivered with impassioned certitude. Now I’m not saying that each and every position I hold is absolutely rock solid, 100% correct, and never subject to revision. I have lost respect for these people. In truth, I’m embarrassed for them.

So I now have a new rule: No discussion of politics with liberals, without a careful vetting. Ah, life is easier.

TERRY TANNEHILL
Manhattan

---

Please address letters intended for publication to the Editor of The New York Sun. Letters may be sent by e-mail to editor@nysun.com, facsimile to 212-608-7348, or post to 105 Chambers Street, New York City 10007. Please include a return address and daytime telephone number. Letters may be edited.