Ramla House

Dan Fisher describes how one Ramla residence can signify a microcosm of the state of Israel; a fluctuation between a house united and a house divided (“House a Symbol of Chasm Between Arabs, Israelis,” Part I, Jan. 15).

Unfortunately for the house and the country itself, Arab inflexibility, stubbornness and a rejectionist attitude has negated all hopes of a positive outcome to this volatile situation.

While Fisher explained that there are two sides to the story, he inaccurately describes them as the moral, ethical and legal equivalents of one another.

Fisher conveniently neglects to mention that Arab intransigence created the current refugee crisis and has led to indescribable suffering and hardship in the Middle East.

This same hard-line attitude also led to the creation of the heinous Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, an organization that Fisher treats very lightly. From bombings to murders, this group’s record for terror remains unchallenged in today’s world.

While Fisher is correct in stating that both owners of the house and the country are in some way responsible for its current status, one need not read very deeply to determine that a position of compromise and a willingness to negotiate can only be found on one side, Israel.

Until this is reversed, unfortunately, the chasm of the country, and the house, will remain.

JONATHAN R. LIGHTMAN

Western States Assistant Counsel

Anti-Defamation League

Los Angeles