AP
The Issue: Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s letter to Israel demanding it ease restrictions on Gaza.
The election-eve letter sent by Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin to Israel is an obvious in-kind contribution to Vice President Kamala Harris to thwart its hemorrhaging of Arab-American voters in the key swing state of Michigan (“Blinken’s Odious Letter,” Editorial, Oct. 16).
The Biden folks have also demanded Israel refrain from attacking Iran’s oil and nuclear sites in the wake of a second round of Tehran’s terrifying ballistic-missile attacks. Whose side is the Biden-Harris regime on?
James Hyland
Beechhurst
Blinken’s letter is all talk, no walk.
He’s not “threatening” Israel in any meaningful way. In one section, he listed ways that Israel could lift restrictions on food and aid supplies that Gaza desperately needs — as though Israel would listen or care.
Blinken has been steadfast in his support of Israel, to the point that the latter has pursued a genocide against Palestine for more than a year now without so much as a hiccup. A little letter means nothing in light of that fact.
Leon Baader
Brooklyn
American assets are deployed in Israel’s vicinity, signaling to Iran that we will stand by our ally.
However, that message is diluted daily by the Blinken letter and various debates over what targets are off-limits for Israeli retaliation.
It’s hard to ignore the significant anti-Jewish faction within the Democratic Party.
The moral thing for Democrats to do is to isolate them. Fat chance.
Leonard Toboroff
Miami, Fla.
Let me get this straight: A country is attacked, and its ally tells them to sit on their hands.
The Biden-Harris administration’s weakness is destroying its allies.
Philip Vallone
Ossining
The Biden-Harris regime betrayed our ally with a seriously misconceived foreign policy.
Rather than helping Israel, Biden-Harris have been interfering in Israel’s domestic policies, undermining its leadership during a time of war, threatening to cease shipments of munitions and seeking to control the IDF’s battle plans.
Stanley Rubin
Fresh Meadows
The Issue: The upcoming vote in New York on the controversial and confusing ballot item, Proposition 1.
Proposition 1 will add a hodgepodge of new characteristics as protected categories — namely age and autonomy (“Prop 1 is anti-parent,” Kelly Eustis, PostOpinion, Oct. 17).
Adding age alongside autonomy in the anti-discrimination code will essentially make children de facto wards of the state, nullifying the role of parents.
Prop 1 will not benefit a civil society. It’s a social-engineering project that will create state dominion of individual behavior.
Linda Cebrian
Rhinebeck
It never seems to occur to Eustis that there are actually transgender people who discovered their gender identity without once having been exposed to what she calls “radical transgender ideology” at school.
A child isn’t a parent’s personal property to control based on political predilections. A child is an individual who needs to be supported for who they are.
As the mother of two kids with friends who have transitioned (some while they were in high school, with zero regrets) as well as my own adult friends who are transgender, I see Eustis’ panic-stricken, biased rhetoric as totally off the mark.
I fully support Prop 1 in the name of a free society with equal rights for all, and in full support of trans people.
Katherine Dieckmann
Manhattan
Want to weigh in on today’s stories? Send your thoughts (along with your full name and city of residence) to [email protected]. Letters are subject to editing for clarity, length, accuracy, and style.