On Jan. 12, there was a major meeting in Bergen County regarding the recent swastikas and the attempted murder of a rabbi and his family. While I applaud these efforts, I wonder why in the past, when my synagogue had swastikas, when a yeshivah student in Edison was assaulted, when the Edison Lexus dealership and other sites were vandalized with swastikas, that we did not have a similar outcry in our Middlesex County community.

Unless and until the judicial system hands out harsh punishment, including real jail time to these perpetrators, including teenagers, nothing will change. Writing an essay on the Holocaust, or doing community service means nothing to those blinded by bigotry and hatred.

Thank you for setting the record straight on President Obama’s record on Israel. Unfortunately, it seems that whenever he has chosen not to march lockstep with Prime Minister Netanyahu, he has found himself and his administration subject to specious claims of hostility towards Israel. I have heard pulpit rabbis digress from the parashah of the week and, instead, twist the president’s speeches and quote phrases out of context in order to make it appear, incorrectly, as if he advocates a return to pre-1967 borders without negotiated adjustments. As you point out, this administrations’ record, notably in the areas of arms sales and intelligence, has been friendlier to Israel than any of its predecessors.

The JTA article by Zach Silberman on the Rothman-Pascrell race in your Jan. 13 issue was unbalanced in Rothman’s favor. Rothman and Pascrell have virtually indistinguishable voting records on Israel-related matters. In his 15 years in office, Pascrell has written and spoken publicly affirming his personal commitment to the State of Israel. He has taken his pro-Israel stands in spite of the fact that his current district includes an extremely large Muslim and Arab population. I eagerly await an article that describes Pascrell’s record fairly.

The Jewish Standard went way overboard in its Jan. 6 article on President Barack Obama. It appeared to be more campaign literature than honest reportage. I would be remiss if I let that article go by without response. Since becoming president three years ago:

• Obama has shifted U.S. strategy to place pressure on Israel for the failure of peace talks, rather than trying to bring both sides to the table.

• He has allowed Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta to blame Israel for not getting “to the damn table.”

• He seemed to agree with Nicolas Sarkozy when the French president called Israel’s prime minister “a liar.”

• He views the Jewish settlers on the west bank as the obstacle to peace. “America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements,” he told the United Nations General Assembly in his first speech to that body. He never explained why Jews would not be allowed to live in a Palestinian state. (For the record, over a million Palestinians are Israeli citizens living in undisputed Israel.)

• His White House removed all references to “Jerusalem, Israel” from its website and his State Department recently asked the Supreme Court to uphold its policy of not allowing those who are born in Jerusalem to have Israel written as their birthplace on official U.S. documents.

• Obama wants Israel to return to its pre-June 1967 borders.

• His ambassador to Belgium openly said Israel itself is to blame for Muslim anti-Semitism — instead of the actual anti-Semites.

In fact, it is Congress that is Israel’s friend. Obama certainly is not.

While Obama is correct to suggest that the United States is pro-Israel, the evidence would suggest that it is despite him, not because of him.

[The editor responds: Regarding whether our coverage was meant as a defense of President Barack Obama, see this week’s editorial on the subject. As to the claims made here: Obama blamed both sides for not coming to the peace table (something every president has done since Richard Nixon’s day); his press secretary repudiated Panetta’s off-the-cuff inappropriate comments; Obama never said Jews would not be “allowed to live in a Palestinian state”; opposing Israel’s settlement policy has been U.S. policy since 1967 (although former Secretary of State James A. Baker III insists Obama has tilted the policy towards Israel; as he said two months ago, “I don’t understand how the U.S. can oppose settlements for 30-plus years, then veto a U.N. resolution opposing settlements”); it was President George W. Bush who first rejected the “Jerusalem, Israel” designation; Obama’s ambassador to Belgium is a Shoah survivor and his remarks have been twisted shamefully out of context. The article in question dealt at length with both the Sarkozy and 1967 borders issues, so we will not summarize them here. Jewish voters have real reason to be concerned about Obama. When truth is so cavalierly tossed aside, however, so are those concerns.]

We are grateful to Jewish Standard readers for their response to a survey about reinvigorating the Bergen County YJCC. The request for input from the community was made in a Dec. 9 article about the strategic planning process that the YJCC is currently undergoing (Bergen Y in transition).

We would like to encourage those who have not yet responded to do so. The more we know about what our community thinks, the better prepared we will be to move into the future with confidence. The survey may be accessed at http://www.yjcc.org/survey.

Thank you for enabling us to reach out to the Bergen County Jewish community.

Thank you Jewish Standard for the wonderful support you gave the Adlers and The Belskie Museum in your Jan. 13 issue. We had the largest attendance of any show in the last 12 months, with 173 people coming to the opening. Thank you so much.

BEIT SHEMESH — It is raining as I write — a rare, cold, hard rain that is welcomed by Jerusalemites who know that it is good for them and the country. Water, like patience, is a treasured commodity here in Israel: temporarily inconvenient, but better for you in the long run.

Rain is a blessing. We pray for it.

Patience is a blessing. We pray that we have enough of it for each other.

It is a good day to stay inside and reflect on my trip to Israel and to Beit Shemesh, a city about a half-hour west of Jerusalem. Beit Shemesh and the Washington Jewish community have been partners for many years, and partners share responsibility for each other.

Suddenly, it seems, gender segregation is everywhere in Israel — buses, army bases, Jerusalem sidewalks, Beit Shemesh schoolyards and, above all, the front pages. What is going on here?

Let’s start with the buses. In the late 1990s, at the request of some charedim, the Transportation Ministry created bus lines that served charedi neighborhoods and cities. On an officially “voluntary” basis, women would enter the buses and sit in the back. These buses were deemed legally permissible because Israeli law allows discrimination when it is necessary to provide access to public services and does not harm the common weal. All the fundamental questions (necessary? common weal?) were left wide open.