PDA

View Full Version : The fence that keeps Islamist mass murders out



ibrodsky
12-30-2003, 04:43 PM
http://securityfence.mfa.gov.il/mfm/web/main/missionhome.asp?LanguageID=&Question2=&MissionID=45187&MissionID=


This website covers the various aspects of the security fence project. Here you will find comprehensive information on the Israeli point of view, answers to Palestinian claims, background material and analyses which will help you get to the root of this complex issue and to understand the true nature of this fence: a temporary and reversible line of defense - not a "Berlin wall"; a necessary life-saving fence that takes into account humanitarian considerations - not an "apartheid wall".

In addition to the following web pages, we invite you to watch a Power-Point presentation on the security fence issue.

Oh Jerusalem
12-30-2003, 08:52 PM
Do ypu really think the fence will protect Israel?

If I were a Pali, I would wait for Israeli to unilaterally retreat behind it and only then commence to punch holes in it.

From today's news:

Hamas leader Sheik Ahmed Yassin stated last night following an IDF aerial missile strike against a terrorist in Gaza, “The Israeli enemy only understands force and must pay for her crimes. Hamas knows how to make her pay”.

Do you think it's going to stop them? Sadly, most seem to think so, looking at the short term achievements.

Justcurious
12-30-2003, 10:39 PM
The Great Wall of China can be seeb from the moon. Is Israel trying to set a new record?

Noam
12-31-2003, 04:22 AM
Originally posted by Justcurious
The Great Wall of China can be seeb from the moon. Is Israel trying to set a new record?

The biggest advantage of the Fence is that it cut PALESTINIAN CRIME by many percents./

They cannot steal:
Cars, Jeeps, Trucks and "slaughter" them for parts
Weapons.
Bee hives
Cattle
Chemicals,
Whores,
Fertilizers...

You name it.
It is the ECONOMY STUPID said Billy.

The Fence is also saving lives. So said Dichter.

We don't want the fence to be seen from the moon. Rather, be FELT from the ground.

Noam
01-13-2004, 02:06 AM
Dan SHiftan on the Fence and the Coming Haague trial:

It is A SUICIDAL AND CRIMINAL GOVERNMENT WHO DOES NOT BUILD A FENCE THAT SAVES ITS PEOPLE"S LIFE.

All the comparisons to Berlin wall are totally wrong.

That FENCE was meant to prevent PEOPLE LEAVING THE STATE

THE SECURITY FENCE IS MEANT TO PREVENT MURDERERS FROM ENTRERING THE STATE.

Revkha
01-13-2004, 03:07 PM
Where do I send my check to contribute to the cost of building the fence?

Let the rest of the world eat cake --- I want to save Jewish lives.

L@mplighterM
01-13-2004, 03:45 PM
Originally posted by Justcurious
The Great Wall of China can be seeb from the moon. Is Israel trying to set a new record?

What if they are?

L@mplighterM
01-13-2004, 03:53 PM
Originally posted by Oh Jerusalem
Do ypu really think the fence will protect Israel?

If I were a Pali, I would wait for Israeli to unilaterally retreat behind it and only then commence to punch holes in it.

From today's news:

Hamas leader Sheik Ahmed Yassin stated last night following an IDF aerial missile strike against a terrorist in Gaza, “The Israeli enemy only understands force and must pay for her crimes. Hamas knows how to make her pay”.

Do you think it's going to stop them? Sadly, most seem to think so, looking at the short term achievements.

I think it’s difficult to punch a hole through a reinforced concrete fence; it would make one hell of a racket.

The fence will save lives in the long term.

Mediocrates
01-13-2004, 05:23 PM
Importantly though it's not unique either. We're lead to believe that the 'fence' is somehow a one of a kind thing in the world. As I posted elsewhere, in a recent article in National Geographic there are fences and walls between countries all over the world. Some of them are robust.

For example India is erecting an 1,800 mile heavily fortified fence to protect itself from Pakistani terrorist incursions.

Kuwait has an armed 150 mile border with Iraq.

The Korean DMZ is the most heavily armed place on earth.

The Greek and Turkish sectors of Cyprus are kept apart by a 112 mile fence.

Even the US and Mexico have a 60 mile fence.

Zambia and Angola have a 620 mile fence between them.

L@mplighterM
01-13-2004, 08:20 PM
I think it’s important to keep in mind that the fence by itself isn’t the whole issue, it still comes down to an alleged land issue. Sharon promised/agreed to the Palestinians a State without the exact details specified in writing (who gets what). I imagine that east of the wall becomes the Palestinian side and the west will be incorporated into the state of Israel or something along that line. I wonder if that’s the position of the current Israeli Administration?

The Palestinians should have been booted (dead or alive) out of the WB a long time ago and the fence should have been built to separate Jordan and Israel.

Oh Jerusalem
01-13-2004, 10:00 PM
Originally posted by L@mplighterM
I imagine that east of the wall becomes the Palestinian side and the west will be incorporated into the state of Israel or something along that line. I wonder if that’s the position of the current Israeli Administration?
Sharon & Co. won't admit it. They keep on saying the the fence can be moved when final border agreements are in place. But I don't believe Sharon for a moment.

The Palestinians should have been booted (dead or alive) out of the WB a long time ago and the fence should have been built to separate Jordan and Israel.
It's not too late. I am a firm believer that in the not too long run, this fence will not protect Ghetto Israel.

L@mplighterM
01-14-2004, 09:31 AM
If my understanding of UN Resolution 242 is correct, then Israel in the interest of national security has the right to expropriate/annex land to secure a defendable border.

Whilst the world might not agree it should certainly understand that there’s a need for a monolithic separation and Sharon should issue a statement that the fence stays where it is and the land is annexed. Period!

One difficulty that arises with annexation is that you inherit the Palestinians that live/own the land on your side of the fence. That’s my understanding of the matter!

Justcurious
01-14-2004, 12:22 PM
Imagine, Ibrodsky, Ãf the United States, were separated by walls according to people's beliefs!

Impossible!

Where would you put the lines?

Mediocrates
01-14-2004, 12:54 PM
There is a 60 mile fence between Mexico and Southern California and given that some illegals are here for the 2nd or thrid generation I suspect they would want to make a similar claim. I also suspect that as long as Mexico does nothing to incent its own people to stay in Mexico and instead silently prompt them to leave Mexico thereby allieviating whatever burden they present to Mexico while at the same time taking advantage of the money they send back home, then we will never see a change in illegals to Mexifornia, all of Bush's 'amnesty' notwithstanding.

Imagine - really - imagine what it would be like if at its core the relationship between Israel and Palestine were not at its core, parasitic.

L@mplighterM
01-14-2004, 01:11 PM
If the consumer ended up paying 100% or even 50% more for produce or fruit they would squawk. If the condo owners in Southern California had to pay double to have their lawns cut and trees pruned they would squawk.

And so it goes…

Mediocrates
01-14-2004, 01:26 PM
We would adjust to a lower labor component lifestyle. Imagine what cars would cost if labor were more than 8% of the production cost of a car.

We would not have lawns to cut and instead of housepainting people would get some other material like vinyl or adobe. And if fruit costs too much we would alter the way we grow it. The fruit we grow in this country is largely cosmetic anyhow - for example. That is, we get our juice from Israel and Brazil and the native citrus is reserved for whole fuit sales because it's prettier. And migrant workers are in a union anyhow.

We can afford cheap illegal labor because basically we're vain and lazy.

Oh Jerusalem
01-14-2004, 10:00 PM
Originally posted by Justcurious
Imagine, Ibrodsky, Ãf the United States, were separated by walls according to people's beliefs!

Impossible!

Where would you put the lines?
What are you rambling about?

The fence separates a sovereign country and its citizens from a terrorist regime attempting to annihilate it.

The only separation of beliefs involved here is whether you think Pals are entitled to blow up and shoot Israelis or not. So......... what do you believe?

Justcurious
01-16-2004, 11:34 AM
Originally posted by Oh Jerusalem
What are you rambling about?

The fence separates a sovereign country and its citizens from a terrorist regime attempting to annihilate it.

The only separation of beliefs involved here is whether you think Pals are entitled to blow up and shoot Israelis or not. So......... what do you believe?

Understandable, yes. But what would you suggest for friendship? Both parties want that, don't they?

minusthejihad
01-16-2004, 12:21 PM
Originally posted by Justcurious
Understandable, yes. But what would you suggest for friendship? Both parties want that, don't they?

Do you ever even glance at the polls that come out regarding this question. If you do, you would notice that the magority of Palestinians (over 83%) do not want Israel to exist and that the majority of Israelis want a two state solution.

Friendship? What does that tell you?

L@mplighterM
01-16-2004, 03:27 PM
Originally posted by Justcurious
Understandable, yes. But what would you suggest for friendship? Both parties want that, don't they?

Funny you!

NewsGuy
01-18-2004, 09:15 AM
Picking up on this discussion with excerpts from the current IsraelForum.com cover story (http://www.israelforum.com/dynamix/page.pl?sn=154) :

So why is the whole world outraged by Israel’s plan? The answer varies based on whom we consider.

The Palestinians are at wits end out of fear that Israel’s unilateral determination of the border will yield a smaller Palestinian State than that which would result from international arm-twisting. And, equally as disturbing to the Palestinians, the plan would eliminate their ability to mass-murder Israeli citizens at will. Thus, the Israeli plan would effectively make the Palestinian dream of perpetrating a Jihad-genocide on Israel unattainable.

The Europeans are vehemently opposed to the Israeli plan, because a unilateral separation would demonstrate to the world that the European backing of Arab terrorism against Israel was useless. The European strategy of acting as the Arabs’ powerful champion would be exposed as futile, and the European prestige in the Arab world would be forever tarnished.

The Bush administration, too, is gravely concerned by Israel’s plan to end the Mideast conflict through its own devices, because Bush is facing heavy criticism over his foreign policy split with most of the world, and over his Middle East policy in particular. As it stands, the "Road map" is one of the few diplomatic initiatives that represents unity among Washington, Brussels, Moscow and the UN. The demise of this unifying peace plan would leave Bush in a weaker position as the 2004 elections approach.

A unilateral separation would also signal the failure of decades of overly optimistic American Mideast policy, in which the Arabs were presumed to be willing to stop massacring Jews in exchange for a Palestinian State. The collapse of Camp David 2000 and ensuing Jihadifada have proven the American assumption to be well-intentioned, but entirely incorrect.

Trouble at the Hague

While various nations have their own reasons to oppose the Israeli solution, Israel must do its best to provide its own citizens with relative peace and security after decades of being slaughtered by the Arab terrorist groups and terror supporting Muslim governments.

If the nations of the world are angered by the Israeli plan to defend itself and to make possible a Palestinian State at the same time, then so be it. And, if third-parties cannot broker an acceptable solution, then Israel needs to move forward with its own. After all, it is the lives of the Israeli people which are at stake.

Meanwhile, the Arabs and their anti-Semitic and corrupt UN General Assembly allies have managed to bring a legal action against Israel at the Hague International Court. This coalition of terrorism supporters claims that the construction of a fence that hampers suicide bombers from reaching their Israeli victims, amounts to committing a war crime against the Palestinians.

Israel is expected to challenge the court’s authority to decide the matter in the first place, and it also denies that the fence is intended to mark an international border. Rather, Israel points out that the fence is a purely defensive barrier to stop Palestinian suicide bombers from reaching their intended victims. At the same time, the exact placement of the fence is under consideration, which renders the Arabs' case moot.

Furthermore, many international observers believe that the United States will back Israel’s position out of fear that the court will be used in the future by America's enemies to adjudicate various American actions, which the Bush administration would rather not defend at The Hague.


Your thoughts?

L@mplighterM
01-18-2004, 03:08 PM
Water runs downhill and Arabs want a Jew Free Israel, that’s two facts. Reluctantly states like Egypt and Jordan have publicly declared that they recognize Israel’s right to exist but if you look behind the scenes it becomes apparent that the declaration is false.

Right now the world is focusing on the wall but its not as if they didn’t have issues prior to the construction of the barrier. Israelis are the ones that live and so they must take steps to secure their country to the best of their ability.

The wall is not an end all to terrorism but it certainly wont add to Israel’s security problems. It’s certain that the World Court will rule that the wall is an illegal instillation and perhaps even order Israel to remove or relocate the structure. I don’t know how UN Resolution 242? will play into this because it clearly states that Israel is entitled to secure borders and so is the World court willing to define the borders so Israel can build the wall on the border? The borders weren’t even clearly established in 1948 and according to a CIA study Israel stood to gain a little bit of land.

I could fully accept the wall if the current administration declared that they were annexing all land on Israel’s side of the wall and would compensate Palestinians for any loss of land. Its not that I think that Palestinians are entitled to one square inch of land but previous and the current administration have promised them a state and presumably land is required for such a state.

At some point an Israeli leader has to come along and say this is the land that we require to secure our borders and the rest is yours. This will of course not end cross border terrorism, but I do feel that it would put a greater onus on Palestinians to police their state, especially if failure to do so would lead to an all out war.

Ahava
01-19-2004, 03:18 AM
Shall I go and demonstrate before the Court building in the Hague if they go through with this?

Oh Jerusalem
01-19-2004, 03:25 AM
It won't help.

ibrodsky
02-01-2004, 05:21 AM
There is reason to be optimistic.

The US has convinced the EU that catering to the Arab/Muslim barbarians' complaint that the fence frustrates their evil ambitions is inappropriate.

I think we can at least hope that worldwide action against Israel, the victim of savage jihad-genocide, has peaked and is now in decline.

Israel appears to be following the liberal-American-Jewish superstar Alan Dershowitz' prescription. I have never been a fan of his, but Dershowitz' book The Case for Israel is a significant achievement. Mainly, the book responds with facts and reason to each accusation comprising the Arab/Islamist Big Lie against Israel. It is also contains quite a few lesser known facts. Everyone concerned about the Middle East conflict should read this book.

I think that if thousands of Jews studied this book and took every opportunity to respond using these arguments in a similar tone we would at least discover whether there are good people on this planet who can be persuaded by documented facts that Israel is the victim of Arab/Muslim racism and jihad, and that singling out Israel for sanctions is an outrageous injustice. It's the ignorant and hate-filled Muslim world--the source of a Death Cult that is slaughtering thousands in senseless suicide/homicide attacks--that should be censured by world bodies, not Israel.

I'm willing to support Israel in giving this tactic a try. Unfortunately, it involves Dershowitz' prescription that Israel not "overreact" to mass murder attacks so as not to provide excuses for more worldwide condemnation singling out Israel. However, I think that if the current policy of restraint does not reap any international rewards (such as 50-year overdue UN resolutions against Arab intransigence, Islamist jihad-genocide, and Palestinian mass murder of civilians) within at most six months, Israel should launch a military offensive and crush the Palestinian barbarians once and for all. Then the US can focus on other Arab/Islamist evil-doers such as Syria, Hezbollah, Iran, and Saudi Racist Arabia.

Leon
02-01-2004, 09:14 PM
Originally posted by Justcurious
Imagine, Ibrodsky, Ãf the United States, were separated by walls according to people's beliefs!

Impossible!

Where would you put the lines?

So are you saying that like the United States, Israel and the Palestinian terroritories are only one united country? And not two separate entities?

As oh Jerusalem said, as a soveriegn country, Israel has every right to seperate itself from the Palestinian territories and protect itself from terror ...after all, the Israelis can always annexx the territories (as Egypt and Jordan did in 48) and they always have the option to 'flush' all the Palestinians out fo there...but they dont.

UN Resolution 242 states that Israel has a right to keep some of the territory it won during the six day war. 95% of Palestinians and the majority of palestinian land is under PLO not Israeli control! Israel has every right to build a fence on the remainder of the land that it is allowed to keep for security under 242!

I suggest you read 242 and not simply be brainwashed by the propaganda tactics of Islamic theocracies, police states and terror groups who distort international law.

Leon
02-01-2004, 09:18 PM
Originally posted by Ahava
Shall I go and demonstrate before the Court building in the Hague if they go through with this?

I disagree with Oh Jerusalem. Help or no help - it would be could to show the international court that there are people who are opposed to the immoral distortion of international law by those who happen to be the worst violaters of int law and human rights (i.e the PLO and the 23 Arab police states who are invited to tesitfy).

It would be a great symbolic act if you and others organise a protest!

someswede
02-02-2004, 08:30 AM
[i]Your thoughts? [/B]

My thoughts are that you guys are extremely paranoid.

Where did the author read or hear that europeans oppose the Israeli initiative?

Wake up! There is no such opposition..

People are tired of hearing about this war in the news every single day of their lives.

Any way to end it would be warmly welcome..

Gilgamesh
02-02-2004, 10:22 AM
Originally posted by someswede
People are tired of hearing about this war in the news every single day of their lives.

Any way to end it would be warmly welcome..

There is an "off" buttom in any TV set. Also, you can change channel or start reading other books.

Europeans used to have enourmose capacity to ignore things, turn ablind eye and justify any evil in the world. Suddenly, now you are "tired" ???

Canajew
02-02-2004, 10:48 AM
Originally posted by Justcurious
Understandable, yes. But what would you suggest for friendship? Both parties want that, don't they?

are you on crack?

No, seriously?

have you been paying NO attention?

Did you miss the whole Oslo thing?

I mean, come on man, grow a head.

Chaya_G
02-03-2004, 07:55 PM
Originally posted by Justcurious
Imagine, Ibrodsky, Ãf the United States, were separated by walls according to people's beliefs!

The fence in Israel will be laid down as closely as possible according to state boundaries--NOT beliefs. On Israel's side of the fence will remain a populace that holds a wide variety of beliefs, all together on the same side.

ibrodsky
02-03-2004, 10:19 PM
Originally posted by Justcurious
Imagine, Ibrodsky, Ãf the United States, were separated by walls according to people's beliefs!

Impossible!

Where would you put the lines?

Nonsense.

Israel's security fence prevents Palestinian mass murderers from just walking into Israel. While it doesn't permanently solve the problem of Arab/Muslim racism, bigotry, and bloodlust, it has saved lives.

Imagine Arab/Muslim barbarians walking into your country to blow up people riding busses and eating in restaurants. Would you put up a fence or welcome them?

The Indian
02-04-2004, 05:21 PM
Israel's fence is working. The proof is in the reduced number of terrorists killing Israeli citizens. It hasn't stopped all, but the numbers are down.

Similarly, in India a fence is being errected in the state of Kashmir along the Line of Control (LoC) and it is yeilding results. The terrorists have fewer entry points and are interdicted by the Indian Army, with a little help from Israeli sensors, when they do enter India from the terrorist state of Pakistan. The terrorists murdering civilians aren't gone, but the numbers are down and a lot more terrorists are getting eliminated by the Indian Army. Contrary to the misinformation that is spread by the US media, it is the Indian Army that is winning the peace, not the Bush administration.

Good job Israel and don't give up on your fence. ISRAEL SHALL BE TRIUMPHANT. India is now being pressurised by idiot Islamic slum countries and some people in the west to not fence the LoC. Thankfully the Govt. of India is not listening to these fools.

Gilgamesh
02-04-2004, 10:16 PM
Originally posted by Justcurious
Understandable, yes. But what would you suggest for friendship? Both parties want that, don't they?

People who want friendship, do not support terrorists and do not rever mass murderers of Jewish women and children, as heros.

We have no indication that Arabs want peace or friendship with us. Words in the media, are not enough.

Gilgamesh
02-04-2004, 10:26 PM
Originally posted by Justcurious
Imagine, Ibrodsky, Ãf the United States, were separated by walls according to people's beliefs!

Impossible!

Where would you put the lines?

I understand that you are totally ignorant and not trying to annoy us with stupid remarks, so I adress you accordingly.

In Israel there are members of many faiths, and many creads. Jews are only 80% of the population. There are Druz, Christians of many streams and Bahay and others. 16% of Israel's population are muslems. It is impossible to erect fences according to faith.

The fence is erected between territoris belong to Israel and territoris controlled by Arafat's PA. The reason for the fence is to limit friction between IDF and civilians and to reduce the number of terrorist inflintration. The fence got electric sensors and advanced observation equipment so to alert of anybody who comes near, or tempers with the fence. The fence is called "electric fence" wrongly, because the senseors are electric. (the whole fence, is one big sensor) One can not touch the fence without us knowing about it immidiatly.

As the Indian wrote, Israel sold India exactly the same technology we use, and I'm glad to hear the fence in India has good relsults.

Oh Jerusalem
02-08-2004, 12:55 AM
Snip! Snip! Snip!

Seeking U.S. Nod, Israel Redraws West Bank Barrier (http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=ABY4N45EKZM1YCRBAELCF EY?type=topNews&storyID=4308223)

Oh Jerusalem
02-09-2004, 12:18 AM
Eiland Tells Munich Conference Fence Route Must be Altered (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=57520)
08:15 Feb 09, '04 / 17 Shevat 5764

(IsraelNN.com) Giora Eiland, head of the National Security Council, told the 40th Munich Conference for Security Policy that the current route for the counter-terrorism partition fence is unacceptable and it must be changed.

Eiland stated the planners of the security fence, which he stressed is a temporary necessity, failed to realize just how significant the disruption would be in the day-to-day lives of PA residents based on the current route of the fence.

Oh Jerusalem
02-09-2004, 01:07 AM
Originally posted by Oh Jerusalem
Eiland Tells Munich Conference Fence Route Must be Altered (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=57520)
08:15 Feb 09, '04 / 17 Shevat 5764

(IsraelNN.com) Giora Eiland, head of the National Security Council, told the 40th Munich Conference for Security Policy that the current route for the counter-terrorism partition fence is unacceptable and it must be changed.

Eiland stated the planners of the security fence, which he stressed is a temporary necessity, failed to realize just how significant the disruption would be in the day-to-day lives of PA residents based on the current route of the fence.
If the above's implications were too vague for all of us, the JPost now spells it out:

Modified fence plan excludes settlements (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1076233683654)
Feb. 9, 2004
By MATTHEW GUTMAN

Battered both internationally and domestically due to the route and the cost of the security fence, sources in the Defense Ministry said Sunday that its loops and eastern passes are to be scrapped – for now.

The changes would exclude several major settlements from the Israeli side of the fence, including Ariel, Karnei Shomron, and Kedumim.

The modifications come as a commission of three US envoys is headed to Israel this week to be briefed on Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's unilateral disengagement plan, much of which depends on the fence.

The Defense Ministry sources, however, noted that the western route of the fence remains as decided by the government in June 2002.

Instead of moving the fence, which project director Netzah Mashiah has said will cost as much as building it anew, the Defense Ministry is simply postponing – perhaps permanently – the construction of the inside loops and eastern spurs of the fence.

Sharon has not yet made an official decision on the fence route, according to the Prime Minister's Office. However, Zalman Shoval, a close aide of the prime minister and a former ambassador to the United States, has confirmed the changes.

The aim of the modifications is threefold: to unburden Israel of some international criticism, to lighten the load on the government's coffers, and to expedite the completion of the fence, said a government source.

"We are just trying to attain our priorities first. And foremost among them is to stop infiltration into Israel by means of the fence," said Mashiah.

The Jerusalem Post published last month the postponement of construction of the eastern loops, though the government's tacit confirmation of the move indicates a softening of official policy.

The route of the fence has been much criticized for carving out Palestinian cantons and "ghettos," as well as cutting off farmers from their lands. The International Court of Justice in The Hague is to hear a case on the fence later this month.

The amended route could make the fence more than 100 kilometers shorter – cutting its cost by about $200 million, according to a Defense Ministry source. A prime example is the case of the Ariel and Kedumim spur. It would shuttle the fence northeast toward Kedumim, and then south and east again, before curving back westward toward Israel proper, and the southern sections of the fence.

Instead of the fence looping far eastward around Ariel and dozens of kilometers north to include the Karnei Shomron and Kedumim settlement blocs, it will veer south and west, toward the Green Line near the settlement of Elkana.

According to one official familiar with the issue, removing the Ariel and Kedumim spur alone shortens the path of the fence by some 85 km.

In the Palestinian areas east of Ben-Gurion Airport, where the fence was to loop around a cluster of nine Palestinian villages, only the western line, already under construction, is to be completed for now. The eastern spurs near the settlement of Beit Arieh and the Ofer military camp near Ramallah will also shorten the total length of the fence by about 25 km.
The government has been pressured to make such changes.

The Security Fence for Israel organization lobbied several Knesset parties and Sharon to endorse the change, which would both quicken the pace of construction and reduce its cost.

Separately, Fatah leader and Palestinian Authority minister Kadoura Fares said that if the "changes are serious, and bring the fence out to the Green Line, then we accept it. If Israel decides that it needs a fence to protect itself, fine. But any construction on the Palestinian side of the Green Line is unacceptable."

What would be a 600 km. fence is scheduled for completion by the end of 2005. By the end of the year, some 520 km. of the fence are to be built through the southern edges of Gush Etzion, south of Jerusalem, in the West Bank.

David_in_NYC
02-09-2004, 12:32 PM
As the old saying goes, good fences make good neighbors.

Oh Jerusalem
02-11-2004, 01:23 AM
Oh! The irony! Ha! Ha! Ha! Yuk! Yuk! Yuk!

http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=19764

JEDDAH, 10 February 2004 - Saudi and Yemeni border authorities
are to hold emergency talks in a bid to defuse tension over a so-called
"security screen" being erected by the Kingdom along the Yemeni frontier.
...Yemeni authorities claim that the barrier is being built in a common
grazing area that had been agreed in the June 2000 border pact that ended a
decades-long territorial dispute between the two countries.

The screen is part of a larger plan to erect ... an electronic
surveillance system along the entire length of the Kingdom's frontiers -
land, air and sea. The project ... has been in the planning stages for
several years. ... French aerospace group Thales is "on the verge" of being
awarded the contract to oversee the construction of the system. The project
is said to be worth up to $8.75 billion. ... A spokesman for the French
negotiators in the Kingdom would offer no comment other than to say that the
discussions between the two sides had been going on "for a long time". ...

However, Arab News has learned from French sources that any
contract is still "some way off", probably several months. .... . .

The Yemen section of the plan appears to have become complicated
by local tribal issues. Reacting to rumors in Yemen's Sada province that the
barrier would be a concrete wall, despite Saudi assertions otherwise, local
Waelah tribal leaders protested to the government in Sanaa, claiming that
any such wall would be against their interests and demanded that work cease
on a 20-kilometer stretch.

They say that there could be no renegotiation of the existing
border between themselves and the Yam tribe on the Saudi side that was
approved by a tribal committee five years ago before being endorsed in the
Saudi-Yemeni border agreement.

Saudi authorities refuse to call the barrier along a
42-kilometer (26-mile) portion of the border with Yemen a "security wall"
opting instead for the term "cement-filled pipeline," . . .

Diplomats say Saudi Arabia is urgently stepping up border
controls after the surge of militancy last year, fueled by weapons smuggled
across thousands of kilometers of desert and mountain borders.

Other officials in the Saudi Arabian border guards have also
denied the rumors about a concrete wall. The head of border guards in Asir,
Gen. Muhammad Al-Bayali, told Al-Watan newspaper that relations between the
two countries are good and that border barriers would largely consist of
barbwire fencing and in certain places, infrared cameras.

. . .

The rumors of a wall had been spread by smugglers, he said,
worried about their illegal operations coming to an end.

Saudi Arabia frequently announces arrests and arms seizures
along the 1,800-kilometer Yemen border. At the end of December the
authorities said they had arrested 4,047 "infiltrators" and seized weapons
and ammunition in Najran province.

Ahava
02-11-2004, 06:12 AM
Originally posted by Leon
I disagree with Oh Jerusalem. Help or no help - it would be could to show the international court that there are people who are opposed to the immoral distortion of international law by those who happen to be the worst violaters of int law and human rights (i.e the PLO and the 23 Arab police states who are invited to tesitfy).

It would be a great symbolic act if you and others organise a protest!

I've just read that there are actually several demonstrations planned! Pro-israel organisation CIDI (my favourite, we support them financially and of course mentally), Zaka representatives, "Christians for Israel" and an association of the World Union of Jewish Students. But!! there are also pro-palestinian groups coming, :mad: , namely: AEL (arab european league: watch out, this group is heavily anti-semitic, the leading man is from Lebanon and probably an ex-Hezbollah activist http://www.arabeuropean.org/ ), Dutch Palestinian Comittee (where Gretta Duisenberg is a member of) and other pro-Palestinian groups.
The spokesman of CIDI fears that things will get out of hand, and he may well be right, since AEL is there too (they're worst) and the kind of people these sort of demonstrations attract anyway, this sort of things can NEVER be without burning flags, screaming anti-semitic things, etc.
To be honest, I can simply not see these demonstrations NOT getting out of hand.
But I'm still planning to go!!!

Leon
02-11-2004, 07:33 AM
All I can say Ahava is I wish I was there. I should purchase plane ticket to Holland.

Oh Jerusalem
02-11-2004, 08:04 AM
Originally posted by Leon
All I can say Ahava is I wish I was there. I should purchase plane ticket to Holland.
And a helmet.

I would personally not bother going. I would not give the court the appearance of legitimacy that these protests appear to give it.

Mediocrates
02-13-2004, 07:12 AM
12 February 2004
NOT AN "APARTHEID WALL"

Anti-Israel ideologues have a well-worn tactic of taking the latest world outrage and foisting it upon Israel, no matter how absurd the comparison or epithet. So in the 1960s Israel was branded a "colonialist power," in the 1970s Israel became an "apartheid state," in the 1990s Israel practiced "ethnic cleansing," and at the Durban conference in 2001 the Jewish state was called "genocidal."

The latest is a throwback to the '70s: Israel is accused of constructing an "apartheid wall" ?\ a term gaining currency in world media coverage of Israel's security fence. To cite just two recent examples, on Feb. 2 the Hartford Courant

(ctnow website has an absurdly intrusive registration policy)

granted op-ed space to an academic "calling for an end to U.S. aid to the Israeli apartheid system" as evidenced by Israel's "apartheid walls," and the Feb. 11 edition of The Australian

http://theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,8635931^2703,00.html

ran the headline: Israel to cut 100km off 'apartheid wall'.

Since the South African apartheid system was dismantled over ten years ago, many today are unaware of what exactly that nation's racist land policies were. The South African government established nine bantustans ?\ sectors for black segregation ?\ in the 60s and 70s, in the effort to separate non-white South Africans from whites, and from each other. To demonstrate just how fallacious the comparison to Israel's security fence is, we summarize South African apartheid policy here, alongside the facts of Israel's anti-terror security fence:

Goal of separation
Apartheid South Africa: The explicit goal of bantustans was the elimination of rights of the majority South African black population, to ensure white hegemony.

Israel's Security Fence: The explicit goal of the security fence is preventing surreptitious terrorist entry to Israel, which has caused the murder of hundreds of Israeli civilians.

Citizenship
Apartheid South Africa: A central goal of official apartheid "separate development" was to strip black South Africans of their citizenship.

Israel's Security Fence: West Bank Palestinians were never citizens of Israel. (Arabs, meanwhile, constitute 15% of the Israeli citizenry.)

Forced transfer
Apartheid South Africa: Between 1950 and 1986, about 1.5 million Africans were forcibly removed from "white" cities to rural reservations.

Israel's Security Fence: The security fence causes no transfer of population.

Opposition to nation
Apartheid South Africa: South African blacks, cordoned into bantustans, did not seek the destruction of South Africa, but rather the removal of the apartheid regime.

Israel's Security Fence: The majority of Palestinians in the territories dispute Israel's very right to exist; this has bred terror, and ultimately, the need for the fence.

Permanence
Apartheid South Africa: South African bantustans were an effort to force a permanent international status on lands, and the black population living there.

Israel's Security Fence: The security fence is a temporary defensive measure, not a border; inconveniences caused by the fence are reversible.

Colonialism
Apartheid South Africa: South African "separate development" was an outgrowth of imperialist, colonial policy.

Israel's Security Fence: Israel is "colonial" neither with regard to the source of its population (mostly refugees), nor their deep historical relationship to the land.

The Israeli security fence, therefore, differs from South African measures in its rationale, its goals, its effect, and its historical context. A far more appropriate comparison can be made, therefore, between Israel's fence and other democratic nations' border fences, such as the British "peace line"

http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/images/photos/belfast/peaceline/peaceline3.htm

in Ireland, or the US border fence

http://www-cs-students.stanford.edu/~robles/mexw/fence.jpg

with Mexico.
As media outlets continue to grant legitimacy to the "apartheid wall" myth, HonestReporting encourages subscribers to respond directly when the distortion appears in news stories or opinion pieces, debunking the latest effort to associate Israel with a racist, immoral political policy.
For additional information on the security fence, see the Israeli Foreign Ministry's website: Saving Lives: Israel's Security Fence.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0o170

FRIEDMAN ISSUES PARTIAL CORRECTION

On Feb. 5, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/05/opinion/05FRIE.html

ignored the facts of Israeli prisoner releases while making his case that Ariel Sharon directs a "conspiracy" to control Washington. That day, HonestReporting issued a communique

http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/critiques/Getting_Through_to_Reuters.asp

encouraging subscribers to write to the Times about Friedman's error.

In today's (Feb. 12) Times, Friedman

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/12/opinion/12FRIE.html

states:

My Feb. 5 column erred in saying Ariel Sharon had released no Palestinian prisoners to Mahmoud Abbas. He did. It was just too limited a release to have any impact.

By "limited release," Friedman clarifies that "none of them [were] big-name fighters" and that some were "just criminals."

This Friedman contrasted to the recent Hezbollah exchange.

http://backspin.typepad.com/backspin/2004/01/background_on_p.html

Yet even in the Hezbollah exchange, the only "big-name fighters" (Mustafa Dirani and Abdel Karim Obeid) were Lebanese. The 400 freed Palestinians included, by Israeli government insistence, no terrorists with "blood on their hands."

Moreover, in June, 2003 Israel did release a "big-name fighter": Ahmad Jabara, known as the "refrigerator bomber" for a terror attack that killed thirteen people, was released to much fanfare, front page headlines

http://www.themedialine.org/news/news_detail.asp?NewsID=2037

in the PA daily paper, and a warm public reunion with Yassir Arafat.

So while Friedman's correction is welcome, he still misrepresents Sharon's record on prisoner releases in the effort to paint the "conspiring" Israeli Prime Minister as "failing to lift a finger" to support Mahmoud Abbas.

Comments to: letters@nytimes.com

ANTI-ISRAEL POLL IN GLOBE & MAIL

The Toronto Globe & Mail

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/GIS.Servlets.Page/document/polls/pollResults?id=23871&pollid=23871&save=_save&show_vote_always=no&poll=GAMFront&hub=Front&subhub=VoteResult

had the following poll question on the homepage of its website earlier today (Feb. 12):

Should all financial and political aid to Israel be cut off until a just peace with the Palestinians is in place? ?_ Yes ?_ No

After immediate protest from HonestReporting and other media monitors that the question itself contains blatant anti-Israel bias, the Globe & Mail changed the question

<no they did not>

to include the option of cutting off aid to Palestinians.

That's a far more reasonable proposal ?\ a halt in PA funding is precisely what the EU's Anti-Fraud Office

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1076559704383&p=1008596981749

is presently considering, after evidence emerged that the PA has directly funneled EU 'political aid' funds to terror organizations.

ibrodsky
02-13-2004, 12:25 PM
Israel has decided not to participate in the ICJ proceedings re: the security fence.

I think this is the correct decision if Israel can count on the US and EU to publicly reiterate that the ICJ's involvement is inappropriate and actually harms prospects for a negotiated settlement.

But if the US and EU don't publicly reiterate that the ICJ is acting inappropriately--preferrably by loudly slamming its behavior once proceedings begin--then Israel should participate and focus on showing that Palestinians are doing nothing to dismantle terrorists groups and the fence is simply a life-saving substitute for the PA's inaction and violation of the "Roadmap."

Sure, Israel will lose at the ICJ, but it would be better to present Israel's case than to give Israel's enemies the opportunity to say Israel isn't defending the fence because there is no defense. This can be done while insisting the ICJ does not have jurisdiction and is hopelessly prejudiced.

Since world bodies reject every Israeli complaint, culminating with the evil UN refusing to support a resolution calling for protecting Israeli children(!), then Israel should use proceedings designed to attack Israel to expose the hypocrisy and evil of the murderous Arab ME and its supporters.

Ahava
02-22-2004, 03:07 PM
Originally posted by Leon
All I can say Ahava is I wish I was there. I should purchase plane ticket to Holland.

I'm going. I read there were extra cheap tickets from Israel to Amsterdam, for people who would go to the demonstration in front of the Court building. Hundreds of Israelis are coming.
Yeah! Israelis in town, can't miss that!

ibrodsky
02-25-2004, 05:43 AM
There's good news. I just checked several major news sites: CNN, Washington Post, Sky News, MSNBC, Fox News, etc. and none of them have links to stories about the discredited ICJ hearings on their front pages.

Only the discredited BBC, and Israeli and Arab news sites, are running front page stories about the Arab barbarians' complaint that the security fence hampers their ability to murder Israel women, children, and elderly as their racist, death cult ideology (Islamism) commands them.

This story is a waste of time. Only the backwards Arab/Muslim world and Western anti-Semites care what the ICJ circus rules, which of course we all know was decided before this collection of "world government" bureacrats decided to ignore the U.S. and the EU.

EDIT: Even at Arabnews.com, you have to go to the bottom of the opinion page to find anything on the ICJ hearing.

Roland
02-26-2004, 02:29 AM
Originally posted by ibrodsky
[B]This story is a waste of time. Only the backwards Arab/Muslim world and Western anti-Semites care what the ICJ circus rules, which of course we all know was decided before this collection of "world government" bureacrats decided to ignore the U.S. and the EU.[B]
Our media say, AFAIK one-voiced, ICJ won't rule anything, only give some kind of survey report according to the original request. Even then some nagging about why the fence is not machting the green line and shaking indexfingers about some infrastructural inconveniences for palestinian dwellers will be done.

Alfred
02-26-2004, 05:48 PM
I have not seen but one picture of the fence. Will it actually work? I mean, can't you just drive a few miles up the road and sneak over to blow up a Pizza parlor or something.

Anything that works is fine with me. I remember that the Berlin wall was built so that tanks could knock them down (forward) from the East going West. I hope Israel is building them facing East. :)

Mediocrates
02-26-2004, 06:02 PM
Only about 5% of it is the grey concrete wall they like to show. Most of it is double/triple layer barb/razor wire. The inside apron will be a field of softly raked sand to show footprints. There will be motion detectors, cameras and probably sound sensors. Parts will have either a revettment or a gully inside the sand apron. There will not be mines I believe.

Alfred
02-26-2004, 06:56 PM
Originally posted by Mediocrates
Only about 5% of it is the grey concrete wall they like to show. Most of it is double/triple layer barb/razor wire. The inside apron will be a field of softly raked sand to show footprints. There will be motion detectors, cameras and probably sound sensors. Parts will have either a revettment or a gully inside the sand apron. There will not be mines I believe.


Wow! Israel is not hiring former East Germans are they:)

Unlike the Berlin wall however, I fully believe in this wall. I still don't think it will help much as there appears to be too much of a free flow between the Arab areas and the Israeli-Arab areas.

But I am not on the ground and am only looking at maps.


Hope it works.

Gilgamesh
02-27-2004, 02:53 AM
Originally posted by Alfred
Wow! Israel is not hiring former East Germans are they:)

Unlike the Berlin wall however, I fully believe in this wall. I still don't think it will help much as there appears to be too much of a free flow between the Arab areas and the Israeli-Arab areas.

But I am not on the ground and am only looking at maps.


Hope it works.

The problem of free flow of Arabs has nothing to do with the fence but with the Gates and check point policy which is unefficiant in screaning would be terrorists, or stop free flow of Arabs. The reasons for that are mostly political ones. We Israelis are much too soft with the Arabs. Timid and sensetive to their "humanitarian needs" instead of sending them to their "worring and caring" Arab brotherens in Jorden or Egypt for "humanitarian" needs. Of course terrorists routinely abuse these humanitarians concessions of ourse against us. In this sense, the fence is indeed, waste of time and money.