High Court rules out 30km stretch in separation fence route

[golani]

Guys, do not forget that jews are often jews worst enemies

When Jerusalem was besieged by roman legions, 2 jewish factions succeeded to fight each other behind the walls ...

short joke: a jewish shipwrecked man is found by a boat

The captain comes to visit the different man made buildings

captain: how come 2 synagogues??

Shipwrecked man with much despise: aaahh, to THAT one, I never go...

[sharonbn]

ok lets put this into plain english so that some rather thickheaded individuals can understand what the Supreme Court did here. It ruled that the lives of Israeli citizens aren't as important as the comfort of the enemy. I hope all three and only three of them take that next bus.

Maybe the supreme court ruled that an alternative route of the fence will retain the same security level, while lessening the impact on Pals? Why do these two factors have to collide? Maybe the supreme court ruled that a better compromise between the two factors is achievable?

Maybe what the supreme court "did here" was to say to the gov't that it cannot bluntly and blindly trample over human rights of civilians, all under the pretext of national security. national security cannot be the justification for EVERYTHING. If it was, we could just shoot the Pals and be done with it. However, no one believes that national security justifies shooting the entire Palestinian people (I sincerely hope no one believes so).

So there is a red line of counter action and defense measurements that even national security cannot justify. The supreme court did not cancel the entire fence. Moreover, the supreme court accepted the fence as a legitimate solution to terrorism. However, the supreme court said that a certain segment of the fence crossed the red line of violation of human rights and the route needs to be altered. The red line is of course, a subjective matter. The judges ruled according to their understanding and opinion.

[sharonbn]

Guys, do not forget that jews are often jews worst enemies

Yes it is true. the only Israeli head of state to be assasinated, was killed by a Jew...

[Oh Jerusalem]

Maybe what the supreme court "did here" was to say to the gov't that it cannot bluntly and blindly trample over human rights of civilians, all under the pretext of national security.

Pretext, a favorite word of the left, used to turn facts into lies.

pre-text (pree'tekst) n.
1. something put forward to conceal a true
purpose or object; ostensible reason;
excuse.
2. the misleading appearance or behavior
assumed with this intention; subterfuge.

National secuirty is not a pretext. The fence works.

Now, Sharon, calculate a formula for us. One Israeli live for 2 Arab fields, half a field or 5 olive trees perhaps? Name your price.

national security cannot be the justification for EVERYTHING.

It isn't. I does justify, however, trampling on the boor Balestinian enemy when it's the best solution at hand and the most immediate path to take to get this fence up and in place.

If it was, we could just shoot the Pals and be done with it.

If they were equivalent, then you're right. We're wasting our money. Lead is cheaper.

But they're not equivalent. And the reason why the fence is going up is because of their shooting us - not us shooting them.

However, no one believes that national security justifies shooting the entire Palestinian people (I sincerely hope no one believes so).

See the left's idea of moral equivalence? defend yourself, chop their property in half to do so and it's like mowing thousands of them down with machine guns.

So there is a red line of counter action and defense measurements that even national security cannot justify. The supreme court did not cancel the entire fence.

According to numerous military analysts that all of us could watch last night on TV, this is a setback to Israel's security and an endangerment to Israel's population from the ongoing Oslo war which the Arabs started 4 years ago.

Moreover, the supreme court accepted the fence as a legitimate solution to terrorism.

Whoopee!

However, the supreme court said that a certain segment of the fence crossed the red line of violation of human rights and the route needs to be altered. The red line is of course, a subjective matter. The judges ruled according to their understanding and opinion.

And their ignorance in security matters.

Watch what this precedent will lead to. Appeals for every 20 meters of fence line and more dead and wounded - all courtesy of the humanity of our supreme wisemen.

And what do you know! .................... This just in.........................

High Court Orders Halt to Fence Around Har Homa
13:30 Jul 01, '04 / 12 Tammuz 5764

(IsraelNN.com) The High Court of Justice issued a temporary restraining order today against continued construction of Israel's security fence in the area around Har Homa, in Jerusalem. The order was issued in response to a petition filed by Arab residents of a village to be on the side of the fence included with Har Homa. The residents said that they did not want to be on the "Jewish" side of the fence, which, they claimed cut them off from their families on the opposite side.



And this in earlier in the day:

High Alert in Jerusalem
10:55 Jul 01, '04 / 12 Tammuz 5764


(IsraelNN.com) Jerusalem police have raised the alert level in response to intelligence indicating terrorists are on their way to carry out an attack on Jews in one of Israel's cities.

The checkpoints around Jerusalem are closed and more checkpoints have been added at the entrances to the capital. Police and soldiers are out in force in areas that may be potential targets.



Kol hamerachem al haachzarim, besofo yachzer al harachamim - whoever will have mercy upon the cruel in the end will be cruel to the merciful.

Stupid Jewish judges and their admirers.

[Oh Jerusalem]

Yes it is true. the only Israeli head of state to be assasinated,

... who was one of our worst enemies.

Chad Gadya.

[Binyamin]

Maybe the supreme court ruled that an alternative route of the fence will retain the same security level, while lessening the impact on Pals? Why do these two factors have to collide? Maybe the supreme court ruled that a better compromise between the two factors is achievable?

Which, of course, they have no business deciding. The first is for the army, the second for the government.

[golani]

... who was one of our worst enemies.

Chad Gadya.

Oh jerusalem,I do not agree

If you think that Rabin was our worst enemy,that is overeacted
He was a war hero, a great general and he wanted peace
He was fooled and tricked by Arafat but still, he was a great guy

[Oh Jerusalem]

If you think that Rabin was our worst enemy,that is overeacted

I said he was one of our worst enemies. I will clarify that by restating that he was one of our own worst enemies.

He was a war hero, a great general

Are you sure?

Exploding the myth of Yitzhak Rabin
Ben Shapiro
November 5, 2003

Eight years ago this week, the fate of Israel was sealed. On Nov. 4, 1995, Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated by Yigal Amir. The murder was tragic, not just because Rabin suffered an untimely death but because Rabin became sacrosanct. The illusory image of Rabin as the tough sabra willing to negotiate with the Arabs, as the invincible general turned peacemaker, as the tolerant, wise leader of the Jewish state, was forever enshrined in the public consciousness. Rabin's political inheritance, the Oslo Accords, became unassailable.

On the anniversary of his death, it is now more necessary than ever to explode the myth of Yitzhak Rabin. As long as Rabin's myth exists, it will be impossible to move beyond his failed policies: negotiation with terror, persecution of the Israeli right wing, apologies for Jewish existence.

Rabin was no "great general." As Uri Milstein's "The Rabin File" explains, Yitzhak Rabin bears responsibility for many of the most fouled-up military operations in Israeli history. On Dec. 9, 1947, during the War of Independence, Rabin took charge of the Jerusalem sector of the Palmach (the elite striking force of the Haganah, precursor to the Israeli Defense Force). Rabin's task was to secure Jerusalem and access to the city. Under his watch, Israeli forces met with disaster after disaster. The substantial losses incurred by Rabin's soldiers led the United States to withdraw support for the establishment of the Jewish state on March 19.

Rabin's military record extends beyond incompetence. The celebrated soldier actually fled the field of battle in 1948. On April 20, a food and supply convoy set out for Jerusalem. The area fell under Rabin's jurisdiction. His forces failed to secure the road, and the convoy was ambushed. When the ambush occurred, several officers attempted to lead counterattacks; Rabin did not. Instead, he personally drove away for reinforcements. After requesting reinforcements, Rabin did not return to fight with his men -- he went to sleep.

One of Rabin's proudest military moments came on June 22, 1948. Menachem Begin's Irgun, another Israeli military group, was in the midst of negotiating a pact with David Ben-Gurion under which Irgun would join the new Israeli Defense Force. Meanwhile, the Irgun had loaded a ship, the Altalena, with weapons and Jewish fighters (many of them Holocaust survivors) to join the IDF. Ben-Gurion ordered that the Altalena be fired upon. Rabin carried out his orders to the letter. Later, Rabin bragged how he had "bumped them off on the deck of the burning ship and while they were trying to swim to safety." Sixteen Jews were killed, many shot while swimming to shore.

So much for the "great general." More importantly, however, Rabin's true political legacy -- the diabolical "peace process" -- must be exposed. Before his election in 1992, Rabin promised the Israeli public that he would never negotiate with arch-terrorist Yasser Arafat or his murderous Palestine Liberation Organization. Yet before the Israeli elections, in May 1992, eight Labor Party members, led by master-appeaser Yossi Beilin, met with Abu Mazen (then the head of the PLO "political wing") in Cairo. This was against Israeli law. According to Yehoshua HaMe'iri, a journalist then stationed in Cairo, "what was discussed was an attempt to ensure a Labor Party victory in the elections." A quid pro quo was made: Labor would work on behalf of "Palestinians" if the PLO influenced Israeli Arabs to vote Labor.

After the election, the Rabin government immediately cracked down on Israelis opposing the Oslo Accords. Moshe Feiglin, now the head of the Manhigut Yehudit block within Likud, organized peaceful mass protests. Rabin retaliated by putting Feiglin on trial for "raising fear among the public." At future protests, the Israeli police were used as a political organization, blocking protesters and sometimes assaulting them.

It is vital to remember that before Rabin's murder, his peace program had been overwhelmingly rejected by the Israeli public. By April 1994, Rabin's approval rating had dropped to 41 percent. Before his assassination, Rabin was trailing anti-Oslo Likud candidate Benjamin Netanyahu by a wide margin. Only after his murder did the public glorify Rabin.

After Rabin's death, the witch hunt shifted into high gear. The Israeli right wing found itself in a position akin to that of the American right wing after the Oklahoma City bombing. Eight years later, the madness has not ceased. The government has shut down the radio station Arutz Sheva, a right-wing news service; actions are underway to shut down Arutz Sheva's Internet site as well.

Yitzhak Rabin did not deserve to be murdered. He simply deserved to lose the public trust. He deserved to live out his life in obscurity rather than dying a martyr for a detestable cause.

and he wanted peace

We all do.

He was fooled and tricked by Arafat

He tried to fool an entire country and succeeded for the most part. Spare me the mushy stuff! He totally lied during his election campaign, painting himself as a moderate dove. Once in office, he stuck Oslo on all of us, proposed returning the Golan, entered the disasterous Oslo accords, brought in Arafat's army from Tunisia and gave them automatic weapons.

He wasn't fooled. He was a fool.

but still, he was a great guy

The myth lives on. Light a candle.

[RichardP]

Yes, Rabin was all those things mentioned and yes, he was a great man. Nonetheless, he, like many was duped by Arafat, but the repercussions of his short-sightedness are still felt today. Then of course there’s Barak, but let’s not go there.

[Gilgamesh]

Maybe the supreme court ruled that an alternative route of the fence will retain the same security level, while lessening the impact on Pals? Why do these two factors have to collide? Maybe the supreme court ruled that a better compromise between the two factors is achievable?

And what made the honorble judge, a judge of military matters? Can the laws of science can be changed by law? Can mountains be leveled overnight, by court rulling? Who said a "compromise" is practicle? The high court?

The promblem, the issue of the debate, is not the best route for the fence. But on the high court of justice execive intervention into areas outside his jurastiction. There is no more 3 seperate branches of goverment, but only one: The high court. The people are no directly electing the judges, and so it should be, but the judges do not undertake responsibility for their misdoings, and are not limited to their own field.

Arabs who feel "harmed" by the fence, are fully entitled for compansation. This is the only high courts ONLY democratic job, in the fence issue. The court must not have any say about where to build the fence.

According to the law, the goverment has a right to seize any property the goverment thinks it needs for the security of the people. The police can even pull you out of the car or take over your apartment in short notice. The only provision is that you are entitled to compansation.

This is the difference between a democratic country and Israel, where the high court physicly dictates goverment policy. As from now, Israel is no longer a real democracy, since Judge Aharon Barak named himself in practice, a sole dictator.

Maybe what the supreme court "did here" was to say to the gov't that it cannot bluntly and blindly trample over human rights of civilians, all under the pretext of national security. national security cannot be the justification for EVERYTHING.

I thought leftis value life and human rights above everything and with full equality among men. I guess I was wrong. Jews are not entitled, by court rulling for human right, aspecialy the right to live. No doubt, Arab comfort out weighs Jews right for life. How disgusting. Again, the court has a right to call the ammount of conpansation, not intervine in national security.

It is true, that the worst crimes in human history, were made under the false "national security" mentale. Is the fence, one of those crimes?

Again, the problem is not "natioanl security", but the reality. The left, can't deal with reality and don't have the intelectual intergrity to admit it. Pity. So they hurle absured charges at the messures and decision. They hate our situation the same like us, normal people, but are afraid to admit the consequances for this situation, the things that have to be done in REALITY.

If it was, we could just shoot the Pals and be done with it. However, no one believes that national security justifies shooting the entire Palestinian people (I sincerely hope no one believes so).

There you go! You admit that Israel's actions are not arbitary but derived from certain logic.

If every Arab you insist on calling "palestinians" would lift his arm against a Jew, he should be shot and killed. Against leftist theoris, most Arabs do not do so, and live. You see? This is the defenition between reaction to a given situation we did not chose, like war, and abusing national security as an excuse for crimes.

So there is a red line of counter action and defense measurements that even national security cannot justify. The supreme court did not cancel the entire fence. Moreover, the supreme court accepted the fence as a legitimate solution to terrorism. However, the supreme court said that a certain segment of the fence crossed the red line of violation of human rights and the route needs to be altered.

When the court had not right or authority, in the first place, to pass any judgement of this sort.

The red line is of course, a subjective matter. The judges ruled according to their understanding and opinion.

The problem has nothign to do with the fence, and all to do with the danger to democracy posed by the high court for justice, who constantly disrupting the fine line the seperate the branches of goverment. This is a clear and present danger to Israel's democacy, that one man thinks he has the last word in anything, and the other branches are totally expandable.

[alexbmn]

the comfort of the enemy should be absolutely of no matter to Israel. I'm 100 percent sure that no other court in any other country in the world would make a similar decision. The fense is a purely defensive measure. Any delay in its completion directly endangers Israeli lives. Its so far away from " a red line " its not funny. Its not even worthy of discussion.

[alexbmn]

NEW YORK—At a press conference Monday, American Civil Liberties Union officials announced that the organization will go to court to defend a neo-Nazi group's right to burn down ACLU headquarters(with ACLU memebers inside)

Ok this is from the Onion. But that's what happens in Israel every day multiplied by factor of a thousand.

[Binyamin]

Exploding the myth of Yitzhak Rabin
Ben Shapiro
November 5, 2003

One of Rabin's proudest military moments came on June 22, 1948. Menachem Begin's Irgun, another Israeli military group, was in the midst of negotiating a pact with David Ben-Gurion under which Irgun would join the new Israeli Defense Force. Meanwhile, the Irgun had loaded a ship, the Altalena, with weapons and Jewish fighters (many of them Holocaust survivors) to join the IDF. Ben-Gurion ordered that the Altalena be fired upon. Rabin carried out his orders to the letter. Later, Rabin bragged how he had "bumped them off on the deck of the burning ship and while they were trying to swim to safety." Sixteen Jews were killed, many shot while swimming to shore.

And then when he is killed, the left is in total shock that a JEW can kill another JEW for political reasons!

[The real reason for their shock is because they thought they could force anything on the country and be safe because they were also Jewish, after all. It was a terrible shock when they found out that it wasn't true.]

[alexbmn]

here's a shocker. Sharon apparently was quite angry after the attack and demanded an artillery response, and of course (only in this one country which occupies a different dimension) the MILITARY USED POLITICAL arguments to talk him out of it.

[sharonbn]

PM Sharon: Supreme Court ruling will help in Hague

Ynet - July 4th. - The supreme court ruling which ordered the gov't to change the route of the defensive wall will help Israel in its legal battle in Int'l court in Hague, said Israeli PM, Sharon, this Morning (Sunday) at the beginning of the gov't weekly meeting.

Four days after the ruling, in which the court acknowledged the importance of the fence as a security measurement, but disqualified the route in the Jerusalem area, PM finds positive aspects in the decision, in preparation for the upcoming int'l court's ruling.

Sharon: "In view of the position and reputation of the Israeli Supreme Court and its head, Aharaon Barak in the world, the court's decision will help to strengthen Israel legal claim and to fend off accusations in Hague int'l court." Sharon added that he ordered the ministry of defense and IDF to devise a new route for the fence.

In contrast to the PM, the ministry of defense and IDF found mostly negative aspects to the court's ruling and stressed that the decision will set the progress back three months and will cost the Israeli tax payer. The head of the fence administration Colonel (reserve) Dani Tirza declared the day of the ruling "black day" and was disciplined by the attorney general, Mazuz.

* translated from Ynet