It is a waste of Israeli money in a time where the country’s economy is in trouble because of the intafada.

Simply said, no solution to the mideast problem can depend on “psychology” There needs to be physical separation between the parties (NOT apartheid. The Palestinians will have their state).

The Israeli wall, which has stopped 90% of suicide bombings, has been declared illegal by the Hague.

And then there’s this priceless quote:

“The court’s head judge, Shi Jiuyong of China, said in the ruling:
‘The wall … cannot be justified by military exigencies or by the requirements of national security or public order.”

I guess he forgot about a certain other wall in his country.

From: gutrumbles.blog-city.com

And then there’s this priceless quote:
“The court’s head judge, Shi Jiuyong of China, said in the ruling: ‘The wall … cannot be justified by military exigencies or by the requirements of national security or public order.”

I guess he forgot about a certain other wall in his country.”

From http://www.gutrumbles.blog-city.com

Go away.

When terrorists shoot (point blank!) an 8-month-pregnant Jewish woman and her 4 little girls, there is absolute silence from your organizations.

The security fence is a temporary and nonviolent way to reduce terrorism. The fence is a proportional response to the ongoing Palestinian Campaign of terror. When the terrorism stops, the fence can be taken down.

The route of the fence was designed to save the lives of innocent people. Israel has the right and the duty to protect its citizens from terrorist attacks.

Since the erection of the security fence there has been a 90% decrease in the number of attacks against Israelis-from an average of 26 attacks per year before the fence to three attacks after the fence was built.

The Israeli Supreme Court has ruled that areas of the fence must be adjusted in order to relieve Palestinian hardship. Unlike any other country in the region, Israel has an independent judiciary. Israel, a democracy committed to the rule of law, will comply with the Israeli Supreme Court’s decision.

The security fence is not a wall, as the court states. The majority of the fence is constructed of barb wire-8.5 kilometers of the fence consists of concrete slabs, in order to prevent sniper fire.

There are many disputed security fences around the world-India has constructed a fence in the contested area of Kashmir, and Saudi Arabia has constructed a barrier in an undefined area along the Saudi Arabia-Yemen border-yet only Israel’s security fence has prompted an International Court of Justice ruling. See this website: (www.washingtoninstitute.org/distribution…)

Israel is willing to make painful sacrifices for peace. Israel has made peace with Jordan and Egypt, and gave up the entire Sinai-land larger than the current state of Israel.

And then there is the issue of media bias against Israel.

In a study last year, the media watchdog HonestReporting found that in “100 percent of headlines” when Reuters wrote about Israeli acts of violence, Israel was emphasized as the first word; also, an active voice was used, often without explaining that the “victim” may have been a gunman. A typical headline was: “Israeli Troops Shoot Dead Palestinian in W. Bank” (July 3, 2003). By contrast, when Palestinians attacked Israelis (ALMOST ALWAYS CIVILIANS!), Reuters usually avoided naming the perpetrator. For example: “New West Bank Shooting Mars Truce” (July 1, 2003). In many cases, the headline was couched in a passive voice.

Sometimes, Reuters presents unreliable information as though it were undoubtedly true. Most people are unlikely to notice this. For example, Reuters will note that “a doctor at the hospital said the injured Palestinian was unarmed” — when in fact the doctor couldn’t possibly have known this, since he wasn’t present at the gunfight. But because he is a doctor, Reuters is suggesting to readers that his word is necessarily authoritative. Unfortunately, Reuters headlines and text are used unchanged by newspaper editors because they assume it is professional, balanced copy, which doesn’t need any further editing.

As Ehud Ya’ari, Israeli television’s foremost expert on Palestinian affairs, put it: “The vast majority of information of every type coming out of the area is being filtered through Palestinian eyes. Cameras are angled to show a tainted view of the Israeli army’s actions and never focus on Palestinian gunmen. Written reports focus on the Palestinian version of events. And even those Palestinians who don’t support the intifada dare not show or describe anything embarrassing to the Palestinian Authority, for fear they may provoke the wrath of Arafat’s security forces.”

But things may well be improving. Lately, with a new Jerusalem bureau chief, Reuters has taken some steps to ensure greater balance. For example, it no longer claims Hamas’s goal is merely “to set up an independent state in the West Bank and Gaza” (which it is not), but instead writes that Hamas is “sworn to Israel’s destruction” (which it is).

The solution to all of this seems simple enough. Get rid of that crusty ass terrorist Arafat, decapitate Hamas, and democratize Palestine…no biggie.