Love of the Land: A sheer blindfold for show

A sheer blindfold for show

Sarah Honig
Another Tack/JPost
07 January '10

Last week's High Court decision to open Route 443 to both Jewish and Arab traffic generated lots of squawk. However, another decision, only months earlier, to forbid "mixed" traffic failed to excite much interest. The petitions in both cases were nearly identical, yet the rulings appear completely contradictory. One common denominator, though, does stand out - both decisions are detrimental to Jews. No way can the High Court of Justice be accused of inconsistency - not even when it blatantly applies diametrically different logic to different litigants.

Nearly a decade ago the IDF banned residents of settlements like Dolev and Talmon from using the highway that bypasses Beitunya - a village near Ramallah with quite a murderous record. The second intifada raged then and the defense establishment reckoned that, for their own safety, it would be better for Jews not to make their way to Jerusalem via a route adjacent to hostile hamlets. The joker in the pack is that the road in question is a detour ordained directly after the advent of Osloite bliss to deliberately keep Jews from chafing against their new "peace partners."

The long and the short of it is that the road constructed to protect Jews from terrorist predations was closed to Jews - to protect them from terrorist predations. Some 6,000 residents of the Binyamin region's westerly section were therefore forced to get to Jerusalem by travelling in the opposite direction. What should have been a half-hour car ride was prolonged to at least an hour-and-a-half. Instead of going eastward, they were forced to travel west and then south via a convoluted course to Modi'in, from whence they enter Route 443 and, at long last, turn east toward the capital. A 10-kilometer drive was effectively quadrupled.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: A sheer blindfold for show

Love of the Land: Judaism and Democracy for Israel

Judaism and Democracy for Israel

Moshe Feiglin
Manhigut Yehudit
17 Tevet, 5770
03 January '10

One of our ideas was to block Israel's major Tel-Aviv – Jerusalem highway in the Latrun area. It was summer, 5755 (1995) and the Zo Artzeinu movement that I headed was set to block major roads throughout Israel in an attempt to stop Oslo in its track. We were on the lookout for creative ways to get the public to understand the dangers of the impending collapse. We pored over maps of Israel and found the point where the broad Tel-Aviv – Jerusalem highway exits the boundaries of the "Green Line" and cuts through "Occupied Territory." Our idea was to declare a new state there.

I was reminded of that episode when I heard of the Israel High Court decision to allow Arabs from Judea and Samaria to travel on highway 443, another major artery between Tel-Aviv and Jerusalem.

I don't understand why everybody is so upset. After all, immediately upon retiring from his position as Chief Justice of the High Court, Aharon Barak hurried to explain that he does not see Israel as a Jewish state, but rather, as a state of all its citizens. If that is so, how can we prevent Arabs from traveling on highway 443 on an ethnic basis? Furthermore, this distressing decision is not the first of its kind. What is the difference between highway 443 and road 557, where Meir Chai, may G-d avenge his blood, was recently murdered after the road was opened to Arab traffic? 443 is in the "occupied territories" and so is 557. Israelis travel on 443 and they travel on 557. If road 557 is opened to the Arabs of Shechem and Tul Karem even though it is clear that it will lead to the murder of Israelis, why is 443 any different?

From a purely judicial standpoint and according to the principles that Israel's courts have established, the High Court decision is logical and predictable. But let us admit the truth. The reason that the issue created such uproar is because, unlike road 557 that only endangers "settlers," highway 443 serves the illusion that the "Separation Fence" along its route provides the Israelis inside with a protected space. And then the High Court comes along and reminds all the Israelis traveling the modern highway between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem that they, too, are nothing more than "settlers."

If Justices Beinish and Fogelman had anticipated the public outrage with their decision, they may have decided otherwise. It seems that from the heights of their enlightened ivory tower, they do not really perceive the depth of disgust that the High Court has created in ever-widening spheres of the general public.

(Read full article)

Love of the Land: Judaism and Democracy for Israel

Love of the Land: "Jewish Only Road" Falsehood Corrected

"Jewish Only Road" Falsehood Corrected

CAMERA/Media Analysis
05 January '10

After dispatching a story that referred to Israel's (non-existent) "practice of reserving some roads for Jews," the Associated Press modified its wording to correctly describe the roads, which in actuality are open to Israeli citizens and residents of all religions and ethnicities.

Before the AP caught and corrected its mistake, though, the Boston Globe published the early version of the story, along with its error. To its credit, the newspaper quickly cleared the record with a correction after CAMERA brought the inaccuracy to the attention of editors there.

The initial AP story, a December 29 dispatch by Amy Teibel asserted:

Israel's Supreme Court ordered the military on Tuesday to allow Palestinians to travel on the part of a major highway that runs through the West Bank, handing Palestinians their biggest victory yet against Israel's practice of reserving some roads for Jews.

Some hours later, on Dec. 30, the AP sent out the same story with corrected language:

(Read full post)

Love of the Land: "Jewish Only Road" Falsehood Corrected

Love of the Land: High Court of Justice Highway Decision And Intellectual Dishonesty

High Court of Justice Highway Decision And Intellectual Dishonesty

Dr. Aaron Lerner
IMRA
Weekly Commentary
31 December 09

“We told the IDF to come up with effective security arrangements”.

That’s the excuse that the High Court of Justice justices will tell themselves when Palestinian terrorists exploit their ruling to restore access to Highway 443.

But it will just be that.

An excuse.

The narrative of the Israeli Leftists celebrating the reopening of Highway 443 to common Palestinian use is that Israel cynically justified their exercise of the right of eminent domain to build the road by noting that Palestinians would benefit from using it and then barring them from the highway.

But Israel had no intention to bar Palestinian access.

Palestinians did, in fact, use the road alongside Israelis.

And this situation could have continued to this very day.

If the Palestinians didn’t start exploiting access to 443 in order to murder Israelis.

But they did.

Let’s make this clear.

Palestinian access to 443 wasn’t limited as some form of “collective punishment”.

It was done because Israeli security services couldn’t come up with a workable, reliable, alternative that would keep Israel’s second most heavily traveled route between the Coastal Plain and Jerusalem safe for Israeli drivers.

Back to the court ruling.

Now these judges may genuinely think that Palestinian use of Highway 443 is more important than the Israeli lives that could very well be sacrificed if their ruling is implemented.

But that’s not what they said.

Instead they covered their backsides by instructing the IDF to come up with effective security arrangements.

Now the onus is on the IDF and the other security agencies to bring the problem back to the court, explaining honestly and vividly the security risks their “solutions” carry with them.

Love of the Land: High Court of Justice Highway Decision And Intellectual Dishonesty

Love of the Land: AP Photo Caption Errs on Roads "For Jews"

AP Photo Caption Errs on Roads "For Jews"

TS
CAMERA/Snapshots
30 December 09

Rehashing an old canard (see here and here) that there are West Bank roads that are for "Jews only," an AP photo caption from yesterday reads:

FILE - In this Friday, Jan. 4, 2008 file photo, Palestinian, Israeli and foreign protesters run from tear gas fired by Israeli troops, bottom, during a demonstration on Highway 443 near the West Bank village of Beit Horon outside Jerusalem. Israel's Supreme Court ordered the military on Tuesday Dec. 29, 2009 to allow Palestinians to travel on the part of Highway 443 that runs through the West Bank, handing Palestinians their biggest victory yet against Israel's practice of reserving some roads for Jews. (AP Photo/Sebastian Scheiner)

As documented earlier by CAMERA, while there are some West Bank roads prohibited to Palestinian traffic, there are no roads either in Israel or the West Bank reserved only for Jews, as this caption claims. The difference is significant -- while most Palestinians may not travel on Highway 443 (this will change in the next five months) and certain other West Bank roads, Israeli Arabs -- Christians and Muslims -- most certainly may.

AP's Amy Teibel accurately described the restriction in her article yesterday, saying that "Israel has created a system of roads in the West Bank restricted to Israeli use." Moreover, AP corrected this very same error last year.

See here and here for other recent AP photo miscaptions.

Love of the Land: AP Photo Caption Errs on Roads "For Jews"