The Kangaroo court has ruled that it is illegal to protect Israelis.
The International Court of Justice will rule on Friday that the barrier Israel is building inside the West Bank is illegal and should be removed, a leaked copy of the ruling showed.
The leaked report did not mention Israel's claim that the fence is necessary to stop Palestinian suicide bombers from crossing the West Bank into Israeli cities, CNN reported.
The Israeli anti-terror barrier was called ‘unlawful’ by the International Court of Justice before the trial even began. What is ‘unlawful’ is this sad mockery of justice which is condemning victims of horrific violence for attempting to protect themselves by means of a non violent measure. The court seemingly does not care that fewer Israelis and Palistinians have been killed since the construction of the barrier.
Ha'aretz has reported that the court has ruled that the route of the fence is not necessary to attain security aims.
Ha'aretz also provides a pocket guide to the West Bank barrier.
The court has seemingly refused to take note of Israel's defense, namely:
*The fence has already proven itself a dramatically effective barrier against suicide attacks.
*The fence would not have been built, were it not for the repeated and deadly attacks of Palestinian suicide bombers.
*The legality of the fence has been upheld by Israel's highest court.
*The fence is temporary and is not intended as a permanent border.
*Israel will seriously consider the grievances of Palestinians, who retain the right to appeal
Let's not forget, the Palistinians could have had a state in 2000 without any fence. (See: CAMP DAVID AND TABA: What did Israel offer?)
Worth Reading
Supreme Injustice by Jerusalem Post's Caroline Glick.
The Supreme Court places higher value on Palestinian convenience than on Jewish lives.The pattern of Palestinian rejectionism: by Yossi Klein Halevi
The tragedy of the International Court's ruling on the security fence.... is that it will reinforce Palestinians' faith in their own innocence and victimization, and preclude a self-examination of their responsibility in maintaining the conflict.
UPDATE
A PDF of the entire ICJ ruling can be found here.
Kesher Talk have a page detailing many other fences around the world which should also be taken down
Why is Israel's security more important that that of Palestinians? Why cant you acknowledge that both Jews and Palestinians are victims?
Posted by: call a spade a spade | July 10, 2004 at 17:46
Why is Israel's security more important than that of Palestinians? Why cant you acknowledge that both Jews and Palestinians are victims?
Posted by: call a spade a spade | July 10, 2004 at 17:47
RE: Why is Israel's security more important than that of Palestinians?
Where did I say that Israel's security is more important than Israel's? The court's ruling is demonstrating that Palestinian convenience is more important than Israel's security.
The fact that I linked to an article demonstrating what Israel offered at Camp David and Taba (rejected outright by Arafat without any counter offer) demonstrates that I do understand that the Palestinians are also suffering. If I did not believe that they were also victims then I would never have linked to something showing what Israel offered (i.e. I would love them to have their own state alongside a secure Israel). But their leaders' repeated rejectionism only serves to exacerpate their suffering.
Oslo demonstrated the drastic effects Israel were willing to take to help the Palestinians with security. Both sides have a right to security. A ruling against the barrier, which doesn't mention the necessity of the barrier to stop suicide bombings, is a ruling that promotes Palestinian convenience above Israeli lives.
(And the very fact that I have mentioned convenience acknowledges that the barrier does inconvenience them. But it doesn't kill them. It is a non violent and temporary measure. It will come down when the terror stops.
Posted by: Steve | July 10, 2004 at 18:47
If he didn't think that the Palestinians also suffer, then I am a loss for words for why this neutral article was run on his site.
Posted by: Anti-UN | July 10, 2004 at 21:06
Sorry...this article...
http://supernatural.blogs.com/weblog/2004/06/middle_east_pea.html
Posted by: Anti-UN | July 10, 2004 at 21:07
"Why is Israel's security more important that that of Palestinians? Why cant you acknowledge that both Jews and Palestinians are victims? "
Surely you will agree that the ICJ ruling is only acknowledging that the Palis are victims? How, from the court hearing, can you argue that both sides are being viewed as victims, as you claim you would like people to acknowledge.
Posted by: Harambe | July 12, 2004 at 16:04
Why don'y you mention any of the exact specific details of the Pali sufferinmg? Israel must move the fence to the borders of before 67. Israel has no right to cut into the Palestinian land and will face the consequences of doing so.
Posted by: Ricardo | July 12, 2004 at 16:18
Ummm...Ricardo...learn to spell mate
Posted by: Anti-UN | July 13, 2004 at 07:52