From Israel - And So It Goes...

Arlene Kushner..
02 September '12..





First, please, see my article, up today on American Thinker. It takes on JStreet's advocacy of the "two state solution," but can be utilized in critiquing that "solution" beyond what JStreet says:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/a_seriously_wrongheaded_letter_from_j_street.html

~~~~~~~~~~
I wrote yesterday about tensions emerging in the US-Israel relationship, and noted some hot words that allegedly passed between PM Netanyahu and US Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro, on the issue of Obama's policy on Iran. There have since been some denials of this report (second hand: of the "I spoke to the PMO's office and was told it never happened" variety).

While I cannot verify with certainty the veracity of that report, I would like to move beyond it to a statement (this one verifiable) by a US official that certainly exposes the light between the US and Israel:

Last week, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey made a statement indicating that while Israel could delay Iran's nuclear program, it could not stop it. Then he said:

"I don't want to be complicit if they [Israel] choose to do it."

Complicit? Complicit? The clear sense meaning of this is being associated with or participating in a wrongful act. This is how Dempsey sees the matter? And how Obama has Israel's back?

Why is it that the Obama administration would prefer not to be associated with any Israel military action against Iran? Do they hope to avoid Iranian retaliation against their installations? Or to assure voters that they had nothing to do with it? Or both?

~~~~~~~~~~

A senior Israeli government official cited today in the JPost, who called Dempsey's words "strange," further said:

"These comments are also a bit strange because they were said in a week when the IAEA released a report that seems to confirm all of Israel's concerns, and during a week where the international effort to isolate Iran and subject it to international pressure took a severe blow with the Non-Aligned Movement in Tehran."

Migron, the legal system, and the threat to Israeli democracy.

Caroline Glick..
carolineglick.com..
31 August '12..




By Tuesday, 50 Israeli families will have been tossed out of their homes in their village of Migron, which is set for destruction.

They will not be dispossessed because they unlawfully squatted on someone else's property.

The residents of Migron will be tossed from their homes - on the order of the Supreme Court - because Attorney-General Yehuda Weinstein and his associates believe they are above the law. And due to this opinion, Weinstein and his associates refuse to recognize the sovereign authority of Israel's government or to act in accordance with its lawful decisions.

The media have alternatively presented the story of Migron's imminent destruction as a story about a power struggle between so-called settlers and the IDF, whose forces will be called upon to eject them from their homes; or as a struggle between the Israeli residents of Judea and Samaria and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu; or as a struggle between the radical leftists from Peace Now and its fellow foreign government-financed NGOs, and the residents of Judea and Samaria.

These portrayals are reasonable on the narrow level of day to day developments in the story of Migron's struggle. But on a more fundamental level, the story of Migron and its pending destruction is the story of the power struggle between Israel's unelected, radical legal fraternity represented by the attorney-general, the State Prosecution he directs and the Supreme Court on the one hand, and Israel's elected governments - from the Right and from the Left - on the other.

Migron is the latest casualty of this struggle. The legal fraternity's bid to wrest sovereign power of governance from Israel's elected leadership threatens our democracy. In its continuous assault on governing authority, the legal fraternity renders it difficult if not, as a practical matter, impossible, for the government - any government - to govern.

It is important at the outset to recognize that there is a world of difference between the rule of law and the rule of lawyers. The fate of Migron, which was sealed on Wednesday with the decision of the Supreme Court, sitting as the High Court of Justice, to remove all 50 families from their homes, is a legal atrocity.

Arlene Kushner - From Israel: Not Pretty

Arlene Kushner..
30 August '12..

Really ugly, if truth be told. That's the situation in Migron. The High Court released its decision yesterday:

The residents -- all of them, including the 17 who re-purchased the land on which their homes are sitting -- must be evacuated by next Tuesday. By September 11, all buildings must be razed except for those on the plot of land that had been re-purchased.

Once again, if I am a bit vague on details it's not a reflection of insufficient effort on my part to secure information, so much as a function of garbled reports. This is in particular with regard to those 17 families. The court acknowledged that they did make the purchase legally, but chose anyway to deny them the right to live on that land that they own. This apparently has something to do with this ownership not complying with the original plans for that area -- which sounds terribly like legal double talk to me.

In fact there seems some internal contradiction in the ruling with regard to whether the homes of those 17 families will be razed.

See Michael Freund in "Tyranny Begins in Migron," on the rights of these people:

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=283111

~~~~~~~~~~

This ruling is an outrage of considerable proportions. There are three aspects to it.

One has to do with the automatic assumption that the land on which the community was built is "Palestinian" land just because Peace Now came to court with an Arab making claims, even though the ownership by this Arab or his family has never been legally documented.

Two has to do with the re-purchase of some part of that land. Even though the legality of that purchase was documented and acknowledged as legitimate by the court, it still denied the owners the right to reside on their land.

Tyranny begins in Migron

Why the inconsistency? Doesn’t the rule of law apply equally to Jews and to Arabs? Apparently not.

Michael Freund..
Pundicity/JPost..
30 August '12..




On Tuesday, a fateful hearing took place at the Supreme Court to determine the destiny of the Jewish community of Migron.

The complicated history of the site, and the legal wrangling surrounding it over the past six years, have left many people wondering where right begins and wrong ends. But regardless of one’s political views, there is something about the case that should send a shudder down the spine of every Israeli who values liberty.

Standing before the justices, Osnat Mandel of the State Attorney’s Office said that Migron in its entirety should be evacuated within a few days. Mandel made no distinction between the land that was recently purchased by Migron’s residents, on which 17 families live, and the rest of the community’s territory, where 33 other families reside and the ownership is in dispute.

In other words, the state is willfully choosing to ignore the legal purchase of land by its citizens and is prepared to expel them from their homes. Needless to say, this is nothing less than an outrage.

The state is trampling upon one of the fundamental underpinnings of any Western-style democracy: private property rights.

The land in question was purchased in a legal transaction from its Palestinian owners at a reported cost of $1 million. Migron’s residents presented documents to support their claim and even videotaped the acquisition as proof that it had been carried out. This development undermines the basis for the expulsion order against the 17 families in question, but that doesn’t seem to have stopped Mandel from insisting that they be removed anyway.

From Israel - The Handle on Sinai

Arlene Kushner..
27 August '12..





I had hoped -- deeply hoped -- to be able to turn my attention to matters other than the situation in the Sinai. But the news there has loomed so large and seemed so ominous, that it merits on-going attention. And so, once again, I begin with this subject.

This time, however, I believe I will be able to provide a bit more clarity about what's happening.

The news has been utterly confounding and filled with contradictions: Tanks have been brought in by the Egyptians to combat the jihadists with the permission of Israel; Israel did not give permission. The Egyptian Defense Minister al-Sisi called Israeli Defense Minister Barak and the two came to an understanding; there was no such phone call.

And, most recently: An Egyptian general came into the Sinai to negotiate with the jihadists and the efforts to take out the terrorists is over; Egyptians say they are continuing their efforts against the terrorists.

~~~~~~~~~~

The information I have now secured is from a most reliable source -- an Arabic-speaking and very savvy Israeli academic with multiple connections. He is in no way an apologist for the Egyptians. This is what he explained:

The jihadist terrorists are hiding in caves in the mountains (I have written about this) and thus tanks are worthless against them. What is needed are infantry combat units and helicopters to bring them up to the mountain tops.

~~~~~~~~~~

The tanks were brought in as a PR ploy, to show the Egyptian people the army is tough and doesn't need to abide by Israeli demands. The intent here, however, is not to set up a situation that leads to war with Israel -- my source does not anticipate that Egypt will go to war with Israel, either in the short range, or even the "medium range" future. Rather, says my source, the Egyptian government is attempting to counter or deflate the demands of those who call for breaking the peace treaty with Israel.

One might argue that bringing in the tanks has broken the treaty. And technically, this would be the case if Israel had not approved the move. But the intent here apparently was not to break it in all its parameters but, quite the contrary, to enable it to be saved. The bravado was for internal consumption.

At the end of the day, will the tanks remain? This I cannot say. Might the situation shift so that the tanks would be drawn upon in a limited military action? I have no crystal ball and so can not definitively rule this out. But what I can report is that a source I consider highly reliable has told me that it is not the intention of the Egyptian government to break the peace treaty and move towards war with Israel.

Kushner - From Israel: Not Just Wishful Thinking

Arlene Kushner..
28 June '12..

Perhaps my need to report some news that is potentially positive is kicking in. Today the state of the world still seems grim, but a tad less so.

The last residents -- 18 families -- of the houses in Ulpana slated for expulsion were moved out today.

With this, we have been mindful that one of the next issues to be faced is that of Migron, where there is also a Court-ordered expulsion, to be carried out before August 1.

But according to information acquired by Israel Hayom: in an effort to prevent that expulsion, an American Jewish philanthropist -- whose name has not been revealed -- has bought land constituting more than 80% of Migron from the Arabs who claimed ownership.

Credit: IndyNews

~~~~~~~~~~

A retrial for Migron - Meeting the values of a democratic state and the values of a Jewish state

Dr. Aviad Hacohen..
Israel Hayom..
28 June '12..





The finality of a ruling is a cornerstone of the legal system; once a final ruling is handed down, there can be no further debate. This is how the legal system avoids endless appeals and the uncertainty that accompanies them.

But there is an exception to every rule, and this rule has exceptions in various legal fields. Though these cases are rare, it is possible, and wise, to enact these exceptions to the finality rule, especially when it is the only way to serve justice.

For example, in a criminal proceeding, when new evidence that could exonerate the defendant is revealed after the final ruling is made, it would be right to hold a retrial and reduce the sentence or even to acquit the accused. The same is true for alimony rulings, when a significant change in the circumstances justifies an adjustment of alimony payments.

If such exceptions occur in district courts, they should certainly occur in the High Court of Justice. As its name suggests, the High Court of Justice does not only rely on legal considerations but also feeds on the laws of integrity and justice. There are unusual cases when justice requires overturning even final verdicts.

If the news reports are true and Jews have legally purchased the land on which the outpost of Migron is situated, from willing sellers and for the full cost, then the verdict ordering the outposts' evacuation must be reconsidered. In light of the new circumstances, there is room to make an exception and reopen the case before the High Court of Justice in order to reach a more just verdict, especially considering that Migron's residents bought their homes in good faith and with real money.

Silverman - Migron residents want to remain home

Anav Silverman..
Israel News/Ynet
14 June '12..

A group of young children parade in a circle, waving Israeli flags against the clear blue sky. They are directed by several youth leaders who are trying to keep the kids in line. It is a few days before Israel’s Independence Day and Migron is preparing for the upcoming festive ceremony, held for the entire community.

Some of the mothers come out to watch their children perform. Among them, stands Aviela Deitch, originally from Milwaukee, Wisconsin, who has been living for the past year in Migron, a tiny West Bank community of 49 families, located 14 miles north of Jerusalem. She lives in a small mobile home, with her husband and six children in a community considered "illegal" and "unauthorized," and even marked as a "wildcat outpost" by those who oppose its existence and subsequently described as such in much of the international press.

For Aviela, the terminology does not matter.

"We chose to live here because we wanted our children to know the responsibility of building a community in a place that has wonderful people," she explains to Tazpit News Agency.

"There is a certain quality of life in Migron and a very strong sense of community. The youth are bright and polite and their parents are involved. Our children attend great schools in nearby communities, while the younger ones go to Migron’s community daycare and kindergarten. There is almost a zero- percent crime rate."

Established in 1999, Migron is made up of mostly young professional people who served in the IDF and national service, graduated from universities, with many now working primarily in the fields of social work, special education, rehabilitation, elderly care, computer programming and mechanical engineering.

Deitch - Migron: A View from Within

Aviela Deitch..
JewishPress.com
02 April '12..

I go by the name Aviela Deitch, but back when I graduated Nicolet High School in 1990, it was Andrea Krissman. Yep, even though I’m the fifth Milwaukee-area generation of my family on my mother’s side, I picked up about twenty years ago and made aliyah. Fast forward to August 29 of 2011, and my husband and I picked up ourselves, our six children, and our lots and lots of stuff and moved from our two-floor home in a larger, established community to a mobile home a third the size in Migron.

And why? Largely because I wanted my children to learn what I learned growing up in Milwaukee – knowing that they not only have the opportunity but also the responsibility to take a hand in building a community.

Migron is located about twelve minutes north of Jerusalem and is currently comprised of 48 families. The adults here work mostly, but not exclusively, in areas concerned with helping others, occupations like social work, various therapies, teacher, special education, elder care, and guidance counselor. Additionally, there is a bank executive, a few computer programmers, a mechanical engineer… you get the drift. As there is child care from daycare through senior kindergarten in the community, the smaller children stay here, while the older kids are bussed to top-quality schools in nearby communities.

The community, in some circles titled a “settlement”, was established in 1999 as a result of an archaeological expedition done here that revealed conclusive signs of a Jewish past. It didn’t take long for the first few dozen families to move in. All were and continue to be housed in government-provided mobile homes. A synagogue and mikveh were built, as well as a horseback riding therapy clinic, petting zoo, playgrounds, a daycare center, kindergartens, and eventually eight families built their own homes. Practically at its inception, the government put up an electric line, telephone service, and set up running water and a functioning sewage system. After seven years of hard work, a suit was suddenly filed in the Israeli Supreme Court, claiming that the land was under private ownership of a number of local Arabs.

Odd.

Dann - Who makes the law?

Moshe Dann..
Opinion/JPost..
27 March '12..

Once again former chief justice Dorit Beinisch and a few of her colleagues have usurped the role and powers of the legislature and sought to create new law.

In a ruling last week, Beinisch and a panel that included Justices Edna Arbel and Miriam Naor, vehement opponents of settlements, held that Michael Lessans, a Jewish plumber who lives in Kedumim, in the Shomron, must evacuate 45 dunams (approx. 11 acres) of land on which he had planted 1,300 trees because Arabs claimed this area belonged to them.

The court ordered Lessans to remove the trees immediately and compensate the Arab claimants and the Civil Administration. The court ruled that Jews, unlike Arabs, could not claim land by chazaka (acquired right of possession) – an Ottoman statute under which working the land for three to 10 years could be a basis for claiming ownership.

Lessans, who immigrated from Baltimore 40 years ago, planted the area with wheat, corn and barley in 1996, and in 2006 planted olive trees. A year later Arabs objected and in 2009 – assisted and represented by Peace Now and Yesh Din – filed a petition against Lessans. The land was never registered in tabu and the Arab claimants offered no proof of ownership.

According to Lessans, a document from the Ottoman period presented by the Arab claimants refers to the right to rent “a place” in the area – but no precise location is specified and the alleged owner is not listed. Therefore, it is impossible to know if Lessans’ orchard is “the place,” or not. Although the lower court rejected Arab claims of ownership, Peace Now and Yesh Din went directly to the Supreme Court, where they knew they could win on politics, rather than law.

In his appearance before the Supreme Court, Lessans offered to give the entire orchard to the Arabs if they could prove ownership. The court refused the deal. If the Arabs can’t prove they own the land, however, why did the court order the trees removed and likely destroyed? These crucial facts were not reported in the media, which accepted the court’s decision without question.

Fresnozionism - Can the world afford the Palestinians?

Fresnozionism.org..
26 March '12..





News item:

In a surprising decision, the High Court of Justice on Sunday rejected a compromise agreement struck between the government and residents of Migron, the largest illegal outpost in Judea and Samaria. The agreement would have allowed the residents to remain in their outpost several years after a mandatory evacuation deadline, but was struck down on the grounds that no group of people is above the law…

This 50-family community, located several miles north of Jerusalem, has become a bone of contention since its establishment in 1999. Left-wing groups claimed the families who set up the community’s first bungalows had illegally trespassed onto privately owned Palestinian land, whereas the residents claimed that they had obtained the necessary authorization to establish the new community. Last August, the High Court of Justice ruled in favor of the left-wing organization Peace Now, which petitioned the court on behalf of the alleged Palestinians [sic] owners of the property. The state was ordered to evacuate the residents and dismantle the site by April 2012, in what was hailed by some as the most important court decision on disputed construction in Judea and Samaria in years.

Without going into all the details, I want to note a few facts.

First, only a small part of the community is built on land that may belong to Palestinians, but the government decided that all of it must be ‘dismantled’.

Second, no Israeli court ruled on the substance of the case — on the question of whose land it was. The government made its decision on the basis of a report written in 2005 by one Talia Sasson, who was head of the state prosecutor’s office at the time.

Sasson is a board member of the New Israel Fund, a member of the Public Council of Yesh Din, a foreign-funded left-wing NGO which carries out ‘lawfare’ against Israel in the name of ‘human rights’, and a Knesset candidate of the fringe New Movement-Meretz party (which has 3 seats out of 120 in the Knesset). She is a professional opponent of the Jewish presence in the territories. Her objectivity is more than questionable, it is non-existent.

Yes Dr. Shine - It is "wrong and manifestly unjust"

Love of the Land..








In a piece entitled "The politics of Migron", in today's Israel Hayom (26 March '12), Dr Haim Shine writes the following:

The citizens of Israel have no choice but to abide by Supreme Court judgements, even if they are wrong and manifestly unjust. If people didn’t fear the court system, they would surely raise their hands against their brothers, especially in such a divided and polarized society as this one. Compliance with the rules of democracy is a cornerstone of Israel’s existence as both a Jewish and a democratic state.

...

At a certain point, the Supreme Court decided that they were occupying privately-owned Arab land. Surprisingly, no Palestinian has yet proven ownership of the land. But the Supreme Court decided that we are obligated to evacuate the residents.The Israeli government, understanding how harsh evacuation can be, especially after the evacuation of Gush Katif in 2005, reached an agreement with the residents to move them to an alternative location. The Supreme Court opposed the agreement between the government and the residents and set a date for the evacuation within three months. This decision is especially puzzling given the fact that the Supreme Court has yet to decide who owns the land.

Dr. Shine concludes:

Nevertheless and despite everything, we must uphold the court’s ruling.

Dr Shine, and perhaps Minister Benny Begin, a question or two, a comment or two, if I may.

If even in the case of "Justice delayed is justice denied" ... meaning that if legal redress is available for a party that has suffered some injury, but is not forthcoming in a timely fashion, it is effectively the same as having no redress at all, then in what way does "to abide by Supreme Court judgements, even if they are wrong and manifestly unjust" become "a cornerstone of Israel’s existence as both a Jewish and a democratic state."?  Is it possible, perhaps, that it's merely a mockery of both.

Chief Justice Burger wrote the following, in the ABA Journal October 1970:

A sense of confidence in the courts is essential to maintain the fabric of ordered liberty for a free people and three things could destroy that confidence and do incalculable damage to society: that people come to believe that inefficiency and delay will drain even a just judgment of its value; that people who have long been exploited in the smaller transactions of daily life come to believe that courts cannot vindicate their legal rights from fraud and over-reaching; that people come to believe the law - in the larger sense - cannot fulfill its primary function to protect them and their families in their homes, at their work, and on the public streets. 

To re-quote one more time: "That people come to believe the law - in the larger sense - cannot fulfill its primary function to protect them and their families in their homes, at their work, and on the public streets, is that which can do incalculable damage to society. And with that, Dr. Shine, we must say, nevertheless and despite everything, we must not uphold the court’s ruling.

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page. Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand 
.

Weinberg - Migron: Yalla, Pogrom!

David M. Weinberg..
A Citadel Defending Zion..
26 March '12..






The Migron outpost now must be evacuated by August 1, the High Court injudiciously ruled Sunday, overturning a wise government compromise that would have allowed an orderly move of the settlement to Psagot over the coming three years. Chaval. (Too bad).

Particularly sad about this turn of events is the old, hateful rhetoric that has been let out of the bottle by the Supreme Court debate. Left-wing rabble rousers like Zahava Galon of Meretz, Yariv Oppenheimer of Peace Now, and hundreds of benighted academics who published a repulsive, sinister anti-Migron petition in the newspaper Haaretz on Sunday, have peppered the public debate with settler-hating epithets like “land robbers,” “lawbreakers,” “violators” and “corrupt manipulators.”

Listening to some of these spokesmen on radio yesterday and today you could feel the hatred of anything related to settlers, settlements and the Netanyahu government oozing from every pore of their oh-so-democratically-and-legally-pure bodies. There was no sympathy expressed whatsoever for the plight of the Migron residents – who settled there with full government support and in the knowledge that the State of Israel had title to the land.

Kushner - From Israel: Pushing Back, Pushing Forward

Arlene Kushner..
29 January '12..


There's a good deal happening, and much to respond to. Please read this through and act. I like to think of my readers as also actors in the important fights we are fighting -- against some things, for others. Your assistance does make a difference.

~~~~~~~~~~

I begin with a link to my latest article on Front Page Magazine, "Answering Obama's Israel Lies."

http://frontpagemag.com/2012/01/27/answering-obamas-israel-lies/

It exposes the distortions and half-truths that have been put out in a campaign video purporting to show what a good friend to Israel Obama is. Please, circulate broadly.

Here's the link to the original video, in case you haven't seen it. It's making the rounds big time and must be responded to in a serious fashion, for it's so easy to be taken in if you don't know the facts. When you DO know the facts, the response to this is some combination of rage and deep disgust.



(My thanks to Debbie B.)

~~~~~~~~~~

A very significant vote is coming up in the Knesset this week. The issues are complex and YOUR COOPERATION HERE IS EXCEEDINGLY IMPORTANT.

You've heard about this legislation from me previously: Proposed by MK Zevulun Orlev (Habayit Hayehudi), it would forbid the dismantling of communities of more than 20 families in Judea and Samaria without properly filed documentation that the land was Arab-owned. This would negate the vague, unsubstantiated claims of land being "Arab" that are currently filed in court by Peace Now.

What is more, this legislation stipulates that if the documentation of Arab ownership is filed after a specified period of time (four years, as I understand it), the community still wouldn't be taken down and instead the Arab land owner would be provided with monetary compensation.

Kushner - From Israel: MIGRON in the spotlight

Arlene Kushner..
24 January '12..

My readers have heard from me about Mitzpe Avichai, and now it is time to turn our attention to Migron -- which presents some very serious issues. You will learn things here that it is unlikely you've heard from your mainstream media sources.

Migron is a Jewish community on a hilltop in the Binyamin Regional Council in Samaria, north of Jerusalem. With 49 families, it is the largest of the communities that are frequently referred to as "unauthorized settlements."

In order to properly understand the situation of this community, we will need a bit of background, which has been provided by a resident of Migron who serves as a spokesperson:

In 1960, the king of Jordan divided the area where Migron is now located into some 60 plots and gave them to individual families. It was, however, with the proviso that they begin farming within three years, or the land would revert back to the kingdom. No farming was done, not for three years and not for seven years -- which is when the land came under Israeli control.

Land that reverted back to the kingdom should have become Israeli state land. This should have been the end of the story. (As I understand it, to ensure there would be no problem, the Jews who came to establish Migron purchased the land in any event.)

IMRA - [Peace Now comes to rescue?] Government Offers Compromise Agreement on the Evacuation of the Structures at Migron

Dr. Aaron Lerner..
IMRA..
22 January '12..

[Dr. Aaron Lerner - IMRA: Yes, the residents of Migron are furious that they find themselves in what they see as an absurd situation in which as a result of "lawfare" on the part of Peace Now they are being expelled from land that they say was virgin untilled land - not privately owned by anyone - until they built their homes. The question - the extremely practical question - is if they can "win" now if they reject Prime Minister Netanyahu's proposal. Where "win" is defined as succeeding in remaining in their homes.

And then Peace Now's Yariv Oppenheimer comes to the rescue in an interview on Israel Radio, recasting Prime Minister Netanyahu's offer as a tremendous victory for the settlement movement - since the proposal provides for the official establishment of the first new community in Judea and Samaria since Oslo. Oppenheimer went even further, predicting that if the residents of Migron accept Mr. Netanyahu's offer that they will ultimately have their cake and eat it to: with both a new community established and the existing Migron location continuing in perpetuity.

Hopefully Oppenheimer won't stop with one interview on Reshet Bet and will make a huge splash in all the Israeli news media channels. The more vocal his criticism the more palatable the offer to the residents of Migron.]

=======================================

Government Offers Compromise Agreement on the Evacuation of the Structures at Migron
(Communicated by the Prime Minister's Media Adviser)

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu earlier today (Sunday), 22.1.12, at the weekly Cabinet meeting, said that according to a High Court of Justice decision, the structures at Migron must be evacuated by 31.3.12.

Due to its desire to honor the Court's decision by agreement and peacefully, the Government proposes the following compromise:

Migron residents' permanent homes will be built near the current site, on state lands the planning for which will be arranged.

Upon the conclusion of the construction, the residents will move to the permanent site.

The site will be evacuated and handed over to the Judea and Samaria Civil Administration.

The Government calls on the residents of Migron to agree to the proffered compromise and thus allow the Government to soon request that the Court approve the arrangement.

Prime Minister Netanyahu said that, "This is a good proposal. It does not solve all of the problems, but it does resolve the problem of Migron."

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Shine - Migron is not an outpost

Dr. Chaim Shine..
Israel Hayom..
22 January '12..



High atop a hill in the land given to the tribe of Benjamin, just where Saul's army once prepared for war with the Philistines, the outpost of Migron was built in 1999. Fifty families climbed up the steep hill, overlooking Nablus and Jerusalem, to deliver the historic homeland of the Jewish people. What they did, as Zionists and pioneers, was reminiscent of the glory days of the early Zionist settlement movement.

This rocky hill, uninhabited since the days of Saul and David and whose soil has not been cultivated -- even sheep and cows have not grazed it -- became the home of Jewish settlers. The homeland once again proved that it was waiting with eternal patience for the return of its sons. Women and children carried the weight of the entire nation on their gentle shoulders.

In caravans, on difficult terrain, in freezing winter weather and sweltering summer heat, an amazing kernel emerged representing a generation of truth that feels an allegiance to the state of Israel and its military. Among Migron's 50 families are career soldiers serving in elite combat units, sons and grandsons of Israeli heroes who gave their lives to protect the country from terrorists.

At the beginning of the century, Israel's government supported the settlement enterprise. Labor party ministers helped build infrastructure, city plans were drafted and the land was owned by the government. In 2004, when the delusional and unrealistic disengagement plan was being formulated (ultimately culminating in the evacuation of all Gaza settlements and a handful of West Bank settlements), the settlement enterprise was halted.

Though Palestinian ownership of the land has not been established, the evacuation orders have already been issued. The State Prosecutor's Office has turned land that was never claimed by anyone into private land. I am convinced that had the same criteria been applied to the lands settled in the early days of Zionism and the establishment of Israel, legal proceedings would still be underway on the matter of Ramat Aviv, Raanana, Ramat Hasharon and many neighborhoods in Jerusalem.