Obama's legacy: Criminalizing Israeli citizenship?
I've already written a couple of times about the fears here in Israel of what President Hussein Obama might try to do to us in his final days in his office. Here's a really disturbing Wall Street Journal piece from Jonathan Schanzer about
some of the possibilities.
The Middle East has few
bright spots these days, but one is the budding rapprochement between
Israel and its Sunni Arab neighbors, including Saudi Arabia and the
United Arab Emirates, thanks to shared threats from Iran and Islamic
State. Now the Obama Administration may have plans to wreck even that.
Israeli diplomats gird for the possibility
that President Obama may try to force a diplomatic resolution for Israel
and the Palestinians at the United Nations. The White House has been
unusually tight-lipped about what, if anything,
it might have in mind. But our sources say the White House has asked
the State Department to develop an options menu for the President’s
final weeks.
One possibility would be to sponsor, or at
least allow, a U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Israeli
settlement construction, perhaps alongside new IRS regulations revoking
the tax-exempt status of people or entities involved
in settlement building. The Administration vetoed such a resolution in
2011 on grounds that it “risks hardening the position of both sides,”
which remains true.
But condemning the settlements has always been
a popular way of scoring points against the Jewish state, not least at
the State Department, and an antisettlement resolution might burnish Mr.
Obama’s progressive brand for his postpresidency.
Mr. Obama may also seek formal recognition of a
Palestinian state at the Security Council. This would run afoul of
Congress’s longstanding view that “Palestine” does not have the
internationally recognized attributes of statehood,
including a defined territory and effective government, though Mr.
Obama could overcome the objection through his usual expedient of an
executive action, thereby daring the next President to reverse him.
Both actions would be a boon to the bullies in
the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, while also subjecting
Israeli citizens and supporters abroad to new and more aggressive forms
of legal harassment. It could even criminalize
the Israeli army—and every reservist who serves in it—on the theory
that it is illegally occupying a foreign state. Does Mr. Obama want to
be remembered as the President who criminalized Israeli citizenship?
The worst option would be an effort to
introduce a resolution at the U.N. Security Council setting “parameters”
for a final settlement between Israel and the Palestinians.
The French
have been eager to do this for some time, and one
option for the Administration would be to let the resolution pass
simply by refusing to veto it. Or the U.S. could introduce the
resolution itself, all the better to take credit for it.
As the old line has it, this would be worse
than a crime—it would be a blunder. U.S. policy has long and wisely been
that only Israelis and Palestinians can work out a peace agreement
between themselves, and that efforts to impose
one would be counterproductive. Whatever parameters the U.N.
established would be unacceptable to any Israeli government, left or
right, thereby destroying whatever is left of a peace camp in Israel.
The Palestinians would seize on those
parameters as their birthright, making it impossible for any future
Palestinian leader to bargain part of them away in a serious
negotiation. Arab states would find their diplomatic hands tied,
making it impossible to serve as useful intermediaries between
Jerusalem and Ramallah. It could refreeze relations with Israel even as
they finally seem to have thawed.
President Obama may be the last man on earth
to get the memo, but after decades of fruitless efforts to end the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict it might be wiser for the U.S. to step back
until the Palestinians recognize that peace cannot
be imposed from the outside.
If Mr. Obama is still seeking a Middle
East legacy at this late stage in his presidency, his best move is do
nothing to make it worse.
A few comments. First, it is longstanding US policy that peace between Israel and the 'Palestinians' can only come through direct negotiations between the parties. Obama has done much to undermine that policy through his insistence on
international peace conferences and
other ways of allowing the 'Palestinians' to
avoid direct negotiations, including his support for
preconditions to negotiations. Perhaps that's why Obama has zero influence in Israel, where the government once again spat in his face on Monday, announcing that it would
build 98 new homes in Shilo, which is well outside the 'settlement blocs.'
On Monday the state informed the High Court of Justice it awaited
final bureaucratic approval to develop the site within six months as a
relocation option for the 40 families from the Amona outpost.
It, therefore, asked the HCJ to delay by seven months the mandated December 25 demolition of the outpost.
Alternatively,
the state said, it was also pursuing the option of using the abandoned
property law, so that it could relocate the outpost to land adjacent to
the community’s current location.
Washington has rebuked Israel
for both plans, but the State Department issued a particularly sharp
statement in which it said the Shiloh project was tantamount to the
creation of a new settlement, something Israel had promised the US it
would not do.
“This settlement's location deep in the West Bank…
would link a string of outposts that effectively divide the West Bank
and make the possibility of a viable Palestinian state more remote,” the
State Department had said.
Second, as much as I will never vote for Hillary Clinton (#NeverHillary), it is clear to me that this sort of scorched earth strategy from the Obama administration is far more likely if Donald Trump wins next week's election than if Clinton wins it. After all, it was Netanyahu who set up Clinton's illegal private server, and it was he that caused it to be used for government business (/sarc). Obama would have far more interest in trying to tie Trump's hands than in trying to tie Clinton's.
All in all, the outlook is bleak with the 'most pro-Israel administration evah' set to extract revenge from an Israeli government that has not been willing to surrender to Obama's wishes over the past eight years.
Labels: Abu Mazen, Amona, Barack Hussein Obama, Binyamin Netanyahu, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Middle East peace process, Obama's legacy, Shilo, United Nations Security Council, US presidential campaign 2016
Priorities! State Department ignores Syria, blasts Israel for giving Jews in Samaria a place to live
The self-proclaimed 'most pro-Israel administration evah' has
blasted the Government of Israel for attempting to resettle the Jews of Amona, a neighborhood in Ofra (Samaria), in an alternate location in Samaria.
The statement, signed by Mark Toner, deputy spokesman for the State Department, drew an unusual linkage between the signing of the defense aid agreement with Israel and criticism of settlement building.
Toner stressed that the U.S. views advancement of the plan as a violation of a commitment by Netanyahu's government not to establish any new settlements in the West Bank.
The White House later further escalated the criticism, as Josh Ernest said that the decision constitutes a violation of a commitment undertaken by the Israeli government to the U.S. administration, adding that this isn't how friends behave.
"We had public assurances from the Israeli government that contradict this new announcement – so when you talk about how friends treat each other – this is also a source of concern. There is a lot of disappointment and great concern here at the White House," he said.
The criticism comes against the backdrop of the Civil Administration Planning Commission's decision last Wednesday to approve a plan for the construction of 98 housing units in the new settlement to be established next to the Shvut Rachel settlement.
According to the plan, it will be possible to build up to 300 housing units and an industrial zone. The NRG web site and Channel 2 were the first to publish the decision. The new settlement, which settlers say is only a neighborhood of the existing settlement of Shvut Rachel, can provide housing for residents of the illegal outposts of Amona, who are expected to be evicted by the end of December.
A senior U.S. official said that the White House boiled with anger at the advancement of the plan and even more at the timing of the decision – just a week after the signing of the military aid agreement by which the U.S. will give Israel $38 billion for a decade, and the day of the death of former president Shimon Peres, whose funeral was attended by President Barack Obama.
A large part of American anger was due to the administration seeing the step as a violation of a commitment Netanyahu gave Obama in 2009 that Israel would not build any new settlements. In his speech at Bar-Ilan that year, Netanyahu said he agreed to the establishment of a Palestinian state and added: "The territorial issues will be discussed in a permanent agreement. Till then we have no intention to build new settlements or set aside land for new settlements."
And in the seven years since the Bar Ilan speech, there have effectively been NO negotiations. At some point, life has to move on.
Ironically, the best thing that could happen for the 'peace process' would be for the 'Palestinians' to actually feel they are losing something by not coming to the table. Nothing else has even a remote chance of bringing them to the table.
The statement was unusual both in its length of more than 300 words, and in content, using strong language to express U.S. objections to advancement of the plan.
"We strongly condemn the Israeli government's recent decision to advance a plan that would create a significant new settlement deep in the West Bank, State Department deputy spokesman Mark Toner said.
Still waiting to hear Obama 'strongly condemn' Assad, let alone do something about him. But priorities man, priorities.
And then the State Department dug deeper.
One of the statement's clauses referred to the defense aid agreement. Its wording was most extraordinary, for through the years the U.S. has avoided creating any linkage between defense aid to Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or the settlement construction issue.
"It is deeply troubling, in the wake of Israel and the U.S. concluding an unprecedented agreement on military assistance designed to further strengthen Israel's security, that Israel would take a decision so contrary to its long term security interest in a peaceful resolution of its conflict with the Palestinians," Toner added.
The State Department's statement also referred to the timing of the decision – the day of former President Shimon Peres' death, saying:
"Furthermore, it is disheartening that while Israel and the world mourned the passing of President Shimon Peres, and leaders from the U.S. and other nations prepared to honor one of the great champions of peace, plans were advanced that would seriously undermine the prospects for the two state solution that he so passionately supported."
So we owe it to Peres' 'legacy' to create his virtual state on an island and jump into the sea? How absurd!
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Amona, Barack Hussein Obama, Bashar al-Assad, Binyamin Netanyahu, Shimon Peres, State Department obsession with Israel, US State Department, US-Israel relationship
Disgraceful: Kidnapped teen called police, police didn't take it seriously
How many times have I written on this blog that Israel's Leftist police treat the revenants ('settlers') with contempt?
Earlier, it was reported that one of the teens called the police, that the call was
cut off and that the police did not bother to report it to the army until many hours later. It's actually worse than that. The police received a call from one of the boys saying that they had been kidnapped and did not take the call seriously. In other words, they decided - without any investigation - that someone was
playing a prank on them.
One of the three boys kidnapped
in the West Bank on Thursday night managed to tell police "we've been
kidnapped" but the report was still not given to security sources for
hours, the military censor cleared for publication on Sunday afternoon.
The call was made to police dispatch around 10:30 p.m. but it was
only as much as five hours later before security services were notified.
For the past 24 hours there has been furious criticism of police
amid reports that they were notified of the suspected kidnapping but
did not notify security forces, giving the kidnappers hours to flee the
scene with the boys.
The Israel Police have not directly responded
to the report, telling reporters to speak to the Judea and Samaria
police district and not the national headquarters. Later on Saturday
night, the Judea and Samaria district sent out a reply saying that they
would neither confirm nor deny the reports which are the responsibility
of the media outlets themselves.
On Sunday, the national police
branch said that there is no truth to the reports that a committee of
inquiry has been opened to probe the incident, and that they would still
neither confirm nor deny reports.
Arutz Sheva
adds:
The call was received at 10:25 p.m. The youth whispered: "We've been abducted! We are being kidnapped."
The call lasted about two minutes and additional noises could
be heard in it. It is being investigated by the Israel Security Agency
(ISA, or Shin Bet).
This information was under a gag order, which was lifted Sunday.
A source in the Israel Police said that the hotline did not take the
call seriously and thought it was one of the numerous calls it receives
from hostile Arabs who seek to overload it with false alarms. It was
only when a brother of one of the abducted boys arrived at the police
station that they understood the call had been real.
That emphasis is mine. TWO MINUTES - not just a call that was dropped after a few seconds like we thought before.
And as to the possibility that the call was from hostile Arabs - that's a load of garbage. Every Israeli can tell the difference between an Arab and a Jew talking. The police are trained to tell the difference very quickly (there's a way you can confirm this for yourself if you're in Israel, but I won't publicize it on this blog).
Bottom line: The police could care less about the 'settlers.' Time and time again we have seen the police take the side of the Arabs (remember
Amona?)
against the revenants. Perhaps that's why every time the government decides to expel Jews from their homes, they send the army (which ought not to be doing such tasks even if they were legitimate) instead of the police. It's time to clean up the police rather than calling in the army to cover for their misdeeds.
Labels: Amona, Hebron, IDF, Israel police, kidnapping, Palestinian terrorism
Government to legalize 13 out of 18 'outposts'
Haaretz reports that the government plans to legalize 13 of the 18 contended 'outposts' in Judea and Samaria because they were not built on 'private Palestinian land.' The other five 'outposts' will be destroyed and their
residents expelled from their homes over the next few months.
Because the 13 outposts are not built on privately-owned Palestinian land, the legalization process could presumably make the petitions against them moot.
The remaining five outposts cannot be legalized, because they are located on privately-owned Palestinian land, and so are slated for evacuation.
The first to go will be Beit El's Ulpana neighborhood, which the court has ordered dismantled by July 1. Next in line is Migron, an outpost near Ramallah, which must be dismantled by August 1.
Givat Assaf, an outpost close to Migron that houses 25 families, will likely be evacuated at some point this summer, though it's unclear when.
...
After that will be Amona, an outpost of 50 families located near Ofra. The government has promised to dismantle this outpost by the end of the year.
Mitzpeh Kramim is also slated for evacuation, but the government has not announced when that is slated to occur. Nor has it announced a timetable for the legalization of the other 13 outposts.
I doubt that it is going to be this simple - either for the 13 or for the five. What could go wrong?
For those trying to figure out the definition of 'private Palestinian land,' go
here.
Labels: Amona, Beit El, Migron, outposts, Supreme Court
Beit El and Gush Katif
Despite his promise to freeze plans to expel the Jewish residents of Beit El's Ulpana neighborhood from their homes, Prime Minister Netanyahu's Civil Administration has made plans to
house those residents in caravillas (mobile homes) should they be expelled from their homes on June 30.
Ynet has learned that the administration is working on a plan through which Beit El land would be allocated for caravillas which would be constructed for the use of the evictees.
Over the past few weeks the defense establishment has held deliberations over possible temporary housing solutions that could be offered to the Ulpana residents after the eviction.
At first, they raised the possibility of temporarily housing the evacuees in hotels, yet new plans reveal the intention of settling them in caravillas until a permanent solution is arranged.
The Civil Administration's settlement sub committee is set to meet on Thursday in order to approve the construction of 30 temporary housing units for evacuees.
...
At the beginning of the month the High Court denied the State's petition to review the case and postpone the evacuation, imposing a July 1 deadline for its razing.
Prime Minister Netanyahu managed to convince right wing MKs to remove deliberations on the Arrangements Law from the agenda; they agreed to freeze promotion of the bill in order to give the government time to settle the issue.
Netanyahu then instructed Defense Minister Ehud Barak to halt all demolition preparations. Yet the defense establishment is apparently ignoring this directive and has been continuing to prepare for the July 1 deadline.
Beit El residents have expressed their anger over the fact that plans for evacuation are continuing, ignoring the prime minister's directives.
The IDF Spokesman said in response: "The IDF is holding ongoing discussions with the settlement leaders…mainly over the issues of defense and security aspects. Naturally these meetings are private and we will not address what was said (in the meetings)."
For the Jewish state to expel Jews from their homes is a disgrace, and residents of Judea and Samaria have been holding a hunger strike against the decree in a protest tent outside the Supreme Court. Of course, you won't see that covered in the New York Times, but I haven't seen it covered in the Jerusalem Post or YNet either. Here's a picture I was sent (Hat Tip:
Varda N).
The only silver lining in this cloud is that the caravillas, which are far more likely than not to become permanent homes for a lengthy period of time, are going to be located in Beit El. Perhaps this is the time to look at some statistics regarding the Jewish refugees from Gaza, who were expelled from their homes seven years ago this summer. This is from a
United Nations report(!) from June 2011.
About 230 of the 1,450 families from Gush Katif (16 percent) have moved into permanent homes, according to a December 2010 report released by the Gush Katif “committee”.
Unemployment among former Gush Katif residents is running at about 18 percent, while under-employment is 20 percent, said the “committee”. Before the withdrawal, unemployment was 5 percent, with 85 percent working in Gush Katif, according to JobKatif, an NGO created to help former residents rebuild their livelihoods.
While unemployment is much worse in Gaza, the unemployment rate among the evacuees is about double the rate of the general Israeli population. Children have faced adjustment issues and the divorce rate increased, along with financial problems, say former residents. Government compensation that was received, was lower than the value of the land and did not allow farmers to re-establish their farms, according to the “committee”.
Shilat Kahalani, spokesperson for the Mateh Binyamin Regional Council which covers 42 Israeli settlements in the West Bank (known as Judea and Samaria to Israelis), told IRIN that many former Gush Katif residents wanted to rebuild their homes and lives in the West Bank, but were prevented from doing so by a building moratorium which was only lifted in September 2010, having been in force for 10 months.
About 380 farms existed in Gushi Katif (of which 240 were operational), but only 28 percent of the owners of agricultural land have resumed farming. Most business owners, too, have not returned to their trade and were not appropriately compensated, according to the “committee”.
“Disengaging a community is not something that can be rebuilt easily, and many families never received promised full financial support,” Kahalani said.
A June 2010 report on the findings of the Israeli “State Commission of Inquiry into the Handling of the Evacuees from Gush Katif and Northern Samaria by the Authorized Authorities”, placed blame on the state of Israel.
“The State of Israel failed in its handling of the evacuees,” it said. “Five years after, most of the evacuees are still living in temporary caravan sites; the construction of most of the permanent housing has not yet commenced; and the decisive majority of the public structures in the evacuees’ new settlements have not yet been built.”
“It was a mission of the government to settle people in Gaza,” said former Gush Katif resident Debbie Rosen, and “there must be a solution for every settler”. She received half the value of her home in Gush Katif, and she and her six children are still waiting for their new house to be built, she added.
And for those who think that the Ulpana neighborhood is going to be 'evacuated' quietly with the soldiers called in to do the job embracing the residents in tears, consider this.
“People in my community are unwilling to be evacuated because on a personal level they witnessed the awful outcomes of such a disengagement on the lives of the Gush Katif evacuees,” Binyamin council spokesperson Kahalani said.
If this expulsion actually goes ahead, we will likely be looking at another
Amona.
Labels: Amona, Beit El, Binyamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak, Gaza expulsion, Supreme Court
Like Gush Katif or like Amona?
There have been a lot of foreboding items in the media lately about how the government is going to expel all the Jews from the village of Migron, and how it's going to be like the 'disengagement' from Gaza. But the pictures that go with those articles are typically not pictures of Gaza. They are pictures of the
violent expulsion of Jews from Amona that took place shortly after the Olmert regime took power six years ago. And the prospect of another Amona should cause far greater concern.
"This is not another outpost eviction," he said. "Migron is a community. This is an unprecedented eviction compared to everything we have done until now."
The officer further estimated that unlike outpost evictions, the destruction of Migron will not be over in one night. "I think the reaction of the settlers will also be more meaningful," he said. He added: "This step will also hurt the security aspect" – possibly meaning that IDF forces will have to be set aside to deal with Jews, thus compromising the anti-terror effort.
The officer admitted that the press coverage of the Jewish riot at the Ephraim Brigade Base had been disproportional. "The subject received greater attention because of the spotlight that was pointed at the area that night. Events like this have happened in the past."
The officer said that the IDF is worried about the rise in terror attacks on motorists in Judea and Samaria. Both rock attacks and firebomb attacks are increasing, he said.
The technique of throwing rocks from inside a passing car at another car is relatively new, he said. "The phenomenon started last August. There appears to be a cell in Gush Etzion, and another one in Binyamin, that we have not yet put our hands on. The murder of Asher Palmer and his son gave terror groups a boost."
Another dangerous and new terrorist technique, he said, is that of terrorists disguised as Israeli police who put up roadblocks and use a police strobe light to complete the illusion. The purpose seems to be abduction of Jews.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Amona, Gaza expulsion, Israeli civil war, Migron
Supreme Court orders government to make plan to expel Jews from 'outposts'
Yesterday, the Justice Minister (Friedmann) and the Attorney General (Mazuz)
reached a compromise on how the next attorney general will be appointed. The compromise puts an end to weeks of hysteria in which past Supreme Court justices (particularly Heshin and Matza) were interviewed daily on the radio so that they could decry the 'politicization' of the attorney general's office by Friedmann. Of course, what the Supreme Court justices were really doing was trying to protect the
branja. Here's the compromise that was reached:
A search committee will be headed by a retired judge, who will be chosen by the Supreme Court Chief Justice with the approval of the Justice Minister. The committee will present two or three candidates, from among whom the Cabinet will choose the Attorney-General.
Until now, the committee head was chosen solely by the Chief Justice, and only one candidate was presented. The new arrangement thus represents a victory of sorts for Justice Minister Friedmann, who wanted more of a say for the political echelons at the expense of what he perceived to be a judicial-system monopoly.
On the other hand, Friedmann gave in on his demand that the search committee head be a former Attorney General or Justice Minister.
Seventeen ministers voted in favor of the new arrangement, while seven voted against. Among the latter were two Kadima ministers, Tzipi Livni and Meir Sheetrit - both of whom are former Justice Ministers - and five Labor Party ministers.
How the attorney general is appointed is important because it is phase one in Justice Minister Friedmann's plan to wrest Supreme Court appointments away from the self-perpetuating monopoly that reflects the views of only the Israeli left. It is unfortunate that Friedman is Justice Minister under the corrupt
Ehud K. Olmert and not under a squeaky clean Prime Minister, because what Friedman is trying to accomplish is important for the country's future - especially for those of us whose outlook is somewhere to the right of Meretz - and all the corruption charges against Olmert (which are quite justified as far as I can tell) just get in the way. For those who have forgotten how the current judicial appointment system works and why it matters, please go
here.
I know a lot of you read my posts on this subject and wonder what they have to do with what you really want to hear about: Israel's actions in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, and the war with the 'Palestinians.' Yesterday, the Supreme Court met Israeli actions in Judea and Samaria.
Yesterday, the leftist Supreme Court gave the government until July 8 to come up with a plan to expel Jews from 'outposts' in Judea and Samaria. Yes, of course, in just about every civilized country in the world, the Supreme Court would not get involved in an issue like that because it's what we lawyers call a 'political question.' Yes, of course, in just about every civilized country in the world, there would be no one other than an aggrieved property owner who could bring a court case about this because anyone else would not have what we lawyers call standing. But in Israel no question is too political for the court's intervention and no real plaintiff is required when the court's sense of
justice political correctness is offended. And that's exactly what happened yesterday. With the IDF unable to handle the Kassams from Gaza and with war threatening from the north the 'Supreme Court' has decided to
force the army to dedicate troops to expelling Jews from their homes based on a petition by
Peace Piece by Piece Now, an entity that would not have standing in a civilized judicial system:
The order by High Court Justice Dorit Beinisch comes in response to a petition by Peace Now, which had asked the court to force the IDF to evacuate the Migron outpost, which was established in 2002 and has some 63 caravans.
...
Peace Now Director General Yariv Oppenheimer called Sunday's decision a "minor" step in the overall process. "The big decision will be taken a month from now when there is a court hearing."
He said that it was not clear from the document how large an evacuation plan Peretz was expected to present. There are some 105 unauthorized outposts in the West Bank, but evacuation moves have centered around a group of 24 whose removal was authorized by the cabinet in 2005.
Talks had been under way between the government and the Council of Jewish Communities of Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip regarding a compromise regarding the outposts that would avoid a violent confrontation. But such talks have stalled.
In case you are wondering,
Migron was ... established ... on a hilltop overlooking the Shomron's central artery Highway 60, which leads from Jerusalem to Binyamin and Shomron towns such as Ofrah, Beit El, Shilo, and Eli. The tall buildings of Jerusalem can be clearly seen to the south, thus that Migron is part of Jerusalem's defense belt.
The town never received all its written permits, thus rendering it an "illegal outpost," but its construction was rushed along and encouraged by many national and local government offices. In particular, a road was paved, caravans and playgrounds were stationed at the site, security was provided, and other help was administered. [In December 2003 when this article was written, then Defense Minister Shaul CiJ] Mofaz [had] ordered O.C. Central Command Maj.-Gen. Moshe Kaplinsky to prepare an order that will bypass the need to receive Supreme Court approval for the evacuation of the families.
...
A senior military Central Command source told Huberman that Migron has the added problem of questionable land-status. Even though much of the property is Jewish-owned, some of it is not. On the other hand, the main pusher behind the establishment of Migron was none other than Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Moshe Yaalon, who served in the past as Central Commander. Yaalon was among those who frequently warned that the site was a critically strategic point, and that if Israel does not take it, the Arabs would. Another recent Central Commander, Yitzchak Eitan, who was not a great friend of the Jewish settlement enterprise in Yesha, also insisted that the site remain Jewish. He even told then-Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer that if Jewish civilians were not permitted to remain, he would build an army outpost there. "This point must not be abandoned," he said.
For the record, none of the families living in Migron has anyplace else to go, which means that if they are expelled from their homes, they will join the Gaza homeless from two years ago (yes, most of the Jews who were expelled from Gaza two years ago are still homeless). And for those who have forgotten,
Amona was also an 'outpost.'
Labels: Amona, Migron, outposts, Supreme Court
