• 0 0
    What. A. Very. Curious. Article.
    • Johnboy
    • 14.03.10 | 13:36 (IST)

    All those paragraphs, and not one single word about ***why*** the judge said he would not issue that injunction. Plenty of words about what the petitioners were arguing. Plenty of words explaining why the state agreed with the basic thrust of the petition. Plenty of words stating that the judge said "no" to the petition. But not one word explaining the REASONS given by the judge for saying "no". He did give a reason, didn't he, for saying "no"? Didn't he?

    from the article: High Court rejects petition to stop building in West Bank outpost
    First published 03:02 14.03.10 | Last updated 10:08 14.03.10
Haaretz Headlines
New Delhi bomb - AP - February 2012
Netanyahu: Iran's terror acts undermine the world's stability 10 comments
bushehr - Reuters - December 9 2010
Iran to load own nuclear fuel rods in Tehran research reactor 10 comments
Tehran demo - Reuters - Feb 2012
Zvi Bar'el / In election-season Iran, domestic politics trump fear of Israeli attack 2 comments
Neeman - Fitoussi - 2.2012
Israel's justice minister advises rightists on how to seek pardons for Jewish terrorists 28 comments