Petition against Jewish 'eruv' started in Bushey

Picture from stock

Picture from stock

First published in News
Last updated
Watford Observer: Photograph of the Author by , Reporter

A residents group opposed to the eruv in Bushey has started a petition in the hope that the county council will not grant the licence needed for it to go ahead.

Last August plans to erect a Jewish eruv, which will consist predominantly of 5.5 metre-high steel poles in 25 locations across Bushey, were approved by Hertsmere Borough Council.

The Bushey Residents Group formed last year in opposition of the eruv and a working group of seven to ten people meet regularly to plan the ongoing campaign.

The group do not believe they were properly consulted on the application.

The religious boundary around Bushey will turn the town into an area where strict Sabbath rules are relaxed for orthodox Jews, such as carrying or transporting items like wheelchairs, pushchairs and handkerchiefs.

To date 179 people have signed the petition on change.org. Although the planning permission has been granted, Hertfordshire County Council still need to grant a license for the application.
 

Comments (12)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

4:58pm Thu 26 Jun 14

Popeonarope says...

This is important that everyone is aware that the request, application, permission and professed implementation of this fairy fence came from within the Jewish community.
Such bias and conflict of interest needs to be highlighted as this has not been a fair and democratic process.
The metaphysical nonsense notwithstanding; the entire episode has highlighted the ludicrous and backwards ideas that many in such religions follow.
Once again, adapt your religion; not my environment.
This is important that everyone is aware that the request, application, permission and professed implementation of this fairy fence came from within the Jewish community. Such bias and conflict of interest needs to be highlighted as this has not been a fair and democratic process. The metaphysical nonsense notwithstanding; the entire episode has highlighted the ludicrous and backwards ideas that many in such religions follow. Once again, adapt your religion; not my environment. Popeonarope
  • Score: -11

5:24pm Thu 26 Jun 14

Busheyman1 says...

Popeonarope wrote:
This is important that everyone is aware that the request, application, permission and professed implementation of this fairy fence came from within the Jewish community.
Such bias and conflict of interest needs to be highlighted as this has not been a fair and democratic process.
The metaphysical nonsense notwithstanding; the entire episode has highlighted the ludicrous and backwards ideas that many in such religions follow.
Once again, adapt your religion; not my environment.
And it's important that everyone is aware you are not telling the whole truth!

It is a lie to suggest that permission came from the 'Jewish community'.

So you are insinuating that Jews run the council? If you checked your facts you would know that there was no conflict on the Planning Committee as some people have tried to suggest.

Herts BC followed correct procedure. Oppose the scheme if you wish but don't besmirch the Jewish population with your twisted comment.
[quote][p][bold]Popeonarope[/bold] wrote: This is important that everyone is aware that the request, application, permission and professed implementation of this fairy fence came from within the Jewish community. Such bias and conflict of interest needs to be highlighted as this has not been a fair and democratic process. The metaphysical nonsense notwithstanding; the entire episode has highlighted the ludicrous and backwards ideas that many in such religions follow. Once again, adapt your religion; not my environment.[/p][/quote]And it's important that everyone is aware you are not telling the whole truth! It is a lie to suggest that permission came from the 'Jewish community'. So you are insinuating that Jews run the council? If you checked your facts you would know that there was no conflict on the Planning Committee as some people have tried to suggest. Herts BC followed correct procedure. Oppose the scheme if you wish but don't besmirch the Jewish population with your twisted comment. Busheyman1
  • Score: 18

6:33pm Thu 26 Jun 14

Popeonarope says...

Yes, Im sure the council was completely impartial.
Why dont we ask Hertsmere mayor and Bushey Heath councillor, Paul Morris or Councillor Dr Harvey Cohen or Councillor John Graham or Councillor Charles Goldstein or Councillor Seamus Quilty or Councillor Sandra Parnell or
Hertsmere MP James Clappison or Councillors Zucker, Parnell and Solomons...

There seems to be a high proportion of Councillors in Hertsmere Council with Jewish affiliations now and historically but maybe that just crazy talk! I'm sure the correct procedures were followed to the letter, without any doubt what so ever.
Yes, Im sure the council was completely impartial. Why dont we ask Hertsmere mayor and Bushey Heath councillor, Paul Morris or Councillor Dr Harvey Cohen or Councillor John Graham or Councillor Charles Goldstein or Councillor Seamus Quilty or Councillor Sandra Parnell or Hertsmere MP James Clappison or Councillors Zucker, Parnell and Solomons... There seems to be a high proportion of Councillors in Hertsmere Council with Jewish affiliations now and historically but maybe that just crazy talk! I'm sure the correct procedures were followed to the letter, without any doubt what so ever. Popeonarope
  • Score: -1

12:21am Fri 27 Jun 14

LSC says...

Why not ask the Chair of Planning, who refused to attend meetings on the matter? Not because of a declared 'Conflict of Interest', but because they didn't like the other people who would turn up at the meetings, who might oppose their views?
Quite clearly, minds were made up before debate was had. This is documented and proven through a leak (brought on by their own incompetence), although not apologised for.

Ignoring the baffling logic behind the whole idea of an eruv, it clearly breaks basic planning law. Bushey is a Conservation Area, and also has some Green Belt.
Neither can be built on or have street furniture added unless it is deemed FOR THE COMMON GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY.
This idea is quite clearly not for the common good, it benefits an estimated 1%, one day a week only.

That is undemocratic and quite clearly unlawful. Hertsmere might have broken the law and got away with it, but Hertfordshire are perhaps a bit brighter and don't want Court cases and their jobs on the line for gross incompetence.

There are houses in Bushey that have been refused planning permission to install double glazing, of benefit to the whole planet, because it is a Conservation Area. Solar panels are restricted within common sight. You cannot have a roof replaced with cheap, but more energy efficient materials.

But you want to stick a pole in the pavement so some god doesn't smite you down for using a wheelchair or blowing your nose on a Saturday, is quite frankly embarrassing to my town. Hertsmere should hang their heads in shame, and boy, will they feel it at the next elections.
Why not ask the Chair of Planning, who refused to attend meetings on the matter? Not because of a declared 'Conflict of Interest', but because they didn't like the other people who would turn up at the meetings, who might oppose their views? Quite clearly, minds were made up before debate was had. This is documented and proven through a leak (brought on by their own incompetence), although not apologised for. Ignoring the baffling logic behind the whole idea of an eruv, it clearly breaks basic planning law. Bushey is a Conservation Area, and also has some Green Belt. Neither can be built on or have street furniture added unless it is deemed FOR THE COMMON GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY. This idea is quite clearly not for the common good, it benefits an estimated 1%, one day a week only. That is undemocratic and quite clearly unlawful. Hertsmere might have broken the law and got away with it, but Hertfordshire are perhaps a bit brighter and don't want Court cases and their jobs on the line for gross incompetence. There are houses in Bushey that have been refused planning permission to install double glazing, of benefit to the whole planet, because it is a Conservation Area. Solar panels are restricted within common sight. You cannot have a roof replaced with cheap, but more energy efficient materials. But you want to stick a pole in the pavement so some god doesn't smite you down for using a wheelchair or blowing your nose on a Saturday, is quite frankly embarrassing to my town. Hertsmere should hang their heads in shame, and boy, will they feel it at the next elections. LSC
  • Score: 8

8:26am Fri 27 Jun 14

garston tony says...

Oh dear, Pope starts off by making what could be a valid point about wether the procedure was actually followed properly when the planning application was approved.

He then has to spoil his good start by reverting to neanderthal type and having a dig at the religion itself.

Im not too sure how a symbol of religious tolerance is an embarrasment btw way LSC, what is embarrasing is the opposition being centred on the religious belief and not the actual planning app
Oh dear, Pope starts off by making what could be a valid point about wether the procedure was actually followed properly when the planning application was approved. He then has to spoil his good start by reverting to neanderthal type and having a dig at the religion itself. Im not too sure how a symbol of religious tolerance is an embarrasment btw way LSC, what is embarrasing is the opposition being centred on the religious belief and not the actual planning app garston tony
  • Score: 5

9:32am Fri 27 Jun 14

LSC says...

The embarrassment is living in a town that not only puts a minority fundamentalist belief system (don't forget most Jewish people aren't affected by an eruv either way, they are far more sensible) above the Law of the land, but advertises the fact physically.
The embarrassment is living in a town that not only puts a minority fundamentalist belief system (don't forget most Jewish people aren't affected by an eruv either way, they are far more sensible) above the Law of the land, but advertises the fact physically. LSC
  • Score: 6

10:08am Fri 27 Jun 14

pepsiman says...

I've got a feeling all sides are going to take this to the wire
I've got a feeling all sides are going to take this to the wire pepsiman
  • Score: 14

12:32pm Fri 27 Jun 14

garston tony says...

Unfortunately LSC most of the 'discussion' has centred around the belief behind the groups desire for an Eruv and usually expanding into attacking other/all faiths too.

The real issue, which is was the proper procedure followed when granting permissions and is that permission allowed within the law, is only paid lip service by the anti group who quickly return to their favourite topic of faith bashing.

Anyone on the outside therefore gets the impression that the people of Bushey are a hostile, intolerant, ignorant and unwelcoming bigots. Saddly that impression is wholly accurate when it comes to some of you.

Question and challenge the procedure and legality fine, but everytime you pass judgement on the faith itself it is you and your ilk that gives Bushey a bad name
Unfortunately LSC most of the 'discussion' has centred around the belief behind the groups desire for an Eruv and usually expanding into attacking other/all faiths too. The real issue, which is was the proper procedure followed when granting permissions and is that permission allowed within the law, is only paid lip service by the anti group who quickly return to their favourite topic of faith bashing. Anyone on the outside therefore gets the impression that the people of Bushey are a hostile, intolerant, ignorant and unwelcoming bigots. Saddly that impression is wholly accurate when it comes to some of you. Question and challenge the procedure and legality fine, but everytime you pass judgement on the faith itself it is you and your ilk that gives Bushey a bad name garston tony
  • Score: 3

2:38pm Fri 27 Jun 14

LSC says...

The opposite is true. Bushey is a very welcoming, diverse and friendly place. It is my belief that it will be LESS so if it is physically marked out as an area of special interest to one particular faith, creed or colour.
I don't see anything bigoted in that.

I've covered the law angle. It was broken/ignored on a very basic level, but to whom does one turn when it is the Council doing so? Our MP isn't interested and the police in Bushey have enough to do without enforcing a Conservation Area.
The opposite is true. Bushey is a very welcoming, diverse and friendly place. It is my belief that it will be LESS so if it is physically marked out as an area of special interest to one particular faith, creed or colour. I don't see anything bigoted in that. I've covered the law angle. It was broken/ignored on a very basic level, but to whom does one turn when it is the Council doing so? Our MP isn't interested and the police in Bushey have enough to do without enforcing a Conservation Area. LSC
  • Score: 4

3:54pm Fri 27 Jun 14

Popeonarope says...

garston tony wrote:
Unfortunately LSC most of the 'discussion' has centred around the belief behind the groups desire for an Eruv and usually expanding into attacking other/all faiths too.

The real issue, which is was the proper procedure followed when granting permissions and is that permission allowed within the law, is only paid lip service by the anti group who quickly return to their favourite topic of faith bashing.

Anyone on the outside therefore gets the impression that the people of Bushey are a hostile, intolerant, ignorant and unwelcoming bigots. Saddly that impression is wholly accurate when it comes to some of you.

Question and challenge the procedure and legality fine, but everytime you pass judgement on the faith itself it is you and your ilk that gives Bushey a bad name
The belief and the eruv are linked Tony. The entire reason for the eruv is based on the belief that a big sky fairy will be a little put out if someone dares to lift, push or think on the sabbat.
Religion is not personal; It is not your favourite colour; it is not the clothes you wear, it is not self contained. Religion is political.
It is social doctrine. Its is mass delusion. It is political power. It warps emotions and opinions. It is the most influential belief a person can hold: it is also the most irrational, most absurd and most blind. And it is the most deserving of criticism.
I would suggest the impression of Bushey is damaged more by a group that thinks they do not have to abide by the rules that everyone else has to, regardless of the majority who have every right to insist the same laws are applied to all without exception. But then, that maybe the reason for creating the eruv in the first place.
I would suggest the impression of "hostile, intolerant, ignorant and unwelcoming" people of Bushey lies at the feet of a group who share a belief system that specifically encourages those charges in its own members, like most religions.
[quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote: Unfortunately LSC most of the 'discussion' has centred around the belief behind the groups desire for an Eruv and usually expanding into attacking other/all faiths too. The real issue, which is was the proper procedure followed when granting permissions and is that permission allowed within the law, is only paid lip service by the anti group who quickly return to their favourite topic of faith bashing. Anyone on the outside therefore gets the impression that the people of Bushey are a hostile, intolerant, ignorant and unwelcoming bigots. Saddly that impression is wholly accurate when it comes to some of you. Question and challenge the procedure and legality fine, but everytime you pass judgement on the faith itself it is you and your ilk that gives Bushey a bad name[/p][/quote]The belief and the eruv are linked Tony. The entire reason for the eruv is based on the belief that a big sky fairy will be a little put out if someone dares to lift, push or think on the sabbat. Religion is not personal; It is not your favourite colour; it is not the clothes you wear, it is not self contained. Religion is political. It is social doctrine. Its is mass delusion. It is political power. It warps emotions and opinions. It is the most influential belief a person can hold: it is also the most irrational, most absurd and most blind. And it is the most deserving of criticism. I would suggest the impression of Bushey is damaged more by a group that thinks they do not have to abide by the rules that everyone else has to, regardless of the majority who have every right to insist the same laws are applied to all without exception. But then, that maybe the reason for creating the eruv in the first place. I would suggest the impression of "hostile, intolerant, ignorant and unwelcoming" people of Bushey lies at the feet of a group who share a belief system that specifically encourages those charges in its own members, like most religions. Popeonarope
  • Score: 1

10:58pm Fri 27 Jun 14

LSC says...

I state once again, this has nothing to do with the general Jewish population of Bushey. It is a tiny group of fundamentalists.
Like Muslim fundamentalists, they tend to shout loudest and get all the attention while the vast majority of their religion wish they would just shut up.
Just like 99.999% of Christians feel about the Westboro' Baptist Church, who are, without doubt Christians, but quite, quite deluded.
But the WBC aren't content with believing what they believe, they picket the funerals of soldiers and homosexuals in an effort to make the rest of the world believe what THEY believe. They feel the need to put up a physical expression of their beliefs. A bit like an eruv.

An eruv, I'm told, must have a boundary. Fine by me, make the whole UK an eruv. It has a natural boundary called the sea all round it, so there is no need for poles. I'd probably not know anything about it.
I'm told this isn't possible, but not why. Why do eruvs need to be concentrated little areas, almost tribally marked out for all to see?
I did try to ask one of the Rabbis, but he just called me an anti-semite, although not to my face, and is reluctant to enter debate.
I state once again, this has nothing to do with the general Jewish population of Bushey. It is a tiny group of fundamentalists. Like Muslim fundamentalists, they tend to shout loudest and get all the attention while the vast majority of their religion wish they would just shut up. Just like 99.999% of Christians feel about the Westboro' Baptist Church, who are, without doubt Christians, but quite, quite deluded. But the WBC aren't content with believing what they believe, they picket the funerals of soldiers and homosexuals in an effort to make the rest of the world believe what THEY believe. They feel the need to put up a physical expression of their beliefs. A bit like an eruv. An eruv, I'm told, must have a boundary. Fine by me, make the whole UK an eruv. It has a natural boundary called the sea all round it, so there is no need for poles. I'd probably not know anything about it. I'm told this isn't possible, but not why. Why do eruvs need to be concentrated little areas, almost tribally marked out for all to see? I did try to ask one of the Rabbis, but he just called me an anti-semite, although not to my face, and is reluctant to enter debate. LSC
  • Score: 8

9:39am Sun 29 Jun 14

Popeonarope says...

http://www.watfordob
server.co.uk/archive
/2014/06/25/11298938
.Planning_appeal_ref
usal_will_ensure_Rad
lett_remains__a_spec
ial_place_to_live_/

http://www.watfordob
server.co.uk/news/11
306122.Appeal_agains
t_Radlett_developmen
t_plans_launched/?re
f=var_0

"The application to demolish the bungalow in Park Avenue was thrown out by Hertsmere Borough Council because it was not "harmonious" for the area and it would detract from the character and appearance."

The council does not consider housing to be "harmonious" in Radlett but 25 5.5m poles with wires in Bushey is perfectly acceptable.... right, got it.
http://www.watfordob server.co.uk/archive /2014/06/25/11298938 .Planning_appeal_ref usal_will_ensure_Rad lett_remains__a_spec ial_place_to_live_/ http://www.watfordob server.co.uk/news/11 306122.Appeal_agains t_Radlett_developmen t_plans_launched/?re f=var_0 "The application to demolish the bungalow in Park Avenue was thrown out by Hertsmere Borough Council because it was not "harmonious" for the area and it would detract from the character and appearance." The council does not consider housing to be "harmonious" in Radlett but 25 5.5m poles with wires in Bushey is perfectly acceptable.... right, got it. Popeonarope
  • Score: 7

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree