|
|
|
Subject:
Dershowitz's Case against Arafat
swhitebull
2/4/2004 9:00:01 PM
|
| Siggi the Troll blathered, baited and switched, since he couldnt defend Arafat- he-da-man- the Ghul:
It seems to me that there are not enough evidence to get Yasser Arafat convicted for this murder in American court. Maybe in a military court like it is pland to put the hostages in Cuba in. A court that vill not need as much proofs as a civillian court and vill newer come down on a conclusion that vill make USA look bad. The fact whether those men did what they vill be charget for or not will not have any impact on this courts conclusion. If we are talking about charging terrorist leaders for killing Anerican citizens then why not take some newer case. Why not take the murder of Rachel Corrie that was committet the 16. of march last year. An Israely soldier murded her with cokd blod in the front of his superiers. Tere are not likly that an icident like that takes plase vithout an order from the above. So why not arrest Ariel Sharon and charge him for ordering that murder. He is the top leader of the worst terrorist organisation in the middle east, the Israely army..
Here in Dershie's own words, the case against Arafat:
The Case Against Yasser Arafat
Any fair court would convict him of murder, Harvard law professor writes
by Alan M. Dershowitz - May 6, 2002
There are two distinct questions that will certainly be raised when Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and U.S. President George W. Bush meet this week. The first is factual: Is Yasser Arafat a mass murdering terrorist with the blood of thousands of civilians on his hands? The second question is one of policy: Should Israel negotiate with Arafat who, regardless of whether he is a terrorist, is also the elected leader of the Palestinian people?
Sharon believes that the answer to the first question is yes and that it necessarily follows from this answer that the answer to the second question must be no. Bush wants the answer to the second question to be yes, and so he insists -- as U.S. national security advisor Condoleezza Rice has put it -- "I don't think we get anywhere by calling Yasser Arafat a terrorist." Indeed, if the U.S. were to call Arafat a terrorist, under the terms of the Bush doctrine, its hands would be tied. It could not deal with him because the Bush doctrine requires that the U.S. treat all terrorists as enemies to be defeated.
There is, of course, a third alternative: To recognize the factual reality that Arafat is a brutal terrorist who has relied on the deliberate targeting of innocent civilians from the very beginning of his career and who continues to do so today, while at the same time recognizing that it may be necessary to negotiate even with mass murderers in order to achieve peace.
The evidence that Arafat is a mass murderer is overwhelming and is beyond reasonable dispute. As a criminal law professor and a practicing criminal defence lawyer for nearly 40 years, I can attest, with absolute certainty, that there is enough evidence against Arafat to assure his conviction of first degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder in any fair legal system anywhere in the world.
The evidence includes his own words, both oral and written, the eyewitness testimony of close associates and an overwhelming amount of documentary and circumstantial evidence.
Were Arafat a mafia don or a drug kingpin he would be spending the rest of this life in prison. On the facts currently available, the case against Arafat is far more compelling than the case against Osama bin Laden, both in terms of the quality and quantity of the evidence, and in terms of the number of deaths for which their organizations are responsible.
Here, in a nutshell, is the prosecution's case against Yasser Arafat:
Arafat's involvement with terrorism began even before Israel occupied a single inch of Palestinian territory. He began as an Egyptian terrorist, complicit in the arming of Fedayeen, who crossed the border from Egyptian-occupied Gaza into Israel to attack civilian targets. In 1968, a year after Israel's victory in the six-day war, Arafat became the father of international terrorism by directing a campaign of airplane hijackings which targeted not only El-Al but the airlines of virtually every European nation. These airplane hijackings were designed to bring attention to the Palestinian cause. Hundreds of commercial travellers were killed. In 1972, the Palestinian leadership decided to escalate its terrorism by attacking the Israeli Olympic team in Munich. Although the attack was masterminded by Mohammed Oudeh, a one-time associate of Arafat, Oudeh publicly stated that "Arafat was briefed on the scheme." Several months after the murder of the 11 Israelis in Munich, Arafat personally planned the kidnapping of two American and one Belgian diplomat in Khartoum, Sudan. Unbeknownst to Arafat, the United States intercepted a direct communication between Arafat and his operatives in the Khartoum office of al-Fatah. There exists a tap |
| |
|
|
|
