This is a recent article about a lawsuit brought on behalf of the families of victims of Arab terror attacks. The families seek damages from the PLO, the terror organization behind the attacks.
In trying to get the lawsuit dismissed, the PLO insisted the terror attacks were actually acts of war. Since wars are conducted by states, the PLO effectively argued that it was acting on behalf of a state, thus effectively arguing that another Palestinian Arab state, in addition to Jordan, already exists in the disputed territories.
De facto, it is actually correct. In practice, there are really four states in the territory of the Palestine Mandate, Israel, Jordan, Hamastan and Fatahstan, but the latter two are rogue states and thus not recognized as states in any legal sense.
In trying to get the lawsuit dismissed, the PLO insisted the terror attacks were actually acts of war. Since wars are conducted by states, the PLO effectively argued that it was acting on behalf of a state, thus effectively arguing that another Palestinian Arab state, in addition to Jordan, already exists in the disputed territories.
De facto, it is actually correct. In practice, there are really four states in the territory of the Palestine Mandate, Israel, Jordan, Hamastan and Fatahstan, but the latter two are rogue states and thus not recognized as states in any legal sense.
PLO loses bid to dismiss lawsuit
Associated Press
New York - The Palestine Liberation Organization can't win dismissal of a lawsuit by victims of bombings in Israel by claiming the attacks were acts of war rather than terrorism, a judge ruled Tuesday.
U.S. District Judge George Daniels said the 2004 lawsuit on behalf of victims and their families can proceed toward trial. It seeks up to $3 billion in damages from attacks between January 2001 and February 2004.
Daniels rejected the PLO's argument that two machine-gun attacks and five bombings were acts of war.
The Jerusalem-area attacks killed 33 people and wounded hundreds, including scores of U.S. citizens.
Daniels said the attacks targeted public places - not military or government personnel or interests. Two bombings were on downtown streets; others occurred at a crowded bus stop, a cafeteria at the Hebrew University and a passenger-filled civilian bus.
The use of bombs in these circumstances indicates an intent to cause far-reaching devastation upon the masses, the judge said, with a merciless capability of indiscriminately killing and maiming untold numbers in heavily populated civilian areas.
Such attacks upon non-combative civilians, who were allegedly simply going about their everyday lives, do not constitute acts of war, he said.
Daniels also said the violence meets the legal definition of international terrorism.
The lawsuit alleges that the PLO carried out the attacks to pressure the United States and Israel to submit to its demands and to terrorize, intimidate and coerce the civilian population of Israel into acquiescing to its political goals.
If the PLO goes bankrupt as the result of losing such a suit and is followed in that path by Hamas and Hezbollah, the world will be a much better and safer place.
In any event, by arguing that a Palestinian Arab state already exists, the PLO and, by inheritance, the Palestinian Authority, undermine their own arguments elsewhere to the contrary.
In any event, by arguing that a Palestinian Arab state already exists, the PLO and, by inheritance, the Palestinian Authority, undermine their own arguments elsewhere to the contrary.
No comments:
Post a Comment