Palestinian convicted of training with al-Qaida + Arafat must pay Israeli bus company

[KrazyHorse]

How bout the fact that the judgment against him was delivered before he got to deliver a defense. That doesn't smack of prejudice in its most literal sense?

[Panag]

Originally posted by CyberGnu
BTW, why aren't the egged people suing Sharon? He is the main character in the way of peace...

Of course, that would require Israelis taking an honest look at the conflict... Won't happen during our lifetime, I'm assuming.

hi ,

gnu , learn your facts , we have a better honest look at the conflict then you , ... at least we dont ignore facts like some , .....

as for Sharon , its people like you who are standing in the way of peace , ......

bye

[Az]

How bout the fact that the judgment against him was delivered before he got to deliver a defense. That doesn't smack of prejudice in its most literal sense?

He didn't bother to.

You can see that when the PA did deliver a defence, things went somewhat differently.

I do think that the lawsuit itself is kinda lame. But at least it's not people suing McD for being fat.

[Dinner]

Arafat is the one who killed any chance of a peace settlement and purposefully brought about armed conflict. He made the call so now he needs to pay for the damages his decision made.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Azazel

He didn't bother to.

You can see that when the PA did deliver a defence, things went somewhat differently.

Judge Adi Azar's verdict was issued without having received Arafat's written defense statement

That's not what this seems to imply. Doesn't come out and say that Arafat was trying to present a defense, but note the contained assumption that there was a "written defense statement" in existence that could have been received.

[KrazyHorse]

I agree with your assessment of the lawsuit. And I really wonder about how fair the trial would end up being, even assuming that Arafat was given time to present a defense. Not because the Jews hate Arabs and are out to get them, but for the same reason I find it suspect for the US to conduct lawsuits against foreign enemies in their courts. There's way too much one-sidedness on the issue to determine fairly what is at heart the justness of your own country.

It would give at least the appearance of a kangaroo court to anybody outside the country conducting the trial.

[Az]

I agree, fully. I am fairly sure that the court could deal with that, heck, he let a suspect nazi go, because of supposed lack of evidence.
but, it puts the court system as an immideate suspect of bias.

On the other hand, what could they do? I don't think they can dismiss a case in a civil lawsuit, and even if they could, they'll enter the political debate, and that's the last thing they want to do.
So they decided to agree on the direct causes of the damage, without getting into the reasons on the causes. Egged are suing the PA for the economical damage that was caused to the company, by the non-prevention of attacks from their territory, not for being terrorists.

[KrazyHorse]

If that's the case (non-prevention as opposed to overt act) then the PA has an excellent case for countersuing the Israeli government for limiting their ability to prevent attacks...

And on, and on...

[Az]

yes, I know.

( I actually am not knowledgable with the exact lawsuit, but that's my presumption).

This was a no-win situation for the legislative.

[Sirotnikov]

If that's the case (non-prevention as opposed to overt act) then the PA has an excellent case for countersuing the Israeli government for limiting their ability to prevent attacks...

completely and utterly false -
Their non-prevention goes back way before Israel first incurred into Palestinian territory for the first time in the middle of 2001.

Not only have they not prevent, but they also freed known Hamas and Jihad members from prison, and set up their own, secular terrorist organization - the tanzim with it's "al-aqsa brigades" wing. The tanzim is a military wing of fatah. Fatah is the party lead by Arafat.


As for this case being "illegal" or "biased", then it is again nonsense.

Since Israel is the occupier of the territories in question, the legal system it upholds applies there. The Palestinians are equally able to appeal to the High Court of Justice, and infact do so on a daily basis.

More than a few home destructions were over ruled by the Israeli high court after Palestinains appealed. Several military practices were ordered changed.

And a year ago, several Palestinian civilians have won a case of compensations from the State of Israel , for injuries they recieved due to military actions taken by IDF.

What does this mean? This means that there's a case for Palestinian civilians to recieve compensations for IDF actions which go astray.

Infact, until some time ago, Israel would actually supply compensations to relatives of knwon terrorists that Israel killed. Since it is unreasonable to provide a profit for those who commit terror, this policy was stopped.

PS - is there anyone here still taking gnu seriously except panag?

[Dinner]

I doubt anyone takes Gnu seriously any more. Still he's interesting to keep around and he always provides humorous entertainment in all the middle east threads.

[KrazyHorse]

Almost as funny as Sirotnikov's tireless rebutting.

[Panag]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

If that's the case (non-prevention as opposed to overt act) then the PA has an excellent case for countersuing the Israeli government for limiting their ability to prevent attacks...

completely and utterly false -
Their non-prevention goes back way before Israel first incurred into Palestinian territory for the first time in the middle of 2001.

Not only have they not prevent, but they also freed known Hamas and Jihad members from prison, and set up their own, secular terrorist organization - the tanzim with it's "al-aqsa brigades" wing. The tanzim is a military wing of fatah. Fatah is the party lead by Arafat.


As for this case being "illegal" or "biased", then it is again nonsense.

Since Israel is the occupier of the territories in question, the legal system it upholds applies there. The Palestinians are equally able to appeal to the High Court of Justice, and infact do so on a daily basis.

More than a few home destructions were over ruled by the Israeli high court after Palestinains appealed. Several military practices were ordered changed.

And a year ago, several Palestinian civilians have won a case of compensations from the State of Israel , for injuries they recieved due to military actions taken by IDF.

What does this mean? This means that there's a case for Palestinian civilians to recieve compensations for IDF actions which go astray.

Infact, until some time ago, Israel would actually supply compensations to relatives of knwon terrorists that Israel killed. Since it is unreasonable to provide a profit for those who commit terror, this policy was stopped.

PS - is there anyone here still taking gnu seriously except panag?

hi ,

last line >

have a nice day

[Az]

And a year ago, several Palestinian civilians have won a case of compensations from the State of Israel , for injuries they recieved due to military actions taken by IDF.

Frogger: I see nothing incorrect with Siro's statements.


*afraid of spiraling into ME madness*

[Panag]

Originally posted by Azazel



Frogger: I see nothing incorrect with Siro's statements.


*afraid of spiraling into ME madness*

hi ,

dont worry , some people never want to believe we are the only true democrazy in the ME with a legal systems that counts for everyone , including illigal aliens , bombers who survive , etc , .......

have a nice day