Help The Legal and Moral Lawfare

On Thursday morning, Shurat HaDin and their American co-counsel, Robert J. Tolchin of New York, filed an unprecedented lawsuit to seize ships used by the Islamic and anti-Israeli organizations to breach Israel’s coastal blockade. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of an American terror victim injured by a Palestinian suicide bomber. The suit, Bauer v The Mavi Marmara, was filed in Manhattan federal court. It seeks to confiscate 14 ships outfitted with funds unlawfully raised in the United States by anti-Israel groups, including The Free Gaza Movement (“FGM”). In May 2010, several of these ships, led by the Mavi Marmara, attempted to breach the blockade. The resulting violence caused the deaths of nine militants and injury to numerous Israeli Navy SEALs.


The plaintiff, American biologist, Dr. Alan Bauer, who along with his son Jonathan was seriously injured in a Palestinian suicide bombing on March 21, 2002 in Jerusalem, alleges that FGM and other American-based anti-Israel organizations have raised funds in the United States to outfit the Gaza Flotilla ships. The lawsuit contends that furnishing and outfitting the ships, which are being used for hostilities against a U.S. ally, violates American law. The plaintiff rests his claim upon a rarely-utilized "informant" statute (18 U.S.C. section 962) that allows a plaintiff (called an "informer") to privately seize ships outfitted in the United States for use against a U.S. ally. The law we are basing this cutting edge suit upon is an anti-piracy statute dating back to 1794.

This is the first time a lawsuit in the U.S. has been brought to seize the Gaza Flotilla ships themselves. The aim is to show that funds were illegally raised by the FGM in the U.S. to purchase and outfit the Flotilla boats in violation of the Neutrality Act. They contend that organizing a naval expedition to violently breach Israel's coastal blockade of the terrorist controlled Gaza is a hostile act against an American ally.

It is their intention to seize all the boats and turn them over to a victim of Palestinian terrorism. The extremists organizing these hostile provocations against Israel must not be allowed to illegally raise funds for their operations in the U.S. This unprecedented private action will help block their efforts to breach the coastal blockade and smuggle materials to Hamas in Gaza.

A copy of the Gaza Flotilla Lawsuit complaint.

Shurat HaDin is using the courts to fight back against the extremists.

Support their efforts!

Shurat HaDin - Israel Law Center
10 Hata'as St. Ramat Gan, 52512 Israel
Phone: 972-3-7514175
Fax: 972-3-7514174
info@israellawcenter.org
http://www.israellawcenter.org/

^

Fighting Lawfare Legally

Here is the letter:

Dear Chancellor Wu:

On March 25 and March 26, 2011, University of California Hastings College of the Law is officially co-sponsoring and funding a conference entitled "Litigating Palestine: Can Courts Secure Palestinian Rights." The conference is listed on Hastings' official website, and you, in fact, are opening the conference by welcoming the participants.

It is, of course, completely within the purview of Hastings College of the Law to examine lawfare as it pertains to the Israeli-Arab conflict. However, the authorized description of this event makes it clear that conference participants will be advocating for one side of the conflict, the Arab side, and seeking to exploit Western courts in order to agitate against Jews and the Jewish state through anti-Israel lawfare.(*) This is not only a misuse of the name and resources of the University of California for political and partisan purposes, it is also ethically and morally reprehensible.

Moreover, we believe that this event fits within the Working Definition of Anti-Semitism issued by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC), endorsed by the U.S. State Department in its Reports on Global Anti-Semitism, and used as well by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights in its examination of campus anti-Semitism. As the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has observed, "Anti-Semitic bigotry is no less morally deplorable when camouflaged as anti-Israelism or anti-Zionism."

The EUMC Working Definition identifies the following practices as anti-Semitic and distinguishes them from acceptable forms of criticism of a sovereign nation's policies:

-     Denying the Jewish people the right to self-determination
-     Applying double standards by requiring of Israel behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.

The Trans-Arab Research Institute, which is the sponsoring organization, has stated that part of its mission is the elimination of the Jewish state. Several of its board members are affiliated with the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign and serve as some of its leaders. In addition, more than half of the speakers at the event are also affiliated with the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaigns, and at least one talk will be devoted to finding legal strategies for defending these campaigns.

This leaves no doubt that the conference was organized for the purpose of harming the Jewish State. Your law school has provided funding and is therefore complicit in this effort.

The heads of sixty Jewish organizations -- including the Anti-Defamation League, the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, Bnai Brith, Hillel, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the Reform, Conservative, and Orthodox movements, both Democratic and Republican supporters, as well as organizations from Mexico, Australia, Belgium and the United Kingdom -- have recently signed a statement identifying Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Campaigns against Israel as "part of a greater effort to undermine the Jewish people's right to self-determination in their homeland, Israel." They condemn such campaigns and assert that its "proponents have provoked deep divisions among students and have created an atmosphere of intolerance and hatred." We are copying this letter to the heads of many of those organizations.

Finally, we believe that this event may be in violation of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Right Act. As you probably know, there has been a recent change in the interpretation of Title VI by the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights. Now, under Federal law, anti-Semitic animus on campus is comparable to other forms of bias and must be aggressively combated by the university administration. The Office of Civil Rights has already opened two investigations of possible Title VI violations at the University of California. One of the complaints, submitted by one of us, argues that university funded/sponsored events that are virulently anti-Israel have created a hostile environment for Jewish students at the University of California Santa Cruz, in violation of federal law.

For the reasons we have outlined above, we urge you to publicly announce that you are withdrawing all Hastings College of the Law funding and sponsorship of this event, as well as your own participation in it.


Sincerely,


Leila Beckwith
Professor Emeritus, University of California at Los Angeles

Tammi Rossman-Benjamin
Lecturer, University of California at Santa Cruz



CC: Hastings College of the Law Board of Directors
Governor Jerry Brown
Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom
State Senate President Pro Tempore Darrell Steinberg
Assembly Speaker John A. Perez
Assembly Speaker Pro Tempore Fiona Ma
Heads of the following organizations, who are signatory to a statement condemning Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaigns against Israel:
Aish HaTorah
Alpha Epsilon Pi Fraternity
American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise (AICE)
The American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)
American Jewish Committee (AJC)
Anti-Defamation League (ADL)
Association of Reform Zionists of America (ARZA)
B'nai B'rith International
The Board of Deputies of British Jews
Boycott Watch
Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations
The Fellowship for Campus Safety and Integrity
Hadassah
Hagshama – The Department for Diaspora Activities of the World Zionist
Organization
Hasbara Fellowships
Hillel: The Foundation for Jewish Campus Life
The International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists
Israel on Campus Coalition (ICC)
The Israel Project (TIP)
Conrad Giles, Rabbi Steve Gutow
Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA)
The Jewish Federations of North America
Jewish National Fund (JNF)
Jewish People Policy Institute (JPPI)
Masa Israel Journey
MERCAZ USA
National Conference on Soviet Jewry (NCSJ)
National Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC)
Orthodox Union (OU)
Rabbinical Assembly
Republican Jewish Committee (RJC)
Simon Weisenthal Center
StandWithUs
Union for Reform Judaism (URJ)
United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism
United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism and campus division KOACH
Women's League for Conservative Judaism
World Jewish Congress, North America
Zionist Organization of America (ZOA)

--------------
(*)
LITIGATING PALESTINE: CAN COURTS SECURE PALESTINIAN RIGHTS?
AGENDA
Friday March 25
3:00 Welcome by Dean Frank Wu, UC Hastings College of the Law
Introduction by Professor George Bisharat, UC Hastings College of the Law
3:15 – Panel I – Palestinian claimants and defendants before U.S. Courts
 Professor Gwynne Skinner, Willamette University Law School, “The Nonjusticiability of the Middle East:
U.S. Human Rights Litigation and the Misuse of the Political Question Doctrine”
 Noura Erakat, Adjunct Professor, Center for Contemporary Arab Studies, Georgetown University,
“Palestinians in US Federal Courts: Constructing a ‘Terrorist’ Prototype”
 Linda Moreno, Esq., “Political Prosecutions in America: Prosecuting Other People's 'Terrorists’”
5:15-5:30 – Break
5:30-6:15 – Keynote Address
 Professor Jules Lobel, University of Pittsburgh Law School, “Success Without Victory: The Politics of
Palestinian Litigation”
Saturday March 26
8:45 – Panel II – Courts in Israel/Palestine
 Jamil Dakwar, Esq., ACLU – New York, “Hollow Justice: Litigating Palestinian Equality In Israeli Courts”
 Nimer Sultany, SJD Candidate, Harvard Law School, "The Master's House and the Master's Tools:
Occupation and the High Court"
 Diana Buttu, Esq., "Fitting a Square Peg Into a Round Hole: The Use of Palestinian Courts to Secure
Palestinian Rights"
10:45-11:00 – Break
11:00-1:00 – Panel III – Other National Courts and the International System
 Emily Schaeffer, Esq., Law Offices of Michael Sfard, "Litigating Bil'in in Canada: Victories and Obstacles
in the Face of an ‘Inconvenient’ Forum"
 Daniel Machover, Esq., Hickman and Rose, “Delegitimising the Rule of Law – The Israeli Campaign
Against Universal Jurisdiction”
 Victor Kattan, Lecturer in Law, SOAS, "Litigating ‘Palestine’ before International Courts: The
Prospects of Success and Perils of Failure"
 Lisa Hajjar, University of California, Santa Barbara, Discussant
1:30-2:30 On Campus Lunch
2:45- Panel IV – Beyond Litigation
 Yasmine Gado, Esq., "The Russell Tribunal on Palestine: London Session on Corporate Complicity in
Israel's Violations of International Law"
 Matthew Ross, Esq. and Elizabeth Jackson, “Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions: Defending the BDS
Movement from Legal Challenges”
 Samera Esmeir, Professor of Rhetoric, UC Berkeley, “International Strategies of Rule and Liberation
Struggles: Between Revolution and War”
4:45-5:00 Closing Remarks by Professor George Bisharat, UC Hastings College of the Law

Lawfare To Target Jerusalem - As A Jewish City

(k/t = Danny Seidmann)

Seems there are moves afoot:- Experts prepare to take Jerusalem case to The Hague

Arab experts on Wednesday took the first steps towards taking international legal action against Israel for ongoing excavations near the old city of Jerusalem. Arab archaeologists, conservationists and heritage experts met in Amman yesterday to gather what they claim are documented impacts of ongoing Israeli projects altering the identity of the Holy City.

The two-day gathering of the committee of experts, held under the auspices of the Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (ISESCO) at the Department of Antiquities (DoA), aims to take Israel to task for violations ranging from changing historical street names to excavations underneath Al Aqsa Mosque.

Once the documentation is complete, the committee will draft a report and issue recommendations for a case to be brought before the International Court of Justice, according to DoA Director Ziad Saad.

..."Israel has used Biblical texts to support their national narrative and have disregarded Arab-Islamic heritage," he said...."Israeli archaeologists themselves have disproved that this tunnel belongs to the time of David. They are using the project to claim that Jerusalem is first and foremost a Jewish city," said Raef Nijem, a conservationist who has worked on the renovation of Al Aqsa Mosque...Ismail Tellawi, secretary general of the Palestinian National Committee for Education and Science, said the committee, in its report, will also demand an increased role for UNESCO, which has listed the old city of Jerusalem on its endangered heritage sites list...

We've already been through this. Back in 1930-1931.

I blogged about it here.

Only fools are doomed to repeat a losing historical narrative, as the Arabs have promoted and continue to do so.

Starting from zero-mention quotient of Jerusalem in the Koran to the policy adopted by the Arabs of 'Temple Denial' (here in 2007 and recently here), the Arabs cannot recall a basic Jewish text, the "three cities" Midrash, here:

Midrash Rabbah - Genesis LXXIX:7 AND HE BOUGHT THE PARCEL OF GROUND, etc. (XXXIII, 19). R. Judan b. R. Simon said: This is one of the three places regarding which the nations of the world cannot taunt Israel and say, ' Ye have stolen them.’ These are they: The cave of Machpelah, the [site of the] Temple, and the sepulcher of Yosef HaTzaddik . The cave of Machpelah: And Abraham weighed to Ephron the silver (Gen. XXIII, 16). The Temple: So David gave to Ornan for the place six hundred shekels of gold (I Chron. XXI, 25). And Yosef HaTzaddik’s sepulcher: AND HE BOUGHT THE PARCEL OF GROUND.

[In the original Hebrew:

ז

ויקן את חלקת השדה אשר נטה שם אהלו וגו' במאה קשיטה

אמר רבי יודן בר סימון: זה אחד משלושה מקומות, שאין אומות העולם יכולין להונות את ישראל לומר: "גזולים הן בידכם" ואלו הן: מערת המכפלה, ובית המקדש וקבורתו של יוסף

מערת המכפלה, דכתיב (בראשית כג): וישמע אברהם אל עפרון, וישקול אברהם לעפרון

בית המקדש, דכתיב (ד"ה א כא): ויתן דוד לארנן במקום וגו'

וקבורתו של יוסף, (בראשית לג) ויקן את חלקת השדה, יעקב קנה שכם

As noted:

How tragically ironic it is that it is in regard to these very areas: Hebron, Shechem, and the Temple Mount, we are forced to stand up against the world to defend our rights of ownership.

And this teaching as an example of the intensity of Rabbinic literature regarding the value of Eretz-Yisrael:

“Pirkei Derabi Eliezer”(Chap. 36) serves as a basis for this teaching:

Abraham advised the Jebusites of his wish to buy the Cave of the Machpela, at a good price, for gold and a legal deed to the place that would be a burial site.

Were they Jebusites? Weren’t they Hittites?--but they were named Jebusites because of their proximity to Jebusite city.

They did not agree. He (Abraham) began kneeling and bowing to them, as it is said: ”And Abraham bowed in front of the people of the land”. They said to him: We know that the All-Mighty will give all of these lands to you and your descendants; enter into an oath with us that the sons of Israel will inherit the city of Jebus only with the consent of the Jebusite people.

Later he purchased the Cave of the Machpela with gold and an everlasting deed. When the people of Israel came into the Land of Israel, they wanted to enter into the Jebusite city. However, they were unable to do so because of Abraham’s oath and covenant with the Jebusites, as it is said: ”And the Jebusite-the settlers of Jerusalem, they (The people of Israel) did not inherit it. (Judges 1:21)

This Midrash comes to teach us, not that Avraham really relinquished Jerusalem, but that he saw Hebron as the foundation of the Jewish People in Israel, without which, we would never reach the holiness of Jerusalem.

And as for that Jebusite reference, see here and also here.

Well, will we see them at court?

^