PLO Still Argues Terrorist Acts are Legitimate Acts of War: Plus ca change...

Submitted by Adam of Royal Oak (United States), Oct 31, 2008 at 14:58

As a preliminary matter, I agree the PLO was and is a terror organization and remains at war with Israel. But I am not sure that the "PLO: acknowleges it is still at war with Israel", at least not based on a reading of the Judge's excellent opinion.

I say this because the Judge was ruling on the Defendant PLO's motion to dismiss under Rule 12. A defendant often seeks Rule 12 dismissal early in the case (before the time and expense of discovery) on the ground that even assuming for purposes of argument that the plaintiff's allegations are true, the case should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction or because the fail to state a claim. This does not mean the defendant is admitting the allegations. (Just like Obama was able to obtain a Rule 12 dismissal of the lawsuit against him claiming he was not born an American citizen).

The significant point, as you emphasize, is that the PLO argued that the attacks as alleged are "acts of war" (which the PLO argues would mean there is no claim under the anti-terrorism law). By making such an argument, however, the PLO shows it still believes acts of terrorism are "legitmiate" acts of warfare. As you state well: "the Palestine Liberation Organization formally confirmed that it still sees terrorism against Israelis as legitimate acts of war."

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".