×
Stephen Emerson, arguing that the failure of U.S. prosecutors to convict the members of the Holy Land Foundation is actually proof that the members of Holy Land Foundation are guilty of the crimes with which they were charged:
"To be sure, the mistrial was portrayed as another in a series of setbacks for the government's anti-terror prosecution strategy. Notably, several jurors seemed to discount the testimony of an Israeli security expert, testifying under an assumed name, apparently on the belief that Israelis cannot be trusted on Palestinian matters."Or, alternatively, on the belief that convicting Americans of supporting terrorism should require more than the word of an Israeli Shin Bet agent testifying under a pseudonym.
"Some jurors may even have bought the defense argument that anti-Israel terror isn't truly terrorism, but merely "resisting the occupation." One juror told the Dallas Morning News of his difficulty in describing Hamas as a terrorist group, stating, "Part of it does terrorist acts, but it's a political movement. It's an uprising."The Dallas Morning News also noted that the juror "has lived in Europe," which is probably where his "moral clarity" was muddied, and which also might explain his immunity to arguments that portray every act of resistance against Israel’s illegal occupation, including support for medical clinics, as “anti-Israel terror.”
