Conference taveng::bagels

.0>                     -< Kahane's Murderer ACQUITTED .... >-
.0>
.0>    ...
.0>
.0>    The jury ...                   evidently was convinced by the well
.0>    known defense lawyer William Kunzler [sic]
.0>    that the prosecution had not been
.0>    able to prove beyond a "reasonable doubt" that the accused indeed was
.0>    the murderer. 

Without any additional details, I would not automatically assume (as .0's title
does) that the accused man did murder Kahane.  The police force and district
attorney's office are run by human beings, who are inherently fallible.  Is it
possible that they had the wrong man?

    The man was convicted of shooting 2 people outside after Kahane was
    killed and for kidnapping a lady trying to get away. The problem the
    prosecution had was that there was no eye witness that saw him shoot
    Kahane.
    
    Obviously the jury was not convinced by the prosecution. Did a guilty
    man get away, maybe, but the prosecution has to prove beyond a
    reasonable doubt to get a guilty verdict and in this case they didn't/
    
    yoseff
    

According to a report that I saw, there was no autopsy of Kahane's body.  With
no eyewitness who saw the defendant shoot the victim, and no medical
examination of the victim afterwards, the prosecution could have a tough time
proving a murder charge.  Whatever one thinks of his politics, Kunstler is a
good lawyer, good enough to use the weaknesses in the prosecution's case to get
an acquittal on the murder charge.

    Did the family refuse to have an autopsy done?? Sounds like if the
    prosecution had gotten the bullet(s) that killed Kahane and it matched
    up with the gun the accused was carrying they would have had a better
    chance.
    
    

    	A guy walks up to a lecturer after a speech, shoots him dead -
    point blank - threatens the other people with the gun, runs out
    shooting, takes a hostage - all with the same gun.
    	He pleads guilty to shooting Kahane, and later changes his plea.
    The defense lawyer spends his jury challenges on turning away
    light-skinned jurors in an apparent and transparent attempt to use the
    ethnic tensions between the Jews and Blacks in the New York area.
    	
    	Upon the bizarre jury decision, the media concentrates on the JDL
    protests.
    
    	A political assasination is condoned. It's now apparently OK to
    kill a Jewish leader in public for what he says.
    
    	I think this travesty is part of the pattern that includes the
    current anti-Israeli/anti-Ziontist/(veiled anti-Semtitic) bias in the
    mass media, the rise of David Duke despite his blatant anti-Semitism,
    our President slamming "the Jewish lobby" as the Goliath, Buchanan's
    "amen corner" causes of the Gulf War, the Crown Heights pogrom and its
    non-investigation, and other, less visible occurences. The world is
    truly reverting to its pre-Holocaust state, and US may be leading the
    pack.
    
    DG

    
    Rabbi Solomon Kahane (a cousin of R. Meir HY"D) just showed
    me a commentary on a verse in this week's parasha (Ex. 2:12):
    
    	And he turned this way and that, and he saw that there
    	was no man...
    
    The commentator Peninim Yekarim explains that this refers
    to the status of the Jew in Egypt -- he looked all about
    and saw that in the eyes of the Egyptian, the Jew was not
    human... and Moses understood that there was no hope for
    justice through the Egyptian courts.
    
    Similarly, Rabbi Meir Shapiro of Lublin says that Moses
    looked left and right - at the various political parties
    across the spectrum - and found only one thing uniting
    them all... contempt for the Jew. It was at this point
    that he gave up all hope in (the most civilized) Egyptian
    culture, and made the fateful decision to throw his lot
    in with his own people -- for better or for worse.
    
    We miss you, Reb Meir, your insights and wit, your leadership
    and fearlessness. May your blood be avenged... speedily.
    
    Jem
    

.5>    	A guy walks up to a lecturer after a speech, shoots him dead -
.5>    point blank ...

It is a feature of the law in the United States, and in many other countries,
that this is not enough to get someone convicted of murder.  In addition to the
guy doing these things, the prosecution must present sufficient evidence to
prove that he did.  One result of this is that in cases where the prosecution
is unable to come up with sufficient evidence, it is quite possible for a
murderer to go free unpunished.

In a roomful of Kahane supporters, no one saw the defendant shoot Rabbi Kahane.
This is a shame, but I doubt that it had anything to do with the current
anti-Semitism in the American left and right.  It may make us feel good to find
someone to blame when things don't work out as we want them to, but sometimes
it isn't anyone's fault.


.6>    Reb Meir, ... May your blood be avenged... speedily.

There was quite enough violence associated with Rabbi Kahane in both his life
and his death.  Maybe we should find a more constructive response.

    It seems unbelievable that the accused was aquitted, as it does to
    a great many others.  I shudder to think that there is a perverse
    conscious anti-semetic explanation for this obvious travesty of
    justice.
    
    Perhaps the CIA of other "well meaning" but never the less misguided
    entity was able to sway the prosecutor and jury to free or lessen
    the responsibility of this heinous crime, that our Arab "friends"
    might find it easier to negotiate other deals with the US.
    
    Justice was not served!
    
    Ron 

    	The moral relativism can only carry one so far. Faith in the
    judicial system is good and proper, but blind faith is not. There have
    been plenty of cases of wrongful convictions AND wrongful acquittals,
    especially when a criminal case carries a heavy political undercurrent.
    
    	The anti-Semitism is not in the court procedure itself, but in the
    method (and successful method!) of selecting a particular jury, playing
    to the communal tensions in the New York area. It's also in the way our
    media has reported on the case since the beginning to the end - from
    vilifying Kahane before his body cooled off, as an implicit suggestion
    that he might have "deserved it" - to the post-trial concentration on
    the JDL protests of the verdict... 
    	Blame, in this case, can only fall on the murderer and his
    shepherds. However, the current methods of "analysis", the spin in the
    media, the general atmospere these create - encourage and incite the
    next such outrage. In this sense, the original murder coverage probably
    tangentially encouraged the Crown Heights pogrom, and the way JDL & JDO
    have been de-legitimized, encouraged the uneven presentation of the
    Crown Heights as a two-sided "battle", by equating a carload of Jewish
    militants with a few hundred black rioters.
    	The web of propaganda and bias may at times seem so thin as to be
    a figment of an angry imagination. This web is, however, strong enough
    to tie the Jews to our pre-Holocaust past and our coming future. The
    pattern comes into sharp relief now and then, and we may get confused
    or outraged or scared - it's always a personal reaction. It's useful to
    remember, in any case, that blood libel stories always start small, and
    always need a nurturing climate to grow in...
    
    DG

    No judicial system that is man made is perfect, by definition it cannot
    be.  Based on what I have heard I would be reasonably certain that
    given the circumstances the accused was guilty. However, since I was
    not on the jury it was not my decision to make.
    
    In terms of the anti-semitism issue. Another well publicized trial
    (Kennedy rape trial) used "experts" to help in the jury selection; in
    other words that is done in many cases. The selection of jurors for the
    Kahane murder case was going to be based, by the defense, on criteria
    that would create a favorable jury for the defendant. Is this
    anti-semitism, I am not convinced of that. Does anti-semitism exist in
    the US in genral, NY in particular, sure it does. Is this trial a case
    of anti-semitism? personally I don't believe so.
    
    yoseff
    

Re: .7 (Eric)

>There was quite enough violence associated with Rabbi Kahane in both his life
>and his death. 

I don't think old (and especially inaccurate) arguments about Rabbi
Kahane's methods need to be dredged up at this point. Suffice it to
say, the Shabbatot that I was privileged to spend with the Kahane
family in Jerusalem were among the most peaceful and serene of my
life. Believe it or not, no political discussions were allowed in
the house on Shabbat whatsoever. All that could be heard from 
Rabbi Kahane's mouth all day was Torah. 

Jem
                                                              

    Would anyone explain me why it was "second degree murder" charge?
    
    
    CEM�H.

In New York State, first degree murder is restricted to the murder of police
officers and prison guards.

    re: .13
    
    I thought it had to do with premeditation.  In some jurisdictions it is
    necessary to prove that not only did the murderer deliberately kill the
    victim, but that it was clearly planned before hand.  The fact that the
    killer was carrying a weapon is not proof that he planned to use it.
    
    re: .11
    
    It is ingenuous (and something of a non-sequitur) to say, in .6 "May
    your blood be avenged... speedily" and then, when Eric suggests that
    there might be a more constructive response, to suggest that because
    Kahane refrained from discussing politics on Shabbat, that he had no
    connection with violence.  In fact, I can recall reading one of his
    tracts a few years ago that was ostensibly about Torah, but was
    obviously a thinly disguised justification for violence against Arabs
    and, possibly, Jews who disagreed with his positions.
    
    
    More generally, I am appalled that a public assassination could take
    place in the middle of a major U. S. city and the killer could go
    unpunished.  Either Nossair did it and the prosecutor and police did an
    inadequate job of proving the case, or someone else did it and seems to
    have gotten away cleanly.  Either way, it sets  a dangerous precedent,
    because it suggests that some people can safely resolve their political
    difference with guns rather than negotiation.  This is not simply an
    Arab-Jewish issue; it has implications for everyone who lives in a
    democracy.
    
                                         Aaron

re 1st degree murder:

Unless NY law has changed in the last 5 years or so, I stand by my explanation.
If my memory of Perry Mason is correct, premeditation is a factor is some
states (where did Perry practice?).

re two possibilities:

There's a third: there are occasional cases where everybody's sure that
the jury's going to return a guilty verdict, but for some reason (known
only to them), they don't.  I think that in some cases it's because they
ignore the judge's instructions.

Re: .14

>    It is ingenuous (and something of a non-sequitur) to say, in
>.6  "May       your blood be avenged... speedily" and then, when
>Eric suggests that       there  might  be  a  more  constructive
>response,

The title of my reply addressed Eric's point  about  being  "more
constructive":

>                            -< *Hashem* Yikom Damo >-

Nothing can be more *destructive* than allowing a murderer to  go
unpunished  for  his  crime.  Nothing is more *constructive* than
praying for justice to be served.

> to suggest that because 
>Kahane refrained  from  discussing politics  on  Shabbat,  
>that  he had  no connection  with violence.

Rabbi Kahane hated violence. There are times when refraining from
violence,  however,  leads to worse consequences. Hence, the U.S.
was absolutely justified in using nuclear weapons  against  Japan
in WWII. Rabbi Kahane quoted, and certainly never apologized for,
the Talmudic dictum, "If one seeks to kill you, arise before  him
and  kill  him  first"  (San.  72a).  However, it is absolute ig-
norance and slander to categorize any of his organizations as en-
gaging  in  "terrorism."  The JDL was founded in Crown Heights to
*defend* against exactly the type of pogrom  perpetrated  against
its  Jewish  residents this summer. In the 70's, there were smoke
bombs thrown into Russian ballet  performances,  the  purpose  of
which  was to make the Soviets feel uncomfortable in America, and
never were there any serious injuries.  There was one incident in
which a Soviet official was shot. Rabbi Kahane was horrified when
he learned of the incident. He called the  criminal  who  did  it
"crazy,"  and it was condemned immediately by the JDL. There were
the incidents where Soviet diplomats were grabbed and  red  paint
was  poured  over  their  heads. Legal? Certainly not. Effective?
Could be.

It's pretty easy for arm-chair analysts to sit back and criticize
activists.   Rabbi  Kahane  saw  20% of the Jewish people quickly
fading into oblivion and he could not live with the thought. Rab-
bi  Kahane  single-handedly  started the Soviet Jewry movement. I
would even suggest that current news events are not unrelated  to
Rabbi  Kahane's activities. His pioneering efforts eventually led
to the Jackson Amendment, which put tremendous economic  pressure
on the USSR. Gorbachev recognized that much of the pressure would
be alleviated by reforming his human rights  policies.  Once  the
process  had  begun, it was irreversible and eventually the whole
system unraveled. Oversimplification?  Sure. Completely  unfound-
ed? I believe not.

> In fact, I can recall reading one of  his  
> tracts  a  few years ago that was ostensibly about Torah, 
>but was     obviously a thinly disguised justification for  
>violence  against  Arabs  and, possibly, Jews who disagreed 
>with his positions.

You have a tendency to make accusations  without  any  hard  evi-
dence.  I  ask  that  if  you  have a quote, you give the precise
reference so that it can be examined in context. Rabbi Kahane was
lynched by the media while he was still alive not only by his be-
ing boycotted, but by this type of  (at  best)  half-truth  being
bandied about incessantly. At least after his death he deserves a
fair hearing, eh? Or does he deserve less than his accused  murd-
erer got?
  
Jem

    So throwing a smoke bomb into a crowded theatre or dumping paint onto
    someone is ok because the "end justifies the means"? The smoke bomb
    incident did not result in any injuries because they were lucky that
    people didn't panic. In both cases, the purpetrators would be subject
    to arrest, and justifiably so.
    
    Don't try to paint Kanane and his followers as peace loving activists
    because no one here is that blind or stupid to believe it. Except
    perhaps for you.
    
    Eric

> Rabbi  Kahane  single-handedly  started the Soviet Jewry movement.

I'll have to check, but I'm pretty sure this is incorrect.  Do you have
a date on this claim?

    re .14
    
    Rabbi Kahane and his supporters liked to *claim* he started the Soviet
    Jewry Movement, but it isn't so.  I know people who were actively
    involved in it before anyone ever heard of Kahane.  It goes back to at
    least 1956 when Morris Kertzer (who was one of the first Rabbis allowed
    to visit the post-Stalinist U.S.S.R.) toured the U.S. to raise support
    for action on behalf of Soviet Jews.  Kertzer was, at that time,
    Director of Interreligious Affairs for the American Jewish Committee.
    Action for Soviet Jewry was active on campuses in the late sixties, if
    not earlier.
    
    As far as quoting Kahane, I admit I don't have the exact words in front
    of me--I did not think the piece was worth saving.  On the other hand,
    one of the reasons I made a point of reading it was that it was
    something that actually had his name on it as the author,  not
    something attributed to him by others.  The gist of it was that Judaism
    is inherently undemocratic and therefore it was proper for Kach to
    pursue it's objectives vis-a-vis the Arabs regardless of the position
    of the Israeli government; Jews who did not understand this did not
    really understand what Judaism was all about.  It had a remarkable
    resemblance to David Duke's explanation of what America is all about.
    
                                            Aaron

    
    At the time when the JDL was protesting appearances by Soviet artists
    in this country, some JDL members sent a bomb to the office of Sol
    Hurok, the producer of many of these shows.  The bomb went off and one
    of Hurok's staff, a secretary I believe, was killed.
    
    

I'm so sorry for your personal loss Jem, the moments you 
spent with Rabbi Kahane (of blessed memory) must have been 
precious indeed.  I'm deeply sorry for the tragic loss to 
the rabbi's family and Israel's great loss.  I'm sorry the 
Jews lost their staunchest advocate, a man that lived his 
life by and for the Torah and I'm sorry for ignorance.  
Vilifying his memory when his murder should be condemned
from the rooftops is beyond comprehension.  His only agenda 
was the survival of the Jews and that they should live in 
peace in Israel.  Boy are we in trouble, we can't even 
recognize who our friends are.

The travesty of justice in allowing this political murder to 
go unpunished is a grave sign of the times.  I too pray for
justice to be served and that Rabbi Kahane's blood be 
avenged speedily.  

Bernice   

    Re: .17
    
>    Don't try to paint Kanane and his followers as peace loving activists
>    because no one here is that blind or stupid to believe it. Except
>    perhaps for you.
    
    Indeed, there is "no one here blind or stupid".  Just ignorant.  
    When I heard Rabbi Kahane answering questiosn in National Press Club 
    in Washington a couple of years ago (shown on C-SPAN), I was amazed 
    how the press was able to distort his ideas.  Now I am a firm believer 
    that only the ignorant can see the late Rabbi as a hatemonger.
    
    As far as the Jewish emigration from the USSR is concerned, it was
    triggered mostly by the Six Day war.  The Russian Jews realized that
    there was a country in which the Jews were not afraid to be Jews any
    more, who could fight the enemies back.  It was the moment of Jewish
    re-birth in the USSR.  I remember that time very vividly even now.

    Come on guys, stop throwing insults about.  This conference normally
    has a reasonably high level of discussion.  If you want to call each
    other stupid go and play in SOAPBOX.  
    
    Take it as read that there are a complete range of opinions about the
    late Rabbi Kahane, from blind support to blind hate.  He had good
    points and bad points.  Unfortunately, he did not (or could not) 
    control his supporters and many of them took things into their own
    hands including violence against leftwingers and journalists here in 
    Israel.  
     
    I personally did not support him, but wanted his murderer to be brought
    to justice.  The fact that there was yet another miscarriage of justice 
    in a US court does not necessarily need to be ascribed to
    anti-semiticism.   
    
    Shalom
    Baruch

.16>	Nothing can be more *destructive* than allowing a murderer to  go
.16>	unpunished  for  his  crime.

That's a matter of opinion.  The American judicial system places the burden of
proof on the prosecution, not on the defence.  This implies that in cases where
there is doubt, it would be worse to punish someone for a crime that they did
not commit than to allow a guilty person to go free.

I agree that "allowing a murderer to go unpunished for his crime" is very bad,
but strongly disagree with your assertion that "*nothing* [my emphasis] can be
more destructive".  I also doubt that halacha would support such an extreme
statement.


.16>	Rabbi Kahane hated violence.

Rabbi Kahane's personal likes and dislikes were his own business.  What is more
relevant is what he said and did, and what has been done by those inspired by
what he said and did.


.16>	Rabbi Kahane single-handedly started the Soviet Jewry movement.

That is at best a gross exaggeration.  Rabbi Kahane certainly was one of a
number of people who increased public awareness of this issue, and he does
deserve credit for that.  But my opinion is that it is the Soviet Jewish
leaders who struggled from within the USSR who deserve the greatest credit.

    If I may...
    
    I know little of Rabbi Kahane and the JDL, so I won't speak about that.
    
    However...
    
    I do know Jem, even if on a somewhat limited basis, and though he
    certainly doesn't need my endorsement, I would like to say that the
    inference made a few replies back was uncalled for.  I know Jem to be a
    man who loves G-d, loves his brothers and sisters, and loves Torah.  We
    may not always agree politically and religiously, but I certainly can't
    fault a man for having those qualities, and for having a desire to
    protect his brothers and sisters from the hosts of those who would like
    to see all people and things Jewish wiped away from the face of the
    earth.
    
    As far as who is responsible for, or should be given credit for the
    return of Soviet Jews to the Land...I don't think it would be far
    fetched to say that the One who inspired the prophets thousands of years
    ago to speak of the dispersement and re-gathering of His people from
    the four corners of the earth should be given all the credit.  He said
    that *He* would gather His people.  No doubt, He inspired MANY in recent
    years to "give feet" to the promise (and we should be thankful that
    those people responded to His call), but it is Hashem Himself who is
    responsible.
    
    Just my opinion....
    
    
    
    Steve
   

    Re: .24
    
>	Rabbi Kahane certainly was one of a
>number of people who increased public awareness of this issue, and he does
>deserve credit for that.  But my opinion is that it is the Soviet Jewish
>leaders who struggled from within the USSR who deserve the greatest credit.
    
    May I ask who these "Soviet Jewish leaders" are?  I lived in Moscow
    thirty years, and do not remember any.  There certainly were some
    Jewish activists, like Shcharansky (sp?), but they did not have much of
    an impact on the Jewish emigration.

.24>	Rabbi Kahane certainly was one of a
.24>number of people who increased public awareness of this issue, and he does
.24>deserve credit for that.  But my opinion is that it is the Soviet Jewish
.24>leaders who struggled from within the USSR who deserve the greatest credit.

.26>    May I ask who these "Soviet Jewish leaders" are?  I lived in Moscow
.26>    thirty years, and do not remember any.  There certainly were some
.26>    Jewish activists, like Shcharansky (sp?), but they did not have much of
.26>    an impact on the Jewish emigration.

The increase in Soviet Jewish aliya was largely due to Western pressure on the
Soviet government.  That pressure was applied when people in the West saw that
there were Soviet Jews who were struggling for their rights, including
emigration.  Sharansky certainly increased Western awareness of this struggle,
as did the defendants in the 1970 (?) hijacking trial.  In this way, their
actions did eventually lead to greater rights for them.  If "activists" is a
better description than "leaders", I accept the correction.

The Jewish Advocate, December 27, 1991 - January 2, 1992

Many Stunned by Verdict Acquitting Alleged Kahane Killer
By Debra Nussbaum Cohen


New York, (JTA) - The acquittal of El Sayyid Nosair in the murder 
of Rabbi Meir Kahane was a surprise to almost everyone involved 
in the trial, including his own lawyer.

And it has angered the late Jewish Defense League founder's 
supporters, some of whom have vowed to exact revenge. 

Kahane's son, Rabbi Binyamin Ze'ev Kahane, pledged that Nosair 
would be haunted by Kahane followers until his death.

"We vow that El Sayyid Nosair will not see a day without fear 
until his very last day," the younger Kahane, who is director of 
a group called Kahane Chai, said after the verdict was announced 
Saturday evening.

Nosair, an Egyptian-born Moslem, was acquitted by a jury of nine 
women and three men of murdering Kahane on the night of Nov. 5, 
1990, while he was giving a speech at a hotel on the East Side of 
Manhattan.

He was also found not guilty of attempting to murder a postal 
officer who allegedly attempted to prevent Nosair from leaving 
the murder scene.

But the jury did convict Nosair on lesser charges of assault and 
weapons possession.

The verdict stunned many, who had assumed it was an "open and 
shut" case.

Nosair's own attorney, William Kunstler, had told 'The New York 
Times', in an interview before the verdict was returned, that he 
expected the jury to be deadlocked or to come back from four days 
of deliberation with a guilty verdict.

"It was just so open and shut that Kahane was murdered by 
Nosair," said Rabbi Avi Weiss, president of a direct-action group 
called the Coalition for Jewish Concerns.  "I can't pinpoint it, 
but there is the sense that the District Attorney's office was no 
match for Kunstler.

"I'm not at all arguing conspiracy, but this is the second time 
that New York authorities have failed in high-powered cases 
regarding Jews," Weiss said.  "It makes you wonder."

The rabbi was referring to the fact that a single youth was 
arrested in the murder of Yankel Rosenbaum, the Australian 
scholar attacked by a gang of black youths during the riots 
against Jews last August in Brooklyn's Crown Heights section.

Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, 
said he finds the verdict "bizarre, totally inconsistent."

Foxman, no advocate of Kahane's but one of the few non-Kahane 
supporters to attend his funeral in November 1990, said that "to 
find Nosair guilty of assault and possession, and not of murder, 
boggles the mind."

Speculating that a deal may have been cut among the jurors, he 
called for a special investigation by the appropriate authorities 
into the apparent inconsistencies.  But Foxman said he did not 
suspect a government conspiracy.

"This was one big surprise for everyone," said state 
Assemblyman Dov Hikind (D-Brooklyn).

Hikind is coordinating a campaign of advertisements and rallies 
to push for maximum sentences for each of the four counts of 
assault and weapons possession of which Nosair was found guilty.

Hikind said $25,000 has already been pledged toward the campaign. 
 
Nosair's sentencing by New York State Supreme Court Judge 
Alvin Schlesinger is scheduled for Jan. 29.  The maximum 
sentences, run consecutively, could total 36 years behind bars.

Hikind said he is also trying to have federal charges brought 
against Nosair for breaching the civil rights of Kahane and the 
two bystanders who were wounded in the incident.

The president of the Jewish Community Relations Council of 
New York said that the case should not be closed.

Kenneth Bialkin called on "state and federal officials to launch 
a meticulous review of the evidence and the way law officials 
handled the case, in order to ascertain whether federal charges 
against Nosair or some other individuals should be brought."

Kahane's son, who found the assistant district attorneys heading 
the prosecution unsatisfactory throughout the trial, was probably 
least surprised of anyone involved.

"I never expected justice from an American court," he said in a 
statement.  "I never expected to see justice emanate from the 
same USA that displays its hostility to Jewish people and to the 
State of Israel in a flagrant fashion."

In Israel, a leading Kahane supporter, Noam Federman, said Nosair 
was acquitted because the American judicial system is 
anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli.

A handful of members of the Kach movement, which Kahane founded 
in Israel, demonstrated Saturday night in front of the U.S. 
Consulate in West Jerusalem.

Nosair's acquittal is "a clear message to Jew-haters that you can 
kill a Jewish leader and get away with it," said Moshe Phillips, 
a spokesman for Kach International, the movement's American arm.

Phillips expressed resentment toward "establishment" Jewish 
organizations for not speaking out against Kahane's murder 
before, during or after the trial.

"The so-called defense groups, which have been silent the last 
year and did not attempt to draw any attention to this case, are 
also to be blamed" for the verdict, Phillips said.

Shifra Hoffman, who described herself as a good friend and close 
associate of the late Kahane's, said that "the Jewish community's 
so-called leadership will have to bear the guilt of abandoning 
Rabbi Meir Kahane in death, as many of them did in life.

"To my knowledge, there was not one representative of any Jewish 
organization at the trial, while Nosair had help from all 
different areas, including the government of Egypt," said 
Hoffman, who is founder of an organization called Victims of Arab 
Terror International.

Rabbi Weiss said he is "terribly disappointed that more people, 
even those who had nothing to do with Kahane, haven't spoken out 
about this.  He was isolated in his politics and isolated even in 
his murder."

(JTA correspondent Gil Sedan in Jerusalem contributed to this 
report.)

Some urgent things came up. Sorry for the delay.

Re: .17 (Eric)

Your ad-hominem attack is uncalled for. 

Re: .18 (Gerald)

>I'll have to check, but I'm pretty sure this is incorrect.  Do you have
>a date  on this claim?

I mispoke if I implied that R. Kahane acted alone or
that he was the very first American Jew ever to act on
behalf of Soviet Jewry. But he certainly was *a* major
mover in this regard while he was in the U.S., and 
anticipated the mass protests by several years. 

It's childish to argue over who was first or second.
The fact is that Rabbi Kahane placed as his #1
priority the welfare of Jews in distress, both
physical and spiritual. Were his tactics always
perfect? I don't know, but armchair criticism
doesn't much impress me.

Re: .19 (Aaron)

>    Rabbi Kahane and his supporters liked to *claim* he started the Soviet
>    Jewry Movement, but it isn't so. 

Rabbi Kahane's detractors like to *claim* that he never did anything use-
ful, but it isn't so.

>It goes back to at
>    least 1956 when Morris Kertzer (who was one of the first Rabbis allowed
>    to visit the post-Stalinist U.S.S.R.) toured the U.S. to raise support
>    for action on behalf of Soviet Jews. 

While admitting that I've never heard the name before, and certainly
not one to detract from any of his possible activities, I think you'll
admit that this Rabbi Kertzer hardly made Soviet Jewry in to front-
page news.

>The gist of it was that Judaism
>    is inherently undemocratic and therefore it was proper for Kach to
>    pursue it's objectives vis-a-vis the Arabs regardless of the position
>    of the Israeli government; Jews who did not understand this did not
>    really understand what Judaism was all about.  It had a remarkable
>    resemblance to David Duke's explanation of what America is all about.

This paragraph smacks of demagoguery. You admit that you've not seen 
the alleged "piece" in years, and yet you proceed to present the "gist."
Rabbi Kahane HY"D doesn't even merit being *quoted* out-of-context!
Paraphrasing out-of-context will suffice for the likes of him.

Re: .20 (Radwin)

>    At the time when the JDL was protesting appearances by Soviet artists
>    in this country, some JDL members sent a bomb to the office of Sol
>    Hurok, the producer of many of these shows.  The bomb went off and one
>    of Hurok's staff, a secretary I believe, was killed.

There was one JDL "member" who was implicated, Stuart Segal, I believe.
He turned out to be an FBI informant. This BTW, was the only death
attributed to the JDL that I know of. The shot fired into the Soviet
Embassy by Steve Rambam did not hit anyone (this does not, of course,
justify it).

Re: .21 (Bernice)

>Vilifying his memory when his murder should be condemned
>from the rooftops is beyond comprehension.  His only agenda
>was the survival of the Jews and that they should live in
>peace in Israel.  Boy are we in trouble, we can't even
>recognize who our friends are.

You've cut right to the heart of the matter, Bernice. We sure
are in trouble if we continue bickering even in the face of
this desecration. 

The phrase "'miscarriage' of justice" has been inappropriately used to 
describe this obscenity. It's not even an "abortion" of justice -
this verdict simply *murdered* justice.

Re: .23 (Baruch)

>    Take it as read that there are a complete range of opinions about the
>    late Rabbi Kahane, from blind support to blind hate.  

For the record, I didn't agree with every opinion or action of
Rabbi Kahane. Re: his supporters: a friend of mine who studied
at R. Moshe Feinstein's yeshiva (MTJ) told me that he witnessed
the Rosh Yeshiva being questioned about a position of his quoted in 
the newspaper by one of his "disciples." Not only had R. Moshe
never said anything remotely resembling what had been quoted
in his name, he had never heard of the alleged student!

If Rabbi Kahane himself was not infallible, certainly some
of his followers were capable of poor judgment. However, there
were certainly many who acted in his name who had not even 
a passing acquaintance with his writings and philosophies.
In fact, I would not dismiss out-of-hand the suggestion that
some of the alleged incidents may have been perpetrated by
his *opponents* just to discredit him, although I have no
evidence of this.

That said, there has hardly been an individual who has
had to endure more persecution - for his simple political
beliefs - than the late R. Kahane. The stories of his being
tailed, detained without charges, interrogated endlessly,
and finally - in that great bastion of democracy - *barred*
from running for office because of his views, are notorious.
Whether you agreed or disagreed with specific views or actions, 
an unjaundiced view of his life reveals a man consumed by one
end -- helping Jews and the Jewish people. He gave every ounce
of his energy to that overarching goal, and indeed -- his very
life. Even if he was 100% wrong on every issue, he must be 
respected -- and indeed emulated -- for at least trying his
best, struggling with the weight of the entire Jewish world
on his shoulders in a confused, rapidly assimilating, resurgently
Jew-hating post-Holocaust era. Whatever else may be said about 
him, his consuming love of the Jewish people and his consistency
in the face of threats and persecution can never be taken from him.

Re: .24 (EricG)

>I agree that "allowing a murderer to go unpunished for his crime" is very bad,
>but strongly disagree with your assertion that "*nothing* [my emphasis] can be
>more destructive".  I also doubt that halacha would support such an extreme
>statement.

I apologize for the hyperbole. Please substitute "few" for "nothing."
(Ever think of becoming an English teacher? :)

Re: .25 (Steve)

>    I know little of Rabbi Kahane and the JDL, so I won't speak about that.
>
>    However...
>
>    I do know Jem, even if on a somewhat limited basis, and though he
>    certainly doesn't need my endorsement,

Thank you, Steve, but I can hardly be mentioned in the same context
as the late great Rabbi. And if an angry person feels better by calling
me stupid, I'll survive.

> No doubt, He inspired MANY in recent
>    years to "give feet" to the promise (and we should be thankful that
>    those people responded to His call), but it is Hashem Himself who is
>    responsible.

Well, it's certainly hard to disagree with that. But R. Kahane believed
in Rava's dictum, "one may not *rely* on miracles."

Re: .28 (Bernice)

>The rabbi was referring to the fact that a single youth was
>arrested in the murder of Yankel Rosenbaum, the Australian
>scholar attacked by a gang of black youths during the riots
>against Jews last August in Brooklyn's Crown Heights section.

The fact is, Jewish timidity demands that Jewish rights be 
overlooked. Put it this way, which police captain would
stick his neck out, risking notoriety and inevitably Sharpton's
minions by *not* labeling an attack by whites on blacks
a "bias-related" crime? But it's Politically Incorrect to
use the same description regarding crimes by blacks against
whites in general, and Jews in particular. Were there, on the
other hand, thousands of angry Jews making life uncomfortable 
for the powers-that-be after each outrage, Jews would be lamenting 
"travesties" less, and indeed,likely mourning less dead in the first place.

Jem

    re .28
    
    > "We vow that El Sayyid Nosair will not see a day without fear
    > until his very last day," the younger Kahane....said
    
    This sure sounds like an assasination threat.  Is this what
    should be done--threatening to kill a person who was tried and
    found not guilty?
    
    As far as I understand it, there are two possible positions to 
    take:
    
    1.	The US legal system is corrupt, and so the JDL has to take
    	the law into its own hands.  If the corrupt system by chance
    	does the right thing that's fine with the JDL, of course, but
    	it can't be depended on.  How guilt is proven is an open 
    	question (or does the JDL have a court system?).
    
    2.	The US legal system is sufficiently non-corrupt that it can
    	make judgements and did so in this case, and that settles it,
    	even though that means that we strongly suspect El Sayyid
    	did kill Kahane, we couldn't prove it and so _must_ treat
    	him as though he did not.
    
    Another issue is whether "innocent until proven guilty" is the 
    morally right presumption to follow.  I believe this is an English
    common-law concept, and Napoleonic law has "guilty until proven
    innocent"--which is certainly more convenient administratively!
    What's the equivalent in halacha?
    
    		-John Bishop
    

    	There is a third position to take:
    
    	The US Judicial system is corrupt, and is pliable under public and
    private political pressure. The US-based and foreign opponents of US
    Jews, Israel, and Jews in the rest of the world, have been applying
    such pressure to effectively tilt the scales of US justice in the
    highly publicized cases like Rosenbaum's murder, Kahane's assasination and 
    so on. To survive as a community of citizens equal to others, the US Jewry 
    MUST apply a counteracting political pressure on the system. Kach does
    it with demonstrations and threats, some mainstream Jewish leaders do
    it through indignation in the media, others may do it in conversations
    with their neighbors - most don't do anything at all.
    	BTW, as a former Jewish resident of the now-defunct Evil Empire, I
    can vouch for the fact that Meir Kahane and his comrades were at some
    point the most visible public pressure group campaigning for our Exodus
    - while the mainstream groups seemed too embarassed to speak up or
    scream for us. So, Kahane was a major helping factor, mayhaps the guy
    who kept the issue alive in the Western public's eye.
    
    DG

    Of course you are right that there are intermediate positions.
    
    (One could start also with variant 0. which would hold that it's
    all just politics or power games, with morality just a froth of
    fine words over self-interest, but then any indignation or claim 
    of unfairness is also just froth).
    
    It seems to me that you have to assume a _lot_ of pressure to 
    cause a jury to acquit a person they believe is a murderer--and
    how do you keep some jury member from spilling the story?  For
    me, the simplest hypothesis is that the jury really did not find
    the evidence convincing beyond a reasonable doubt.  US juries may
    be too easily persuaded that a reasonable doubt exists--I'm sure
    murderers get off, especially if they have good lawyers--but that's
    a general flaw in juries, not an instance of anti-Semitic influence.
    
    As for the Rosenbaum murder--I wasn't aware that anyone was charged
    and tried for it.  Given when and where it was done, there may be
    no-one willing to testify or even identify the murderer(s) anonymously.
    You can't do much without even a suspect!  Is there a suspect?
    
    			-John Bishop

    	You don't need to pressure a jury - that's crude and illegal.
    Trials are skewed in jury selection, judge's instructions to the jury,
    prosecutory zeal (or lack of it), admissibility of evidence - should I
    go on?
    	As far as Rosenbaum's murder, I am sure there is more info on it in
    this notesfile already.
    	Morality is the foundation of a civilized (rule-based) society.
    When power politics are introduced instead, it's often quite obvious to
    the naked eye - because the outcome "makes no sense". That common sense
    measure is often the practical application of morality-based judgments.
    In this case, I believe power politics have been introduced, and the
    Jews have no other choice but to respond, get hands dirty as a community - 
    lest it happen again and again.
    	Furthermore, the Jews have been pushed towards extinction
    repeatedly, and with the acquiescence of the rest of the "moral" world. It 
    may be that in such a case, survival is the ultimate moral position...
    
    DG

    
    
    Re: .30
    
    >    Another issue is whether "innocent until proven guilty" is the
    >    morally right presumption to follow.  I believe this is an English
    >    common-law concept, and Napoleonic law has "guilty until proven
    >    innocent"--which is certainly more convenient administratively!
    >    What's the equivalent in halacha?
    
    The halacha is based on the verse, "do not follow the majority
    to do evil... after the majority goes the judgment."
    The implicit assumption, of course, is that the accused is
    indeed innocent until convicted by a _bet din_ (Rabbinical 
    court). In civil matters, only 3 judges are required; in 
    capital cases, a minimum of twenty three were needed. In the 
    former, a majority of only 1 was needed for conviction, in
    the latter, a majority of two was needed.
    
    A major difference between halacha and (lehavdil) the jury
    system is that, whereas in capital cases, a unanimous decision
    is required of the jury, in halacha such unanimity would 
    actually *invalidate* the decision, the assumption being
    that some bribery had taken place. 
    
    In the case of this decision, the bizarre verdict was
    explained by some as a compromise between the jurors
    so that they could agree on some unified position and
    go home already. It seems to me to be a most unnatural
    requirement, and in celebrated cases such as this, makes
    true justice a near-impossibility.
    
    Jem
    
    

I just saw a brief item about Nosair's sentencing.  Could someone with greater
access to US news please supply details?

Thanks.

He received the maximum sentence.  The judge condemned the jury's verdict
but there's nothing he can do about it.

.36>	He received the maximum sentence.

Thanks, Gerald.  Do you happen to know just how many years (minimum and
maximum) the man got?  I was wondering how it compares to the typical sentence
for killing a person.

    Don't remember exact details but it wasn;t close to what a typical
    setence for murder is. Judge wanted to make all the sentences
    consecutive but by law could only make some of them consecutive. The
    sentence was for more than 10 years, but I don't know when he is
    eligible for parole.
    
    yoseff