Conference back40::soapbox

    
    
    Or Proposal C - Do what the Israelis do...
    
    When was the last time they had an airline/airport security problem??

    .1
    Daily.
    
    The security measures that the FAA is proposing are FAR less stringent
    than what is routine security at Tel Aviv.

    With the exception of #3 in proposal A, this is right out.  Forgiveness
    of property damage and loss of life is not in order and a slap in the
    face to the survivors and families of the victims.  It is also a clear
    signal that we are open to further attacks as zealots do not
    necessarily understand the compassion we would be attempting to show.
    
    Proposal B is the proper course, actually something a little less overt
    than an outright invasion of Libya.  Terrorists IMO should be summarily
    tried and executed if found guilty.  Part 3 is a tougher call.  
    
    This Marzuk dude, which team did he play for?  

>    The security measures that the FAA is proposing are FAR less stringent
>    than what is routine security at Tel Aviv.

Implementing the Tel Aviv security routine at all American airports would
end one-day business trips; spending six hours going through security for
two flights would not be accepted by the American public.

/john

    
    re: .2
    
    My question was meant to say. "When did the Israelis last have a
    problem".. sorry I wasn't verbose enough...
    

    .5
    Just a matter of wording. You are, of course, correct. But as pointed
    out in .4, most Americans are not willing to do what the Israelis do to
    preserve their national security.
    
    When it means going overseas and attacking terrorists at home, yes,
    Americans seem to like that.
    When it means having to watch one's own back for the repercussions that
    said terrorist's brother is intent on carrying out, no.
    

    
    Oh I dunno...
    
    I think the extra time and inconvenience might be worth it to insure
    that I don't wind up splattered all over some hill-side...
    

Israelis seldom use airplanes for domestic travel, so there isn't as much
reliance on speedy checkins.

Proposal B has a nice ring to it. Especially part 2.

    Proposal B.
    
    "...to the shores of Tripoli..."
    
    Of course the Tripoli in the Marines' Hymn refers to the Barbary
    States, but what's in a name, after all...?

>    Of course the Tripoli in the Marines' Hymn refers to the Barbary
>    States, but what's in a name, after all...?

And I thought it was a shoe size... silly me.

    	Marzuk -- isn't that the music they play in the elevator?

    
    Proposal B
    
    This Marzuk, he a ballplayer or something?

    
    well, of course, i've been equated to hitler (in the repository
    note) for suggesting that we take a very militaristic view
    toward terrorism and kick the piss out of any country that
    willfully aids and abets terrorists (i even provided a nice
    list of where to start), so duly chastised, i dare not suggest
    that it is still a very real and workable solution to the problem...

    -b

    
    Is the greatest threat to American life and limb domestic in nature
    (the OKC bombing, Unabomber) or foreign (World Trade Centre, Pan Am
    over Lockerbie)?
    

    
    jc, you forgot one important one, alien. hth

    
    Alien, yes, sorry.  How's SDI coming along?  ;^)
    

    There's not alien on *my* car, so that's not a threat.

    
    <---  Isn't he great, folks?  He's here all week!
    

    
    Great idea Bri.  You send a bunch of choppers down to Langley
    to strafe the CIA building right now.  I'll get a Brit gunboat
    to lob a few shells into the MI5 and MI6 buildings in Whitehall.
    
    Decades of support for terroristic dictators, death squads, insurgency
    groups and other anarchist opposers of our client states should *not* go
    unpunished.
    
    regards,
    
    Colin
    

    If the French are to resume nuclear testing, perhaps they can select
    some more fitting places than the middle of the south pacific, if they
    should suffer any more acts of terrorism... 

    
    John, are you feeding Dick, your finest beers, and fish perhaps?

    >> If the French are to resume nuclear testing, perhaps they can select
    >> some more fitting places than the middle of the south pacific
    
    They should start with EuroDisney, and would probably love to,
    actually.
    
    Chris

    I remember a few years ago, I was in New York City with freinds and we
    visited the usual tourist traps, the World Trade Center and Statue of
    Liberty/Ellis Island, along with all the 5th Avenue stores etc.
    
    Exactly one week later from the day I visited the Statue and Ellis
    Island there was a bomb threat on Ellis Island and they had to evacuate
    both islands.  It was pretty scary indead when I heard the news.

    
      On the way flying to Europe, nobody checked anything.  On the way
     back, the day after a subway bomb exploded in Paris, the plane was
     delayed while security went through all the luggage thoroughly.
    
      You see this all the time - laxity, shocking breach, extreme
     attention and diligence, tapering off to laxity, repeat.
    
      bb

>      You see this all the time - laxity, shocking breach, extreme
>     attention and diligence, tapering off to laxity, repeat.

   It had been nearly 10 years since the last wave of terrorism
   in France, and I'd hardly call the situation during rush hour
   in the St Michel metro station "laxity".

   Is it laxity to not have covers bolted over all the trash receptacles
   in the subway?  Or to be able to go about daily business without
   black suited CRS personnel swarming around public places?

   I think Americans would have a cow if the kind of security measures
   that are commonplace in Europe had to be put in place here.

   - Jim

* Hamas warns Clinton on detention of leader

DAMASCUS - The Islamic resistance movement Hamas, which has killed scores
of Israelis in suicide bombings, warned U.S. President Bill Clinton on
Wednesday of "negative and grave consequences" for detaining its political
leader.

In a statement faxed to Reuters in Damascus, Hamas said the Clinton
administration had committed "a grave political mistake" by deciding to
keep Mousa Abu Marzuk in custody pending a formal extradition request from
Israel.

"The adminstration of Bill Clinton rejected all official and popular
appeals to free Dr. Abu Marzuk and insisted on committing a grave political
mistake which will have negative and grave consequences," the Hamas
statement said.

Abu Marzuk, 43, was detained in New York on July 25 when he tried to enter
the United States. He was formally arrested on Tuesday and a magistrate
told him Israel wanted him put on trial for terrorism and conspiracy to
commit murder.

Israel has said it would seek Abu Marzuk's extradition from because he was
"engaged in conspiracies to commit the crimes of murder, manslaughter,
grievous harm, wounding ... under agggravating circumstances."

Hamas has denied Abu Marzuk was ever involved in any attacks on Israel and
said his calls for ending the campaign of violence had met with disapproval
within the guerrilla group.

    
    those CRS guys - do they give throat exams with their submachine guns
    the way the German police do (or did during the Badder-Meinhof era)?

    
    
     Rep .30  RAH
    
    >>>those CRS guys - do they give throat exams with their submachine
    guns the way the German police do (or did during the Badder-Meinhof
    era)?
    
    
     Yes, but they do it in such a nice french way!!! Speaking from the
    experience of having said exam up close and personal while setting
    up for '85 DECville/DECUS at Cannes. All they had me on though was 
    trying to smuggle in a spares kit for a 2065!!! I don't really need
    to see what they would do if they didn't like you.
    
    
    
    -mike
    

> From New York: The fabled lost city of gold ... it's THE TOP TEN
  LIST for Thursday, August 10, 1995.  And now, the man who paid
  me to say this ... David Letterman!
 
> From the home office in Grand Rapids, Michigan ...
 
TOP TEN SIGNS YOU'RE IN AN UNSAFE AIRPORT
 
10. Hijackers are allowed to pre-board
    
    
 9. Mary Jo Buttafuoco walks through metal detector without her
    bullet setting it off
    
    
 8. Machines sell insurance just for your time in the airport
    
    
 7. White zone for unloading, red zone for reloading
    
    
 6. You-know-who is there filming a Hertz commercial
    
    
 5. As you board plane, gate attendant says "You poor son-of-a-
    bitch"
    
    
 4. Runways have passing lanes
    
    
 3. You have to go through a metal detector just to enter the
    gift shop
    
    
 2. There are more shots being fired there than at the White House
    
    
 1. Electronic scanning equipment made by Westinghouse
 
       [Music: "Running On Empty" by Jackson Browne]
 
 
Compiled by Sue Trowbridge
 
          ----------------------------------------
               LATE SHOW WITH DAVID LETTERMAN
               11:35 p.m. ET/PT (10:35 CT/MT)
               on the CBS Television Network
          ----------------------------------------
 
             On Friday's show, Dave welcomes
 
             ...actor PATRICK STEWART
             ...athlete MONICA SELES
 
 
The Top Ten List is Copyright (C) 1995 Worldwide Pants, Incorporated.
Used with permission.
 

    I've heard many times that the United States are the biggest and most
    advanced terrorists around. Why dont you call a spade a spade and say
    that the U.S is at war with the rest of the world. The U.S IS the
    threat. Any terror that arrives on U.S. soil is not born from someones
    wild imagination, there is most probably a reason.
     
    have a nice day. 
    
    chris
    

[From Sunday's news:]

    Heightened vigilance was especially evident at the International
    Arrivals Building, which houses El Al, the Israeli airline, where
    traffic cones lined the curb and cars were not permitted to stop, even
    to drop off and pick up passengers. The precautions added a measure of
    inconvenience for thousands of passengers, but there was little
    grumbling.

    "We know they're going to have to step up security," said Benzion
    Miller, a cantor at Beth El synagogue in Borough Park, Brooklyn, whose
    family was not allowed to join him inside as he waited for an El Al
    flight to Israel. "As long as the United States is on our side and they
    put up security, we have nothing to worry about."

    Referring to Middle East terrorist groups, he said, "There was a threat
    and they keep their promises."

Airport security tightened amid reported terrorism threat
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

(c) 1995 Copyright the News & Observer Publishing Co.

(c) 1995 Associated Press

NEW YORK (Aug 14, 1995 - 14:48 EDT) -- The area's three major airports were
under tightened security today because of a threat of terrorist attack by
Middle Eastern militants, possibly a "suicide massacre."

Travelers at Kennedy, LaGuardia and Newark airports faced security checks
and were told not to leave cars unattended at terminals. Also, vehicles were
subject to random searches.

"It's for our own safety, so you really can't complain about it. It's
because of a few nuts like this that everyone has to be put out," Richard
Hayman, pops conductor for the St. Louis Symphony Orchestra, said today as
he waited at a security checkpoint at Kennedy. He was flying to South Korea
with his wife for a guest conducting appearance.

Passengers were not allowed to check bags at curbside. At the Korean Air
Lines terminal where Hayman went, they had to carry all their luggage
through metal detectors before getting to check-in counters.

The heightened security was imposed after the FBI learned that terrorists
had targeted Kennedy, a major international arrival and departure point,
according to a report first published Sunday in Newsday.

Newsday quoted unidentified officials as saying the FBI had received
detailed intelligence that two militant groups -- the Palestinian Hamas and
the Iran-backed Hezbollah, or Party of God -- were planning a "suicide
massacre" that could come at any time.

The threat comes at a time when the United States has begun proceedings to
extradite a reputed Hamas leader, Mousa Abu Marzuk, to Israel. Also, several
Islamic fundamentalists are on trial in New York on charges of conspiring to
plot terrorist acts.

After Marzuk was detained when he arrived at Kennedy on July 25, Hamas
issued a statement denouncing the action as a "serious and provocative
move." Hamas warned the United States against extraditing Marzuk to Israel,
saying it would hold the Clinton administration "fully responsible."

A State Department official who requested anonymity told The New York Times
that "whatever threats we have received" have come from within the United
States.

The FBI relayed its information to the Port Authority of New York and New
Jersey, which operates the three airports, on Saturday afternoon and
security at Kennedy was immediately brought up to its highest level, Newsday
said.

Security at Kennedy was raised to "Level 4", an action not taken since the
Gulf War in 1991, Newsday and the Times said. The New York Post said all
three airports were at Level 4.

On Wednesday, federal Transportation Secretary Federico Pena announced new
airport precautions nationwide to "deter possible criminal or terrorist
acts."

As part of that national alert, the airport at Ithaca, N.Y., 175 miles
northwest of New York City, was closed for a time this morning after a man
described as a Turkish national was seen looking into parked cars, said
Stephan Nicholson, the airport assistant manager. The man was charged with
loitering.

At Kennedy's International Arrivals Building, only people with tickets were
allowed to enter the departure wing and long lines formed as employees
checked passengers.

However, Kennedy's operations desk said no flight delays were reported as of
early today.

Trash cans that might hide explosives were removed. A rooftop parking lot at
the Delta Airlines terminal was closed.

At all three airports, tow trucks were sent out to remove unoccupied cars,
and vehicles were subject to random searches.

Car and truck bombs, sometimes set off by suicidal drivers, are a favored
method of some Middle East terrorist groups.

FBI spokesman Joe Valiquette would not comment this morning on any aspect of
the security measures or confirm the Newsday report. Tom Middlemiss of the
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which runs the airports, referred
all inquiries to the Federal Aviation Administration. The FAA declined to
give details.

D. Joy Faber, a spokeswoman for the Port Authority, said there was no
telling how long the measures would remain in effect.

    
    reading .35 reminded me... i heard a news story this morning
    on the radio... during the WGAS about the (wo)man in the street
    interview, the reporter asked "aren't you worried a bomb could
    go off here any second?"
    
    are _all_ reporters anal cavities the size of lincoln tunnel?
    sure seems that way sometimes...
    
    -b

    .36
    
    ...and my response would be "No, no self-respecting terrorist would
    risk the flood of BS caused by blowing you up."

    I will have to remember that 'un, in hopes of being thought really
    REALLY funny & original if my chance ever comes...  Thanx & apologies
    in advance! :-)
    

    
    re:.35

    > "It's for our own safety, so you really can't complain about it. It's
    > because of a few nuts like this that everyone has to be put out,"

    This kind of attitude really troubles me.... There are too many places
    that this could go, especially considering:

    .                    .                    .                    .          
    .                    .                    .                    .          
    > A State Department official who requested anonymity told The New York Times
    > that "whatever threats we have received" have come from within the United
    > States.
    .                    .                    .                    .          
    .                    .                    .                    .          
    > On Wednesday, federal Transportation Secretary Federico Pena announced new
    > airport precautions nationwide to "deter possible criminal or terrorist
    > acts."
    .                    .                    .                    .          
    .                    .                    .                    .          
    > At all three airports, tow trucks were sent out to remove unoccupied cars,
    > and vehicles were subject to random searches.
    .                    .                    .                    .          
    .                    .                    .                    .          
    > D. Joy Faber, a spokeswoman for the Port Authority, said there was no
    > telling how long the measures would remain in effect.

    

    On the lighter side:

    > However, Kennedy's operations desk said no flight delays were reported 
    > as of early today.

    No kidding, all the passengers are tied up trying to get through the
    security.  It's much easier to get all the passengers (both of them)
    on to the planes in a rapid manner.

    Dan

    Concern expressed about Hamas fund-raising in U.S.


    (c) 1995 Copyright the News & Observer Publishing Co.

    (c) 1995 N.Y. Times News Service

    (Aug 15, 1995 - 22:36 EDT) -- At the Holy Land Bakery and Grocery on
    Chicago's north side, Mohammed Joma Hilmi Jarad scoffed at the notion
    that the fundamentalist Islamic movement Hamas depends on American
    fund-raising for its terror campaign to sabotage peace between
    Palestianians and Israelis.

    "To blow up a house, you only need a bomb this size," said the
    Palestinian-American grocer, hefting a grenade-sized can of chick peas.
    "But to build a house, you need a lot of money."

    Housing and hospitals, not bombs, are the fruits of American Muslim
    generosity, said Jarad, who spent six months of 1993 in an Israeli
    prison on suspicion of being a Hamas organizer.

    The role of Hamas in the United States has become a subject of anxious
    attention as federal prosecutors seek to prove that a Hamas leader
    detained in New York, Mousa Mohammed Abu Marzook, channeled large sums
    of money from the United States to Gaza and the West Bank to finance
    attacks on Israeli targets.

    In his defense, Marzook has said that the money he raised went to
    Hamas-controled charities, which support a network of free schools,
    hospitals, orphanages, and clinics in the occupied territories.

    Fearful that Hamas, whose suicide bomb attacks have so far been
    confined to Israeli targets, may be contemplating retaliation here,
    President Clinton has tightened security at New York airports to the
    highest levels since the 1991 Gulf war.

    No one suggests that funds raised in the United States account for more
    than a small fraction of the total money spent by Hamas each year,
    whether for blowing up buses or feeding orphans. But the case of
    Marzook, and the more general question of fund-raising for Hamas, poses
    difficult issues for American law enforcement because -- as was long
    the case with money raised for the Catholic cause in Northern Ireland
    -- the line between support for charity and support for terrorism is
    blurred.

    In Chicago, home to a major nucleus of Hamas support in the United
    States, the hardline Palestinian movement has won the sympathy of many
    local Muslims who say that the Palestine Liberation Organization has
    sold out.

    Not limited to nostalgic, first generation immigrants, the hardline
    attitudes toward Israel are being passed down to the second generation
    of Palestinian-American Muslim youth.

    Last December, about 5,000 people packed the Hyatt Regency hotel in
    downtown Chicago for the annual meeting of the Muslim Arab Youth
    Association. Midway through the meeting, a speaker suddenly announced
    that a Palestinian policeman had bombed a Jerusalem bus, killing
    himself and wounding 12 Israelis.

    "Allahu Akbar," roared the crowd, offering spontaneous praise to Allah.

    On the South side, the copper crescent and dome of the Bridgeview
    mosque rises against an industrial backdrop of freight rail lines and
    high tension power wires. Despite the gritty setting, the appeal of the
    fundamentalist message burns so strongly that the mosque has become
    Chicago's largest. With prayer rugs spilling out the doors at Friday
    afternoon prayers, the neighborhood is adopting parking restrictions to
    unclog streets during the weekly flood of cars.

    Over the last three years, Israeli police have detained six members of
    the mosque, including Jarad, while visiting the occupied territories.
    They have accused its imam, or leader, Sheikh Jamal Said, of being a
    senior Hamas official in the United States.

    "Totally fraudulent," said the burly, bearded Palestinian-born
    religious leader of the charge, before sweeping off in his long grey
    robes to address the overflow crowd gathering for last Friday's
    prayers.

    Later, over lamb kebab at the nearby Cairo Restaurant, Rafeeq A. Jaber,
    the Palestinian-born president of the Bridgeview Mosque Foundation,
    vowed: "The Israelis will never have security as long as they are
    taking someone else's rights. The Israelis will always be afraid
    because they are living on someone else's land."

    On Chicago's north side, Jarad, the grocer, recalled his interrogation
    experience as he chatted quietly in his store, a Middle East market
    redolent with the aroma of cinnamon and freshly ground coffee.

    "They tied my hands behind my back and made me sit on a small chair, a
    kindergarten chair, with a dirty bag over my head," said the
    39-year-old Palestinian-American who wore the skull cap often worn by
    devout Muslim men who have performed the pilgrimage to Mecca. "They
    didn't let me sleep for two or three days."

    After one month of interrogation, Jarad signed a confession to
    performing organizing work for Hamas in the occupied territories. His
    lawyer objected that the confession was written in Hebrew, a language
    that Jarad does not understand. After six months in jail, Jarad was
    released without charges. He has never returned to visit relatives in
    the West Bank.

    "It is our duty to send money to help the churches, mosques, and
    hospitals of our people," the grocer said. "But I warn my firends that
    anyone going there now should expect these things."

    To date, the only American citizen convicted in Israeli courts of
    carrying money to Hamas is Mohammed Al-Hamid Khalil Salah, a member of
    the Bridgeview mosque who was arrested with Jarad on the West Bank. A
    Chicago used car salesman, Salah was convicted in a secret military
    trial of membership in Hamas and of carrying $650,000 for its
    operations from the United States. He is now serving a five-year
    sentence in an Israeli prison.

    Further feeding Israeli suspicions about Chicago's Palestinian
    community, a military court in Israel two years ago convicted Nasser
    Issa Galal Hidmi, a former Kansas State University student of
    undergoing Hamas military training in Chicago. According to Hidmi's
    confession, he attended Hamas meetings in Chicago in 1990 and 1991 and
    underwent Hamas training there in the use of hand grenades and in the
    preparation of car bombs.

    But some Palestinian-Americans are skeptical that the radical exile
    politics goes beyond cheerleading.

    "I don't see any bake sales in Chicago for Hamas," said Raymond
    Hanania, a Chicagoan who recently was elected president of the
    Palestinian American Congress. Speaking of the estimated 500,000
    Americans of Palestinian origin, Hanania, a Christian, said: "If they
    do it, they raise it quietly."

    Even the Israelis, who requested Marzook's arrest and want him
    extradited to stand trial on terrorism charges, concede that Hamas does
    not need American bounty to finance its military wing.

    "Hamas doesn't need much money to run its terrorist activities," a
    senior Israeli military official said in an interview in Tel Aviv.
    "It's pocket money. To have a cell of suicide bombers you need four
    guys and four Kalashnikovs and one booby-trapped car. Give me $7,000
    and I can run it for a year."

    Much more expensive than low-level urban warfare, Hamas social aid
    projects depend on foreign funding, some of it from donors in the
    United States.

    But critics contend that the distinction between Hamas terror and Hamas
    good works is dubious. Charity, they say, helps raise the political
    stature of a group that promotes terror. And once the money reaches the
    Middle East, dollars are dollars.

    "Once the charity money hits its foreign destination, it is very
    difficult to determine where it really goes," said Oliver B. Revell, a
    Texas security consultant who ran the Federal Bureau of Investigation's
    counter-terrorism program until 1991.

    "There is very much a parallel with the success that the IRA had with
    Noraid in the U.S. in the 1970s," he said, referring to British
    allegations that the Irish Northern Aid Committee funnels money to the
    Irish Republican Army.

    To curtail "charitable" donations to political groups with terror
    wings, Clinton signed into law last fall a measure calling for up to 10
    years in prison for anyone convicted of knowingly raising money for
    terrorist operations. This fall, Congress is expected to pass
    legislation to allow federal scrutiny of financial records of charities
    suspected of funding terrorist groups. For several months, the FBI has
    started monitoring Hamas supporters in a number of American cities.

    Any Hamas fund-raising that went on openly in past years apparently
    went underground last January after Clinton ordered a freeze on all
    banking assets owned by 12 Palestinian and Israeli "terrorist" groups,
    including Hamas, and 18 individuals. As of last May, the Treasury
    Department had frozen only $370,000 from all of them, according to a
    Congressional inquiry.

    At the Bridgeview mosque this weekend, posters urged the faithful to
    place checks in collection envelopes for charity: to help Bosnian
    Muslim refugees in the former Yugoslavia.

    Since the signing of the Israeli-Palestinian peace accord in 1993,
    Hamas, which means "Zeal" in Arabic, has intensified its campaign of
    suicide bombings of Israeli targets. Since 1994, 57 Israelis have been
    killed and more than 160 wounded in Hamas attacks.

    But in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and in Palestinian-controlled
    Gaza, Hamas has another face. Hamas-run schools offer free classes and
    Hamas-run clinics charge as little as $1 for a private visit to a
    doctor. During the holy month of Ramadan last spring, Hamas distributed
    free meat and clothing to its supporters, while Palestinian leader
    Yasser Arafat complained bitterly to Israeli and American officials
    that he could barely meet his government payroll.

    Hamas also uses schools, mosques, jails, and funerals to spread the
    gospel about their jihad or holy war and recruit young suicide bombers
    with promises of paradise if they are martyred.

    "You have to distinguish between Hamas as a secret resistance
    organization and Hamas as a charitable organization which gets funds
    for social welfare," Imad Faluji, a senior Hamas official, said in an
    interview in his Gaza office. "If we are talking about Hamas as a
    resistance organization, we don't take any funds from the United States
    or any other country in the world. But on the other hand, if you're
    talking about welfare associations, we have contacts all over the
    world."

    Asked how a Hamas supporter would send money to the military wing of
    the organization, Faluji replied: "The address will be me."

    Faluji said that more than 50 percent of the money for Hamas comes from
    Palestinians living inside Israel, 25 percent from the Gulf states, 15
    percent from Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, and only 10
    percent from Europe and the United States.

    American and Israeli officials acknowledge that they know little about
    how Hamas is organized and where it gets its money. In interviews,
    Israeli military intelligence officials estimated that Hamas is largely
    foreign-funded, with 40 per cent of the budget coming from Arab Gulf
    countries, 20 percent from within the Occupied Territories, 10 percent
    from Iran, and between 10 to 15 percent from the United States, and the
    rest from elsewhere around the world.

    Last fall, Clinton personally appealed to the leaders of Saudi Arabia,
    Kuwait, and Syria to cut off aid to Hamas. The pleas were ignored.

    Until a few years ago, Hamas extensively used American and European
    banks to move money into the occupied territories. Now the United
    States is less important to Hamas than before. After the arrest of
    Salah and Jarad, Hamas began moving its American-based financial
    operations abroad.

    Paradoxically, Israel's peace with the Palestinians and with Jordan
    opened up banking practices in the Middle East and allowed Hamas to get
    money through Jordan. In the second half of 1993, Marzook left the
    United States to set up new operations out of Damascus and Amman.

    "When I was in charge of fundraising my main problem was how to bring
    in money from abroad," said Faluji. "Now with the peace deal with
    Israel, it is much easier than before."

    Israeli officials and journalists have alleged that the Palestinian
    equivalent of Noraid is the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and
    Development. An offshoot of an information group, the Islamic
    Association for Palestine, the Foundation has built upon Islam's
    tradition of tithing to become the largest Muslim charity in the United
    States.

    In telephone interviews last week, officials of both groups denied any
    links to Hamas. Marzook, the Hamas leader arrested in New York, is
    believed to have advised both groups, which are located in Richardson,
    Texas, a Dallas suburb.

    "When we fund a specific organization, we don't fund it because it is
    Hamas or of another group," said Shukri Abu Bakr, the foundation's
    executive director.

    In the coming weeks, a federal court will train the spotlight on the
    American connection to Hamas. Prosecutors have charged, in a complaint
    on behalf of the Israeli government, that Marzook is the head of Hamas'
    "highest ranking leadership body."

    In that role, the complaint stated, he financed "terrorist activities
    against soldiers and civilians," helped supervise Hamas' military wing,
    and deserves to be extradited to Israel for trial.

    But the complaint said that "the most significant information" against
    Marzook is based on statements and documents from Salah, the
    Palestinian-American used car salesman from Chicago. Salah took his
    orders from Marzook, who gave him explicit instructions to recruit
    trainees in the use of explosives and use some of the cash he was
    carrying to buy weapons and finance Hamas' military operations.

    But some senior administration officials question the veracity of the
    information from Salah, who, like Jarad, was subjected to heavy-handed
    tactics typical of treatment of Palestinians in the occupied
    territories: a tiny unheated cell; limited access to an attorney;
    round-the-clock interrogation, sometimes with bags over their heads;
    deprivation of food, water, sleep, and toilet facilities; and
    hand-cuffs for long periods of time.

    "The confessions have to be looked at skeptically," said one senior
    administration official. "Salah alleges he was forced to sign a
    confession in Hebrew he couldn't read and did not understand. He was
    told that if he signed a confession he would be given a light sentence
    and released. It was a real Star Chamber court."

    Hamas has mounted a major lobbying campaign in Syria, Egypt, and Jordan
    to persuade the United States to release Marzook. Its representatives
    have threatened to harm American interests if the United States
    extradited Marzook to Israel. Such a development would represent a
    major change in the strategy of Hamas, which has thus far limited its
    attacks to Israeli targets.

    "We have been keen not to harm the U.S. interests or the American
    people in Palestine and outside it because we are limiting our battle
    against the Israeli occupiers," Abu Mohammed Mustafa, the Hamas
    representiative in Damascus, said recently. "We wish and hope that we
    will not be forced to change this policy."
     

    
    > "We have been keen not to harm the U.S. interests or the American
    > people in Palestine and outside it because we are limiting our battle
    > against the Israeli occupiers," Abu Mohammed Mustafa, the Hamas
    > representiative in Damascus, said recently. "We wish and hope that we
    > will not be forced to change this policy."

    They would be foolish to attack us.  What would that accomplish.  Well,
    that would cut off most of the influx of cash from the US, and possibly
    Europe.  And completely tick off the most powerful country in the
    world.  Not a good move in my book.  Of course that doesn't mean that
    they wouldn't

* Hamas burns U.S. flag over Abu Marzuk's arrest

GAZA - Supporters of the Islamic Hamas group in self-ruled Gaza burned
American flags Friday in protest over the detention of a senior leader in
the United States.

Palestinians said the Islamic Resistance Movement staged protests across
Gaza demanding Washington free Musa Abu Marzuk, the head of its politbureau
who was detained in New York last month after finding his name on a list of
aliens not allowed to enter the United States.

Israel has since issued an arrest warrant against Abu Marzuk and said it
would ask the United States to extradite him.

Witnesses said masked activists burned American flags after the Friday
prayers at several mosques and hung placards on mosques saying Abu Marzuk's
arrest was "a Crusader, Zionist war on Islam."

At the Salah ed-Deen mosque in Gaza city, worshippers cheered as U.S. and
Israeli flags went up in flames. Boys also took off their sneakers to beat
pictures of President Clinton.

Hamas, which opposes the Israeli-PLO peace moves and has carried out
suicide bombings against Israel, says Abu Marzuk is a political leader and
not involved in guerrilla activities. Hamas has warned of a "wave of anger
and rage against the U.S." and "unpleasant consequences" if Abu Marzuk was
not released.

    <---
    
    'oughta be a constitutional amendment 'gainst that.

Mark these words reported in today's news well, to understand that the
annexation of Jerusalem by Israel will never be accepted by any Arab
country:

    "This is the course the Palestinians have apparently been forced to
    choose in light of the daily mounting violence and suppression in
    occupied Jerusalem."
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

/john     

    Whassa news well?  The place that accepts old news?
    

Islamic Jihad claims responsibility for suicide attacks
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

(c) 1995 Copyright Nando.net
(c) 1995 Associated Press

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip (Nov 4, 1995 - 17:48 EST) -- With clenched fists
raised high, Muslim militants claimed responsibility Saturday for two
suicide bombings and vowed to avenge their leader with more deadly attacks
against Israel.

Islamic Jihad leader Fathi Shakaki was gunned down in Malta last week, and
the group blames Israel for his death. Israel has not confirmed or denied
involvement in the killing.

At a Gaza City stadium rally to commemorate Shakaki, protesters burned
American and Israeli flags and an effigy of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak
Rabin.

"Wait, wait, oh Rabin, the sons of paradise are coming. Death to America,
death to Israel," chanted the crowd, some of them wearing T-shirts with
Shahaki's picture.

Despite efforts by Palestinian police to limit the number of participants,
an estimated 4,000 filled the stadium.

A statement read over a loudspeaker said the Islamic Jihad was responsible
for Thursday's two suicide bombings that injured 11 Israelis. The announcer
identified the bombers as Ribhi Kahlout, 22, and Muhammed Abu Hashem, 18.

Israel has warned that it will freeze its planned troop pullback in the West
Bank if Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat does not prevent further attacks.

But Arafat indicated that Shakaki's death had made it more difficult to
control the militants.

"We did our best to prevent those operations, but then came the attack in
Malta," Arafat told reporters Saturday. He did not elaborate.

Islamic Jihad, the staunchest opponent to Israel-PLO peacemaking, has
carried out a series of suicide bombings and shootings in the two years
since Israel and the PLO signed their first peace agreement.

In a January bombing in central Israel, 21 people were killed. An April
blast near a Jewish settlement in Gaza killed seven Israeli soldiers and an
American student.

Palestinian police said they had arrested a third Islamic Jihad activist who
had planned a suicide attack to avenge Shakaki's death. His name has not yet
been released.

    
    The good news?
    
    No Israelis were killed...
    
    More good news?
    
    Them whackos can claim whatever they want... but two of them will no
    longer be around to comment...
    

* Judge upholds convictions for terrorist-bombing plot

NEW YORK -- Saying there was no proof the defendants' constitutional rights were
violated, a federal judge rejected Wednesday a motion to throw out the
indictments and convictions of Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman and nine others on
charges of waging a terror-bombing and assassination conspiracy in New York.

Judge Michael B. Mukasey also denied a request that Abdel-Rahman, the militant
Muslim who prosecutors said had led the conspiracy, be allowed to address the
court for three and a half hours when he and the other men are sentenced next
Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Manhattan.

At a presentencing session Wednesday, Abdel-Rahman's lawyer, Lynne F. Stewart,
said the blind, 57-year-old cleric from Egypt -- a fiery speaker whose voice was
not heard at his eight-month trial -- wanted to give his view of the case and
the "history it occupies in the world."

"He has been entombed in nowheresville," Ms. Stewart said, referring to his
confinement since his conviction in October in a medical center for federal
prisoners in Springfield, Mo., where she said her client, who speaks no English,
rarely has a chance to talk with anyone.

But Mukasey said he would limit the defendants' sentencing statements to 20
minutes each for those speaking in English and 40 minutes for Abdel-Rahman and
others speaking in their native languages of Arabic or Spanish, to allow time
for translation to English.

In upholding the indictment and convictions, the judge said there was "no proof"
to back the defendants' contentions that the chief government informer in the
case, Emad Salem, had destroyed evidence that would have helped exonerate at
least some of the defendants.

They were convicted of plotting to blow up major buildings and transportation
links in and around New York City and to assassinate public figures.

Abdel-Rahman faces up to life in prison, and the other defendants face sentences
whose maximums range from 35 years to life.

Cleric gets life for planning urban war
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright � 1996 Nando.net
Copyright � 1996 Reuter Information Service

NEW YORK (Jan 17, 1996 8:40 p.m. EST) - A federal judge Wednesday sentenced
militant Muslim Sheik Omar Adel-Rahman to life in prison for leading a
terrorist plot that could have devastated New York City and killed
thousands.

The cleric and nine of his followers were all sentenced for planning a war
of violence in the United States that included the bombing of the United
Nations building, bridges and tunnels leading into New York and the
assassination of political and religious leaders.

Another defendant, El Sayyid Nosair, 40, was also sentenced to life for his
role in the plot which included the murder of militant Rabbi Meir Kahane.
The other eight defendants received prison terms ranging from 25 to 57
years.

In sentencing Abdel-Rahman, U.S. District Judge Michael Mukasey told the
cleric he was convicted of leading the terrorist plot.

"You were convicted here of leading a terrorist conspiracy in this country,"
Mukasey told Abdel-Rahman at his sentencing.

"You were convicted of directing others to perform acts which if
accomplished would have resulted in the murder of hundreds if not thousands
of people and brought about devastation on a scale that beggars the
imagination ...certainly on a scale unknown in this country since the Civil
War, if not ever," he said.

He said if the plot had been carried out, it "would have made the World
Trade Center outrage seem almost insignificant by comparison."

The February 1993 World Trade Center blast, which killed six and injured
more than 1,000, was considered the worst terrorist act on U.S. soil at the
time.

Abdel-Rahman, who is blind and diabetic, spoke for more than 1 1/2 hours
through a translator criticizing the United States and Egypt, particularly
its president, Hosni Mubarak.

The translator had to stop several times because of difficulty understanding
the cleric, whose remarks were often repetitious and rambling.

Even so, he had only made it through half of his planned speech, when
Mukasey cut him short.

The cleric did not ask for clemency but said he had been tried unjustly
because of his religious beliefs. He urged Muslims not to befriend
Christians and Jews and said that America would disappear from the face of
the earth if it tries to kill Islam.

He said prosecutors want Muslims to become subservient to America or "else
we have to go to jail for life."

"We do not kneel ... except for God. Please do not be subservient to
America," he said.

The cleric said that the United States believes it is "killing" Islam by
putting Muslims on trial.

"In truth it is killing itself," he said. "It cannot kill Islam and if it
tried to do that, God will actually make it disapper and make it disappear
from the surface of this earth as it had made the Soviet Union disappear."

Mukasey, who had sat patiently through the day-long hearing, said the
defense charge of religious persecution "is totally false."

He said the cleric not only approved the violence but urged his followers
"not to let the waters run" -- meaning not to perform just small,
insignificant acts.

In sentencing Nosair, the other defendant who received a life term, Mukasey
said the evidence showed he was a "major participant in a conspiracy to reap
vast destruction in this country."

Nosair was charged in a state case with murdering Kahane in 1990. However he
was acquitted on the state murder charge in 1992 but was convicted of lesser
weapons violations.

All 10 defendants in the bombing case were convicted of a Civil War era
crime called seditious conspiracy. They were found guilty of agreeing that
the conspiracy's goal would be to use force to oppose the authority of the
United States.

Other defendants sentenced Wednesday and their prison terms are: Ibrahim
Elgabrowny, 57 years; Clement Hampton-El, 35 years; Victor Alvarez, 35
years; Mohammed Saleh, 35 years; Fadil Abdelghani, 25 years; Tarig Elhassan,
35 years; Fares Khallafalla, 30 years, and Amir Abdelgani, 30 years.

Just for discussion purposes, could this dangerous? Did this guy actually 
do anything? I am concerned that people in this country can be convicted of
thinking about doing something. An actual act is not required. Does this 
bother anybody else? 

>> NEW YORK (Jan 17, 1996 8:40 p.m. EST) - A federal judge Wednesday sentenced
>> militant Muslim Sheik Omar Adel-Rahman to life in prison for leading a
>> terrorist plot that could have devastated New York City and killed
>> thousands.
    
    Is this one of those low-level jobs that we're glad to have
    immigrants here to do, because we can't get citizens to do it?
    
    Chris

    .50
    
    Ralston, you're kidding aren't you?  
    
    I'd say the potential for loss of life at the WTC and if the
    bombings of several tunnel entrances to NYC had worked as planned;
    THAT would have been a lot more dangerous than putting this looney,
    fanatic and his cohorts in jail.
    
    It was proven he directed the deeds; conspiracy was proven, what
    else do you want?  
    

    
    	I guess he's wondering how far the government can go in prosec-
    	uting someone for THINKING about doing something even though
    	they haven't actually done it.
    
    	This "conspiracy" thing bugs me, since I thought Pam Smart got
    	a very stiff sentence for someone who didn't even commit an
    	actual murder.
    

Right. What real crime has been committed? Has anyone here ever layed in bed at 
night and planned out in their minds anything that might be considered a crime? 
I have. I would never go through with it however. By using the standards of this
conviction, I am guilty of conspiracy. I'm not saying that this guy and his 
friends aren't scumbags of the highest order. I'm saying that thinking about and 
even planning a crime is totally differant than committing a crime.

Evidence included videos of defendants assembling bombs.  Nosair committed a
"real crime" for which he was inexplicably acquitted.  In this case, he was
convicted of conspiracy to murder Kahane.

    Ralston,
    
    I'm sure we've all fantacized in our minds about things that might be
    considered a crime.  The key here, is did YOU ever go out and solicit
    someone or direct someone to commit that crime?  If you didn't, no
    sweat....it was just a fantasy.
    
    The sheikh directed his followers to carry out a deadly plot, so he's
    definitely culpable.  I believe in New York state, when you are a
    conspirator in a crime and someone dies, you are treated just the 
    same as if you had been present when the victim died.
    
    

    Had they succeeded, it's not impossible that they might have killed
    100,000 people.
    
    As it is, I think they killed six, or thereabouts.
    
    

>                          I believe in New York state, when you are a
>    conspirator in a crime and someone dies, you are treated just the 
>    same as if you had been present when the victim died.
    
This was a Federal case.

>    As it is, I think they killed six, or thereabouts.
    
Seven.  Meir Kahane and six at the WTC.

       <<< Note 512.54 by GENRAL::RALSTON "life in the passing lane!" >>>

>By using the standards of this
>conviction, I am guilty of conspiracy.

	No, you are not.

	A conspiracy requires two or more people involved in the planning
	AND (more importantly) an "overt act" is required to show that the
	planning was aimed toward committing the crime.

Jim

    Gerald,
    
    So it was a federal case, aren't the rules even more stringent?
    The sheikh directed the men to do his bidding and people died; the
    old dude's culpable.
    
    

    
    >old dude's culpable.
    
    	And he's also to blame.
    

I kept asking if this guy actually committed a real crime. It wasn't until the
last few that the question was answered. If someone died under his direction
then he is guilty. But why conspiracy? If I hand Jim Percival a gun and ask him 
to kill Jack Martin and he does it, he and I are both charged with murder. It was
the conspiracy charge that threw me.

    Ralson,
    
    I believe they have to classify it as a conspiracy because he wasn't
    actually at the crime scene (to get someone named in an indictment).
    
    The "conspiracy" was how Vince Bugliosi got Charlie Manson.  In those
    days most legal experts thought Bugliosi didn't stand a chance of
    putting Manson behind bars.  Manson was arrested for "conspiracy to
    commit murder" and Bugliosi made his case strong enough to convince
    the jury.
    
    Had the death penalty not been revoked a year after the convictions,
    Charlie would have gone to the chair along with Tex Watson and the
    girls convicted of doing the actual killings.
    

You can call me Tom.

       <<< Note 512.63 by GENRAL::RALSTON "life in the passing lane!" >>>

>If I hand Jim Percival a gun and ask him 
>to kill Jack Martin and he does it, he and I are both charged with murder. 
>It was
>the conspiracy charge that threw me.

	If you hand me a gun and ask me to kill Jack and we then plot on
	how to do it, making note of Jack's daily activities and actually 
	plan on how to do it, THEN we are guilty of conspiracy.

Jim

    
    
    Otherwise, it's aiding and abetting.. right?
    

I guess I'm confused, which wouldn't be the first time. I really thought that
both would be charged with the same murder, even if only one actually did the 
killing.

    Why do I get this strange feeling I'm not liked here????!

We all love you Jack, except when you pass up a perfectly good 69 SNARF!

    
    	Pam Smart got life without parole for conspiracy in the murder of
    	Greg.  What did the kid who actually murdered him get?
    

    28-40

    25 or 6 to 4

    <<< Note 512.67 by SOLVIT::KRAWIECKI "Zebras.. doomed to extinction" >>>

>    Otherwise, it's aiding and abetting.. right?
 
	Accessory before the fact is more likely. If he offers money (not
	that it would have to be much ;-)  ) solicitation to commit murder.

Jim   

       <<< Note 512.68 by GENRAL::RALSTON "life in the passing lane!" >>>

>I guess I'm confused, which wouldn't be the first time. I really thought that
>both would be charged with the same murder, even if only one actually did the 
>killing.

	It depends on State law. Generally you can be charged with the murder
	if you are present during the crime, conspiracy if you are not.

	Note that Manson was actually charged with murder, so California
	law must be different.

Jim

    
    re: .74
    
    Maybe we can take up a collection????
    
    ;)
    

    Shawn,
    
    I think you need to re-think your fixation with Pam Smart :-)
    
    Pam's in prison (and rightfully so IMHO) because she used those
    young men to get rid of an unwanted husband.  She planned the thing
    and set it all in motion.
    
    If the guys just had a crush on Pam (thru no fault of her own) and
    decided to off her hubby, that would have been another story and
    Pam wouldn't be in jail.  
    
    

Pame.  That's how she and her family spell it.  hth, nnttm, et.al.

    
    	I spell it Pam, because Pame looks stupid.
    
    	And I don't care what she did, because this was no Patty Hearst
    	deal where someone was kidnapped and forced into a felony.  They
    	were not forced to do anything.
    

    
    How would you feel if people spelled your name Sean because Shawn
    looked stupid?
    

    
    	Hell, people do it all the time and I haven't complained yet.
    
    	Notice that I hardly ever use my name.
    

| <<< Note 512.80 by UPSAR::POWDML::HANGGELI "Little Chamber of Tear-Off Bottoms" >>>


| How would you feel if people spelled your name Sean because Shawn looked 
| stupid?

	But Shawn DOES look stupid. :-)

    <<< Note 512.82 by BIGQ::SILVA "Benevolent 'pedagogues' of humanity" >>>

>	But Shawn DOES look stupid. :-)

	And the spelling is kinda dumb too. ;-)

Jim

01/21/96 - 02:14 PM ET 				[Cross-posted from News Briefs]

Muslim militant group threatens to avenge sheik's sentence 

CAIRO, Egypt - A militant Muslim group has threatened to
attack American targets to avenge the life sentence imposed on
Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman for plotting to blow up New York
landmarks, a newspaper reported Sunday. 

"All American interests will be legitimate targets for our
struggle until the release of Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman and
his brothers," the Al-Hayat newspaper quoted the Islamic
Group as saying. 

"As the American government has opted for open confrontation
with the Islamic movement and the Islamic symbols of struggle,
al-Gamaa al-Islamiya (the Islamic Group) swears by God to
its irreversible vow to take an eye for an eye," the statement
said. 

The Islamic Group has been blamed for much of the violence in
a nearly four-year campaign aimed at overthrowing Egypt's
secular government and replacing it with strict Islamic rule. 

The group considers the Egyptian-born Abdel-Rahman as its
spiritual leader. 

Abdel-Rahman was sentenced to life in prison on Wednesday
by a U.S. District Court after being convicted in a plot to bomb
the United Nations, a federal building, two New York tunnels
and a bridge. Nine others were convicted in the conspiracy. 

The U.S. Embassy has warned Americans to exercise caution
because of possible violent reaction in Egypt to the court ruling.
The embassy was closed Sunday, and spokesmen could not
immediately be reached for comment on the Islamic Group
statement. 

There was no way to independently verify the statement.
Similar claims from the group have gone in the past to
Al-Hayat. 

More than 870 people have died since Muslim militants
launched their campaign against the government in the spring
of 1992. 

By The Associated Press 

    
    	Thanks, Jim ... next time you come out here remind me to beat
    	you repeatedly with a stick.
    
    	8^)
    

    .79
    
    > I spell it Pam, because Pame looks stupid.
    
    So much for people's right to be known as they wish to be known.

    
    	Don't start, Binder.
    
    	It's Pam's right to be known as Pame, and it's my right to call
    	her Pam if I feel like it.
    

    
      re, .85 - In the USA, you CERTAINLY have no right to be called
     whatever you wish.  It would be unconstitutional.  I can call you
     anything I wish, whatever you think.  It is my self-evident right,
     and is unalienable.  What you suggest is tyranny.
    
      bb

    Isn't there a "fighting words" exception to that rule?

    .88
    
    It's not a Constitutional right, it's the right we all have to expect
    common decency from others.  Too bad others seem unable to grasp the
    concept.

    
    	Dick, it's insulting to think that people are just adding letters
    	to their names, which would normally alter the pronunciation, and
    	expect people to automatically know this and pronounce them wrong.
    
    	No wonder the English language is so screwed up.
    
    	I'll see if I can find Dave Barry's column on "The 'E' tax", where
    	""The owner of The Boot Shoppe" would be fined, and the owner of
    	"Ye Olde Shoee Shoppe" would be taken outside and shot".
    

    .91
    
    Kristin.  Kristen.  Krysten.
    Catherine.  Catharine.  Katherine.  Katharine.  Kathryn.
    
    You probably have trouble pronouncing all these names, too, don't you,
    given their wildly different pronunciations.  I suppose you'd call me
    BIND-er, too, because you're too insulted to learn that my name, being
    German, is pronounced BINN-der?

  if my last name has insulted anyone, my apologies.


  i thank you.

    
    	Yes, I would call you BIND-ER ... this is the US, not Germany,
    	so I'll use the US pronunciation.
    
    	Would you pronounce "Pame" like "Pam" or "Paim"?
    

    
    	I have no problem with your name, Ms. Dessmaisins.
    

    .94
    
    I'd pronounce it "Paim."  Until I was corrected.  Then I'd pronounce
    it "Pam" because that's what common courtesy suggests is the right
    thing to do.

    
>>    	Yes, I would call you BIND-ER ... this is the US, not Germany,
>>    	so I'll use the US pronunciation.

	the "US pronunciation"?  it's only the "US pronunciation" for
	idjits who won't pronounce a man's name the way he pronounces
	it himself.

    
    
    Well, I pronounce it Blinder for other reasons. :')
    
    
    
    Mike

    
    	He pronounces it incorrectly, so I'm supposed to follow suit?
    
    	Monkey hear, monkey do?
    
    	I think not.
    

 The terrorist SNARF!

    You can call me Ray
    you can call me Jay
    At my age I`ve been called everything in the book any way!!

    .99
    
    Incorrectly?  I find myself vastly amused at the prospect of my
    great-grandfather Jacob Binder's reaction to the statement that he
    pronounced his name incorrectly.  Nobody in Aurora, Illinois,
    pronounces it BIND-er, not even the people who live on Binder Street.

    
    	Hey, Giai, whaddaya say?
    
    	Hey, Re, everythin' OK?
    

    
    	Oh, Aurora, Illinois?
    
    	Why didn't you tell me you had such widespread, overwhelming ev-
    	idence to back this theory up??
    
    	Here I am thinking you have a few people that agree with you, but
    	now that this latest tidbit has been revealed I don't see how I
    	can compete.
    

    you're sounding more idiotic by the minute, Shawn.

The Terrorist Threat, people, The Terrorist Threat!

Note 227.0                     On unnecessary e's                      7 replies

			  Ye Olde Humor Columne
						--Dave Barrye


       We need to do something about this national tendency to try to make 
    new things look like they are old. 
       First off, we should enact an "e" tax.  Government agents would roam
    the country, looking for stores whose names contained any word that
    ended in an unnecessary "e," such as "shoppe" or "olde," and the owners
    of these stores would be taxed at a flat rate of $50,000 per year per
    "e."  We should also consider an additional $50,000 "ye" tax, so that
    the owner of a store called "Ye Olde Shoppe" would have to fork over
    $150,000 a year.  In extreme cases, such as "Ye Olde Barne Shoppe," the
    owner would simply be taken outside and shot. 
       We also need some kind of law about the number of inappropriate
    objects you can hang on the walls in restaurants.  I am especially
    concerned here about the restaurants that have sprung up in shopping
    complexes everywhere to provide young urban professionals with a place
    to go for margaritas and potato skins. You know the restaurants I mean:
    They always have names like Flanagan's, Hanrahan's, O'Toole's,
    O'Reilly's, etc., as if the owner were a genial red-faced Irish
    bartender, when in fact it is probably 14 absentee proctologists in
    need of tax shelter. 
       You have probably noticed that, inevitably, the walls in these
    places are covered with objects we do not ordinarily attach to walls,
    such as barber poles, traffic lights, washboards, street signs, farm
    implements, etc.  This decor scheme is presumably intended to create an
    atmosphere of relaxed old-fashioned funkiness, but in fact it creates
    an atmosphere of great weirdness.  It is as if a young urban
    professional with telekinetic powers, the kind Sissy Spacek exhibited
    in the movie 'Carrie,' got really tanked up on the margaritas one night
    and decided to embed an entire flea market in the wall. 
       I think it's too much.  I think we need to pass a law stating that
    the only objects that may be hung on restaurant walls are those that
    God intended to be hung on restaurant walls, such as pictures, mirrors,
    and the heads of deceased animals.  Any restaurant caught violating
    this law would have to get rid of its phony Irish-bartender name and
    adopt a name that clearly reflected its actual ownership ("Say, let's
    go get some potato skins at Fourteen Absentee Proctologists in Need of
    Tax Shelter"). 
       And I suppose it goes without saying that anybody caught
    manufacturing "collectible" plates, mugs, or figurines of any kind
    should be shipped directly to Devil's Island. 
       Now I know what you're thinking.  You're thinking:  "Dave, I hear
    what you're saying, but wouldn't laws such as these constitute
    unwarranted government interference in the private sector?" 
       The answer is:  Yes, they would.  But unwarranted government
    interference in the private sector is a small price to pay if it draws
    the government's attention away from its efforts to revitalize decaying
    urban areas.  The government inevitably tries to do this by installing
    60 billion new red bricks and several dozen vaguely old-fashioned
    streetlights in an effort to create a look I would call "Sort Of
    Colonial Or Something." 
       The government did this to a town right near me, West Chester, Pa.
    This is a nice little old town, with a lot of nice little old houses,
    but about 10 years ago some of the downtown merchants started getting
    really upset because they were losing business to the "shopping malls,"
    a phrase the merchants always say in the same tone of voice you might
    use to say "Nazi Germany."  Now, as a consumer, I would argue that the
    reason most of us were going to the shopping malls was that the
    downtown stores tended to have window displays that had not been
    changed since the Truman administration, featuring crepe paper faded to
    the color of old oatmeal, accented by the occasional dead insect.  And
    the actual merchandise in these stores was not the kind you would go
    out of your way to purchase or even accept as gifts.  We are talking,
    for example, about clothing so dowdy that it could not be used even to
    clean up after a pet. 
       What I am saying is that the problem with the downtown West Chester
    stores, from this consumer's point of view, was they didn't have much
    that anybody would want to buy.  From the merchants' point of view,
    however, the problem was that the entire downtown needed to be
    Revitalized, and they nagged the local government for years until
    finally it applied for a federal grant of God knows how many million
    dollars, which was used to rip up the streets for several years, so as
    to discourage the few remaining West Chester shoppers.  When they
    finally got it all back together again, the new revitalized West
    Chester consisted of mostly the same old stores, only in front of them
    were (surprise!) red brick sidewalks garnished with vaguely
    old-fashioned streetlights.  The whole effect was definitely Sort Of
    Colonial, Or Something, and some shoppers even stopped by to take a
    look at it on their way to the mall. 
       I gather this process has been repeated in a great many towns around
    the country, and it seems to me that it's a tremendous waste of federal
    time and effort that could otherwise be spent getting rid of the extra
    "e." I urge those of you who agree with me to write letters to your
    congresspersons, unless you use that stationery with the
    "old-fashioned" ragged edges, in which case I urge you to go to your
    local Flanagan's and impale yourself on one of the farm implements. 

	[from the Miami Herald's "Tropic" magazine, March 30, 1986]

    
    Salesman walks into "Mike Kowalksi's Bakery" and sees this older,
    oriental gentleman sweeping up and asks to see Mike Kowalksi.
    
    Little old man says: "You're looking at him"...
    
    Taken aback, the salesman says : "I'm sorry for being startled, but you
    appear to be of oriental ancestry... How did you come by the name?"
    
    Little old man says: "Well, when I came into this country through Ellis
    Island way back when, I was standing behind this tall, burly, blonde
    European... He walked up to the Immigration Official and was asked his
    name... the man replied 'Mike Kowalski'... Then it was my turn. The
    same official asked me my name and I told him...
    
    
    
    
       "Sam Ting"..

    Why are so many Italian men named Tony?
    
    
    
    
    Because when they came over to Ellis Island, they had the acronym
    stamped on their forehead, "TO New York"

    
      In a long, long distant past, I was given a college roommate,
     whose given name was James.  His mother had always called him
     James.  I called him Jim.  "I've always been James."  "TS.  Now
     you're Jim."  And so he was, and not just to me.
    
      bb

    .110
    
    > And so he was...
    
    ...because he hadn't the courage to stand up for himself.  His problem.

>       <<< Note 512.92 by SMURF::BINDER "Eis qui nos doment vescimur." >>>
>    Kristin.  Kristen.  Krysten.
>    Catherine.  Catharine.  Katherine.  Katharine.  Kathryn.

Whatever.

Many, many people spell my name RANDOLF until corrected. This would be cool,
except for the fact that I've NEVER seen it spelled that way. We even have
the town of RandolPH here in Massachusetts. Like, DUH.

Given that the name was probably spoken �ons ago, before it was written, the
spelling is probably arbitrary, anyway.

    Many people spell my name `Glen'. Makes me feel queer.

<---part of you is...Leslie

    	
    	di, I don't take offense at your last name, although your
    	username makes me feel like a stuttering fool...
    
    

   .115  yes, well, you never know how many people with the last name
	 of DesMaisons might be working on the same cluster, after all.

    
    Yeah Di.... I had that same worry...
    

    
    Terrorists are threatened at the sound of your names.

With a name like Christine Butkovich, you can imagine all the kind 
variations my school chums (?) came up with.  Most commonly, the "Chr" would 
be replaced with a "p" and I'll leave the last name to your imagination.
No wonder I used to sign my name "Chris B" most of the time!

... and that's why you became a terrorist.

Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 10:49:44 -0800 (PST)
From: Virginia McMillan <[email protected]>
Subject: Nuclear Terrorism in the US?
To: Virginia McMillan <[email protected]>

C O N S E R V A T I V E   C O N S E N S U S (tm)
*****************************************************************
 Events * Analysis * Forecasts * Commentary * Readers' Opinions
*****************************************************************
N E W S   F L A S H   :::              World, National, Regional
                                             Distribution: World
                                                   Editor's Desk

Copyright 1996 by Conservative Consensus, ISSN 1074-245X.

QUOTATION AND REDISTRIBUTION are permitted, for private,
non-commercial use, provided nothing is changed and
our headers and trailers remain intact. V2X9

N U C L E A R   T E R R O R I S M   I N   T H E   U S ?

NEST MAINTAINS 1,000 specialists on 24-hour standby, to disarm a
               nuclear terrorist bomb planted in the US. The
               Nuclear Emergency Search Team is tasked with
               responding to a nuclear threat anywhere in the US
               within four hours. Their training includes
               building and dismantling homemade nuclear bombs.
               To date, they have been put on alert over 100
               times, and mobilized 30 times against threats
               believed to be credible. Lisa Gordon-Hagerty, head
               of NEST, said she thinks "more in terms of when,
               not if." [Source: Intelligence Digest]
_________________________

ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY: We have argued on several occasions that
nuclear terrorism represents a far greater threat to US security
than that posed by a traditional military first strike against
the US. This is not to diminish the possibility of missile or
bomber attack -- although submarine launched cruise missiles,
which could be launched off our coast and would fly too low for
any type of satellite laser-based system to deal with, are a more
likely option.

THE REAL THREAT is a nuclear device assembled in an apartment,
hotel room, floated in on a barge, or delivered, days in advance,
in any one of hundreds of ways. The simple fact is that there is
no defense against such an act.

THUS WE MUST look to motive. That is why America's foreign policy
and role in the world must be reexamined. The threat is real. Ms.
Gordon-Hagerty is correct: not if, but when. The US has the
choice to carry on that debate either before or after such an
incident. We recommend before.

Well here we are.

Now that the anti-terror bill is law, it has only taken a few days for an
attorney to file a $10 billion lawsuit naming Libya, its intelligence agency,
its national airline, etc.

The lawyer hopes to collect through the seizure and liquidation of Libyan
assets in the United States.

Will this do any good, or will it only inflame further terror actions against
American targets?

/john

    .123
    
    What about ex post facto?

 ZZ   What about ex post facto?
    
    No thanks, I already ate thank you...

Ex post facto applies to criminal law, not civil law.

/john

   ______________________________________________________________________
   
     Clinton signs anti-terrorism measure to punish Iran, Libya investors
  __________________________________________________________________________
                                       
      Copyright � 1996 Nando.net
      Copyright � 1996 The Associated Press
      
   WASHINGTON (Aug 5, 1996 12:00 p.m. EDT) -- Amid new concerns about
   terrorism, President Clinton signed a bill today to punish foreign
   businesses that invest in Iran and Libya. He urged America's allies to
   join him but said the United States will go it alone if they don't.
   
   "We do not always agree," Clinton said, taking note of allies'
   complaints that the United States is interfering in international
   trade. "I hope and expect that before long our allies will come
   around."
   
   The French government lost no time in attacking the new law. Even
   before Clinton signed it, Yves Doutriaux, a French Foreign Ministry
   spokesman in Paris, said the measure will "create a particularly
   dangerous precedent for the security and development of commerce."
   
   Doutriaux said France would work with the European Union to protect
   any French companies from being hurt by the law.
   
   In signing the measure in an Oval Office ceremony and again in a
   speech at George Washington University, Clinton said Iran and Libya
   are "two of the most dangerous supporters of terrorism in the world."
   
   Addressing the objections of allies, the president advised, "You can't
   do business with people by day who are killing your people by night."
   He said that regardless of the response of allies "the United States
   has to act."
   
   The measure requires the president to impose sanctions on foreign
   firms that invest $40 million or more in a year in the energy sectors
   of Iran and Libya.
   
   The United States already is under fire from Canada, Mexico and other
   allies for a measure Clinton signed into law that penalizes foreign
   businesses that invest in property the Cuban government confiscated
   from current American citizens.
   
   The Iran-Libya measure has been attacked by the European Union which
   calls the bill unacceptable.
   
   Clinton was joined in the Oval Office by relatives of victims of the
   1988 downing of Pan Am Flight 103. Also present were Secretary of
   State Warren Christopher, Attorney General Janet Reno and Clinton's
   national security adviser, Anthony Lake.
   
   As the bill moved through Congress, lawmakers cited the case of Pan Am
   103, as well as the explosion of TWA Flight 800, where a bomb is
   suspected.
   
   Libya and Iran are on the State Department list of nations supporting
   terrorism and the United States bans trade with both.
   
   Clinton said the bill today "will help deny those countries the money
   they need to finance international terrorism."
   
   The United Nations Security Council imposed sanctions against Libya
   after it was implicated in the Pan Am 103 explosion. Clinton said the
   measure would heighten pressure on Libya to extradite the suspects in
   that case.
   
   The legislation requires the president to impose two or more of six
   possible sanctions against foreign companies or individuals that
   invest $40 million in a year in Iranian or Libyan energy development.
   U.S. companies are already barred from any trade with the two nations.
   
   The six possible sanctions the president could impose are: denying
   Export-Import Bank loans, denying export licenses, barring U.S. banks
   from making loans of more than $10 million a year to sanctioned
   parties, barring sanctioned financial institutions from being primary
   dealers of U.S. government bonds, banning U.S. government procurement
   of goods and services from sanctioned entities and imposing import
   sanctions.

Last year, Clinton signed into law a new Anti-Terrorism law which creates
an exception to the sovereignty foreign governments enjoy, allowing suits
for terrorism.

Under this law, the family of an American student killed in an attack on
an Israeli bus in the Gaza strip has filed a $150 million civil suit which
names as defendants the Iranian government, its top leaders, the Iranian
Ministry of Information and Security and other Iranian officials, charging
that they should be held responsible for the attack.

"Alisa Flatow's death was caused by a wilful and deliberate act of ...
killing because the explosion was caused by a bomb that was deliberately
driven into the bus by Palestine Islamic Jihad acting under the direction
and sponsorship of" Iran and the other defendants, the suit said.

/john

    yeah, try and collect. it amounts to nothing more than a
    little harrasement against Iran.
    
    if there was strong evidence of direct Iranian involvement
    the government would have acted on it in some manner.

From today's Jerusalem Post:

Stephen Flatow vs. the State of Iran

by HILLEL KUTTLER

(March 2) -- A New Jersey real estate lawyer is suing
Iran over the death of his daughter, killed in a 1995
suicide bus bombing here

To this day, Stephen Flatow believes his 20-year-old
daughter Alisa never saw it coming. He does not mean
only the suicide bomber who rode alongside Egged bus
No. 36 and blew up himself and eight passengers traveling
near Kfar Darom on April 9, 1995. But danger generally.

That day, Alisa was on her first-ever outing to the Gaza
Strip. The New Jersey woman was religious and loved to
sunbathe. And Gush Katif's beach provided separate men's
and women's swimming areas.

Just three months earlier, father and daughter met for
what would be the last time, when the Flatows traveled
to Israel to visit Alisa.

She was on her sixth visit to Israel, spending the year
studying at Jerusalem's Nishmat seminary. Stephen and
Alisa were leaving Friday night prayers at the Western
Wall and stopped at the plaza steps.

Stephen told her that being in Israel was like being in
the Garden of Eden. Alisa replied, "It really is, isn't
it?" They spoke briefly about the need to bring peace
with the Arabs.

"Her view was that it wouldn't affect her directly,"
Stephen says of the region's tensions. "And she felt
that there's people here dealing with people, that you
had to give both sides the opportunity to get together
and talk.

"I don't think she saw herself in harm's way being in
Israel. I think she felt comfortable there; I felt she
was comfortable there.... I don't think she ever really
thought that something like this would happen to her. I
used to be more comfortable when Alisa was in Israel
than when she was visiting her boyfriend on the Lower
East Side."

Alisa was careful. Stephen impressed a set of rules on
each of the five children he and his wife Rosalyn have
sent to Israel: Only travel to recognized destinations.
Never go alone.

And always take public buses.

Alisa abided by the rules.

Now Stephen Flatow is hoping the new rules drawn up by
Congress bring solace and justice to the family and levy
a financial disincentive on those involved in her death
from perpetrating such a crime again.

Stephen Flatow is suing Iran.

Until last year, he might have been left to trudge off
and join hands in the somber circle of bereaved parents,
with no outlet other than the pride of knowing that
Alisa's organs are now keeping three Israelis alive.

But last April President Clinton signed a massive
counter-terrorism bill that stripped away the "sovereign
immunity" foreign countries enjoyed from prosecution by
Americans. And in September, amendments in both houses
of Congress went a step further by opening up those
countries to civil suits for damages for their
involvement in international terrorism.

The case, which Flatow filed in federal court here on
Wednesday last week, could be a precedent. Flatow is
seeking $150 million in damages. Suits brought by the
families of terrorism victims of the PLO and Libya have
gone nowhere yet. Flatow knows the fight will be
difficult and lengthy (at least seven years) but
believes that unlike the others, he has statutory teeth
behind his effort.

He also has Steven Perles, the Washington lawyer who
tried to sue Germany for damages on behalf of Hugo
Princz, who suffered through and survived the Holocaust
as a naturalized American citizen. The case was thrown
out when a judge determined US courts had no
jurisdiction, but in a second attempt Princz and Perles
got the case heard and eventually won.

Perles intends to muster America's greatest
counter-terrorism experts, marshaling testimony and
evidence to buttress his claim that Iran is culpable in
Alisa's death. The logic being: Iran funds and supports
the Islamic Jihad, and IJ took responsibility for the
bomb that killed Alisa.

According to Perles, the State Department's coordinator
for counter-terrorism Philip Wilcox told him and Flatow
that Iran funds IJ to the tune of $2 million annually.

Wilcox also told them that the US believes IJ did in
fact carry out the attack that killed Alisa and seven
others. In last year's report on terrorism, the State
Department only stated that IJ claimed responsibility
for the Kfar Darom bombing.

While refusing to comment directly on the Flatow case,
Wilcox says that the US is concerned about
state-sponsored terrorism and is looking "for ways to
bring those states into account."

The administration, he says, supports the laws making
the Flatow suit possible.

Flatow and Perles met with Israeli ambassador Eliahu
Ben-Elissar and officials of the New York consulate.

But, even though prime ministers Rabin and Peres charged
repeatedly that the tentacles of Iran are wrapped around
international terrorism, Flatow has not yet asked for
Israel's assistance in their case.

Steve Emerson, a Washington-based expert on terrorist
groups, believes that Perles has a tough case ahead.
While the US ascertained Libya's involvement in the Pan
Am 103 bombing over Lockerbie, he says, it must first be
proven in a court of law that the IJ is guilty in this
case and that Iran is behind the group.

Flatow and Perles make a striking team, sitting at a
conference table in the latter's office just hours
before filing the suit. Flatow: grayish and stocky,
Perles: balding and lean.

They're both in their mid-to-late 40s, dressed in the
oh-so-proper lawyerly style of starched white shirts and
red suspenders, jackets off for now.

Flatow is serious but chuckles occasionally. He's used
to talking about his daughter. His composure is in
check. He speaks in short sentences and to the point.

He finds amusing the suggestion that Alisa might have
followed her father into the legal field. (He practices
real-estate law.)

"Alisa was what you would call a people person. Alisa
wanted to be perhaps a physical therapist, an
occupational therapist," he says.

"I think she could have done that or gone into Jewish
education. But most importantly, she would have been the
mother of a strong Jewish family." When asked why he's
taking on an entire country, his voice sounds determined
but lacks any hint of anger.

"We want to expose the underbelly of the (Islamic)
Republic of Iran," he says. "We believe that no country
should be permitted to sponsor or encourage terrorist
attacks against innocent civilians no matter where they
are."

More personally, Flatow is pursuing those who sent those
who bombed the Egged bus that day. He wants to at least
salve the puncture. "I don't think the wound ever
heals," he says. "It's a step in the healing process, a
step in making us get on with our lives.

It's a logical step to take. I'm not a country. I can't
wage war against the Iranians or IJ. I rely upon those
tools that we have at our hands, and that's the legal
system....

"You have to react to a loss of a child. You have to
react to a terrorist attack. If you don't react, it's
just going to stay inside you and do whatever it does to
your psyche and to your physical being.

"So this gives us a means to work with whatever emotions
we have pent up inside us. It lets us do something
constructive, as opposed to destructive, with our lives.
And to an extent, it keeps Alisa alive because we're
talking about her and working on her behalf."

In contrast, Rosalyn does not wish to be interviewed.
Nor does Vicki Eisenfeld of West Hartford, Connecticut,
whose son Matthew was killed in the first No. 18 bus
bombing in Jerusalem one year ago this week.

She says only that the Flatow family "has to do what
they have to do." People deal with loss differently,
Stephen Flatow explains.

He has spoken with Arline Duker of Paramus, New Jersey,
whose daughter Sara was killed along with Eisenfeld, her
fianc�. The two victims' families would face different
circumstances should they someday decide to sue, since
Hamas took responsibility for that bombing.

Flatow says he draws strength from the Dukers and from
Israeli families he's met with who experienced the same
trauma as he.

But another parent of a terrorism victim, Susan Cohen,
wants no part of a civil suit. Cohen, whose daughter
Theodora was killed in the Lockerbie bombing, charges
that two lawyers approached her with a "hard-sell" pitch
for enlisting Perles in a lawsuit against Libya that
would deliver many millions of dollars.

Their promotional literature included a photograph of
Alisa Flatow and listed something called the Raoul
Wallenberg Center for Civil Justice that is at the same
address as Perles's law firm.

"It was reprehensible," she says.

Perles denies the claim, saying no one represents him
and that victims' families recruit him and not the
opposite. He says he's been contacted by the Wallenberg
Center and asked to consult with families of terrorist
victims, which he has done on a pro-bono basis.

Flatow is silent as Perles gives his side.

Beshert ("destiny"). Flatow says that what happened to
Alisa was fated.

When she was five, she got into a bicycle accident. As
he drove her to the hospital, Alisa cried in the back
seat, asking why "these things" always happen to her. It
was her third trip to the emergency room in three years.

"I tried to explain to her that things happen that we
don't understand. They're called accidents. She didn't
expect her friend to ride over her foot. She shouldn't
let it bother her because she was in the wrong place at
the wrong time.

"Now, when I travel around the country to speak to
Jewish groups about organ donations or about Alisa, I
sometimes hear her saying, 'Daddy, why did this happen
to me?' So I pretty much think the same way: She didn't
expect this to happen to her, I didn't expect this to
happen to her.

"But there's one thing I know. She was in Israel, she
was very proud of being Jewish. She stood up with the
seven hayalim i[soldiers] who were killed along with
her, to say: 'I am a Jew. I am here with you.'

"So I came to realize that at that time, she was not in
the wrong place. She was in the right place."

    He has an ice cubes chance of seeing that money!

>According to Perles, the State Department's coordinator
>for counter-terrorism Philip Wilcox told him and Flatow
>that Iran funds IJ to the tune of $2 million annually.
>
>Wilcox also told them that the US believes IJ did in
>fact carry out the attack that killed Alisa and seven
>others. In last year's report on terrorism, the State
>Department only stated that IJ claimed responsibility
>for the Kfar Darom bombing.

This contradicts Chip's .139.

    not necessarily a contradiction. "believing" and having some
    solid evidence are worlds apart. 

The Supreme Court on Monday let stand a ruling in a case similar to the one
in .-4 that the U.S. court system does not have jurisdiction over foreign
governments.

Bruce Smith, whose wife Ingrid, died over Lockerbie, had sued the
government of Libya, the Libyan Security Organization, and Libyan
Arab Airlines, as well as two Libyans.

The U.S. Court of Appeals in New York had ruled that Libya enjoyed
immunity under the foreign sovereign immunities law.

Smith's lawyers had argued that terrorism is conduct which forfeits
sovereign immunity.  But SCOTUS let the appeals court ruling stand
without comment or dissent.

Claims against the two Libyans are still pending.

There are also other cases from other families of the Lockerbie victims
pending; the other cases were filed _after_ Congress passed the new law
giving U.S. courts jurisdiction over foreign states in certain cases of
terrorism.

/john

    
    see US Constitution, Article III, section 2, paragraph 1.
    
    also relevant, the eleventh amendment.
    
      bb

The 11th Amendment would not appear to be relevant unless Libya became the
51st state unbeknownst to me.

/john