It is also important to note that throughout the entire conference, including Q&A and random comments from attendees, there was absolutely no debate or discussion about the Israeli side of the conflict. Taken as unassailable axioms were:
 Israel was the aggressor in 1967 and its conquest of Palestinian land was illegal, as is its continued illegal occupation which must be ended by any means including terrorism.
 Israel’s current sovereignty over the West Bank is “Illegal occupation” per international law.
 Hence the West Bank can be legally defined as “occupied territory.”
 The Palestinians are helpless innocent victims of Israeli illegal aggression and occupation.
 The Palestinians are a politically disempowered group and as such must be recognized as worthy of support, defense, advocacy, and protection under law.
 Hence the Palestinians can legally use violence against their occupiers even if that violence includes targeting civilians.
 Islamic Jihad and Hamas and Hezb’Allah use international aid for humanitarian purposes only.
 What Israel calls defense against terrorism is in fact “state terrorism” against helpless, defenseless Palestinian civilians.
 The land under dispute is in fact historically, politically and morally “Palestinian territory.”
 Israel is a rogue, illegal, oppressive, genocidal state perpetrating crimes against humanity in violation of international law.
For decades, internationally renowned jurists, academics, analysts and political leaders have argued that these “axioms” are the reverse of reality; a product of mendacious propaganda designed to undermine the legitimacy of Israel, to isolate her from allies and from the family of nations, and to make her appear a rogue and illegitimate state unworthy of continued existence.
The UN was clear in 1967 that Israel was the victim of aggression in the 6-day war, and despite that, Israel offered to return conquered territory in exchange for peace. The Arab aggressors refused, preferring to maintain a state of war. This being the case, Israel’s continued sovereignty over those conquered territories is legal, and not an illegal occupation.
Far from helpless victims, Palestinian terrorists are unconscionable aggressors who flout international law and laws of war by targeting almost exclusively civilians in an endless relentless terror war aimed at destroying Israel and genociding its Jews. There is no basis in western morality or law for the legal use of terrorism by any group no matter how “disempowered.” Terrorism, no matter how hapless, helpless, hopeless, homeless its perpetrators, is a war crime; and genocide, the unabashedly avowed aim of Hamas and Hezbollah, is a crime against humanity.
There is ample evidence that Hamas steals money, food and medications from the UN and other sources that provide aid for impoverished Arabs in the Gaza Strip. The ten unquestioned axioms of this conference are not merely lies, they are an intentional reversal of reality which turn history upside down. Yet they stood unchallenged at this conference, indeed adulated as inviolate truth, and they served as cornerstones for the “cause lawyering” that professor Bisharat and others advocate.
The absence of any consideration for any pro-Israel arguments, and the utter irrationality of the unquestioned axioms that serve as the foundation for the entire event’s intellectual and legal framework, must lead one to conclude that the organizers, sponsors, presenters and participants have no interest in justice. [iii] The purpose of this conference was to disseminate a new and powerful methodology to advance the cause of Arab terrorism and to legitimize Palestinian violence against Israel.
America’s legal community, and all those who support Israel and seek peace, are forewarned. Professor Bisharat and his ilk will not be dissuaded by defeats in court, nor even by the refusal of some judges to permit cases to come to trial. They will enjoy victory by the very process of ‘cause lawyering’ before a mainstream media always hungry for notoriety. As Stephen Schwartz so aptly concluded, they will use and abuse the American court system to achieve via lawfare what their clients have not been able to achieve in US legislation or public opinion: the criminalization of Israel, the exoneration of this generation’s most brutal mass murderers, and the transmogrification of genocide into “national liberation.”
They have opened a new front in the Arab-Israel war. Our legal system will surely be its first victim. We must work to make sure that Israel is not its second.
[i] For a detailed discussion of the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) movement, its false premises, its lies, and its real agenda, see:
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=9303 Mainline Christian Anti-Semitism By: David Meir-Levi , FrontPageMagazine.com | Tuesday, March 15, 2005;
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=9246; http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=7964 Divestment Fraud By: David Meir-Levi , FrontPageMagazine.com | Wednesday, July 13, 2005;
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=5571 Divestment: The How-To Manual By: David Meir-Levi , FrontPageMagazine.com | Monday, February 20, 2006.
[ii] For legal issues related to working with Hamas and other terror group or groups connected with terror groups, see http://www.foreignaffairs.com/print/67829; and note the most recent commentary on this issue at http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/67930/douglas-n-greenburg-and-derek-d-smith/aiding-friends-and-foes-in-palestine, Greenberg, Douglas N., and Smith, Derek D., “Aiding Friends and Foes in Palestine: How Fatah-Hamas Unity Threatens U.S. Funding,” Foreign Affairs, published by the Council on Foreign Relations, June 20, 2011.
[iii] One speaker espoused an amazingly blatant racist explanation for the failure of some “cause lawyering” cases, suggesting that due to the fact that the jury in the Holy Land Foundation case consisted solely of “white Christian Republicans,” neither Sami el-Arian nor the Holy Land Foundation could get a fair trial.
Another speaker, focusing on the asymmetry between the Palestinians and the Israelis, asserted that this asymmetry makes it legal for the Palestinians to use low-tech weapons against civilians. No one, she concluded, should expect the Palestinians to abandon violence while the attempts to achieve justice for Palestinians in US courts are underway.
Another excellent example of some presenters’ irrational arguments was the opinion that because the people of Gaza are starving, Israel’s blockade is illegal under international law. Aside from the question of the blockade’s illegality as a function of the Gaza Strip’s food supply, the participant failed to consider the actual status of the Arabs of the Gaza Strip. While there is poverty in the Gaza Strip, there is no humanitarian crisis. The people of the Gaza Strip are not starving. For details of the economic situation in the Gaza Strip, see Meir-Levi, David, “The Gaza Flotilla Confrontation: Facts vs. the Academicians,” Scholars for Peace in the Middle East Newsletter, July 6, 2010. Moreover, Israel is supplying the Gaza Strip with tons of food, water, electricity and medicine on a daily basis. Thus, in light of the panelist’s own logic, since the people of Gaza are not starving, Israel’s blockade is perfectly legal.