16 thoughts on “Maariv Reports Abusisi Plea Deal Imminent, Defense Flatly Denies It – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
task-attention.png
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.
 

    1. Wow, really? All of ’em? Considering how many lies you & Frontpagemagazine believe I’ve told I’m suprised they could disprove them all in a single “item.” I’m always pleased when FPM wastes its time attacking me. And I’m delighted to be their bogeyman.

      I looked all over the FPM site & couldn’t find the garbage to which you were referring, which disappointed me no end.

      1. Probably your comments with respect to Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman.

        You wrote that your confidant told you that the government had “the goods” on the two of them, but the case ended up being dropped.

        1. The gov’t certainly DID have the goods on them. But because the Justice Dept. wasn’t willing to offer to expose the confidential sources, methods & substance of what it had & how it derived it, the judge (a right wing VA judge) threw the case out. If the gov’t had been willing to lay it on the line they certainly would’ve proceeded & likely gotten convictions, at least of Rosen. Since I like Keith personally & politically I hope he would not have been convicted. But Rosen, yeah any day.

          1. I didn’t mean to re-open that discussion. You just wrote that you had no idea what the commenter above was talking about, and I figured that your posts on the Rosen/Weissman case had to be what was being referenced.

          2. No problem. I understand. I just wish people would be more clear. I’ve written perhaps 100 posts on Aipac, so it helps to clarify which one you’re talking about when you make claims as this commenter did.

          3. There you go again. It’s always the rightwingers. Here’s a leftwing view of the government case.
            “And this AIPAC case is the first time ever that the government has tried to use a law that was passed in 1917 called the Espionage Act to imprison, not government employees who pass on classified information, but private citizens who do nothing more than receive classified information. You had mentioned that the employee — the individuals had passed on the information to the Israeli government. There is a suggestion they did that, but that is not part of the criminal case. The only thing they are accused of doing is receiving classified information.’
            http://www.democracynow.org/2006/8/18/can_journalists_be_prosecuted_for_receiving

    1. Hornik doesn’t address my coverage of Abusisi at all. How can it blow my claims out of the water if it doesn’t even address them? Further, it doesn’t even point to a single argument supporting the validity of the state’s claims against Abusisi. As they used to say in the movies (or TV): “is that all you’ve got??” Because if that’s all you’ve got to support Israel’s claims then that’s beyond pathetic.

  1. FPM
    Front page magazine has item today disproving all your lies

    Only cretins would rely on Frontpage magazine for news. I wonder how many people outside of the far right Zionist settler and Armeggedon crowd consider Front Page Mag as worthy of anything other than fairy stories?

    It’s David Horowitz’s propoganda machine, which includes Jihad Watch.

    One of the reasons British media became popular in America since 2006 was because of these propoganda outlets dictating what people heard.

    In 2007, these proved prophetic, so with hindsight, we can say people like David Horowitz unwittingly did the public a favour, by pushing them to the left.

    British media could swing the next US election
    http://britainandamerica.typepad.com/britain_and_america/2007/05/british_media_c.html

    By Tim Montgomerie, Editor of BritainAndAmerica.com

    Good report, Richard.

  2. RE: “This isn’t justice. This is…kangaroo justice.” ~ R.S.

    OR, PUT ANOTHER WAY BY KAFKA IN “THE TRIAL”:

    …after months of trial postponement, Joseph K goes to court painter Titorelli to ask for advice. He is told to hope for little. He might get definite acquittal, ostensible acquittal, or indefinite postponement. No one is ever really acquitted, but sometimes cases can be extended indefinitely.

    Titorelli: “You see, in definite acquittal, all the documents are annulled. But with ostensible acquittal, your whole dossier continues to circulate. Up to the higher courts, down to the lower ones, up again, down. These oscillations and peregrinations, you just can’t figure ‘em.”
    Joseph K: “No use in trying either, I suppose.”
    Titorelli: “Not a hope. Why, I’ve known cases of an acquitted man coming home from the court and finding the cops waiting there to arrest him all over again. But then, of course, theoretically it’s always possible to get another ostensible acquittal.”
    Joseph K: “The second acquittal wouldn’t be final either.”
    Titorelli: “It’s automatically followed by the third arrest. The third acquittal, by the fourth arrest. The fourth…”

    PARTIAL SOURCE – http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057427/quotes?qt=qt0135410

  3. Is there a way that Dirar Abusisi can still get a fair trial? Or are 15 to 20 years in jail his best option given the circumstances? How about Amnesty International? How about a lawsuit against the state of Israel about his abduction?

    1. Abusisi’s family is already suing Ukraine in a case that may end up in the European Court of Human Rights.

      His lawyer is appealing some key elements of the case to the Supreme Court. If he wins, then Abusisi will have more leverage to negotiate a deal. Who knows what will happen?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link