PALESTINIAN ARMED GROUPS GATHER FORCES

Seeing the conciliatory images from Washington that displayed Palestinian and Israeli leaders sitting at the same table, Hamas decided to raise its voice. While premier Benyamin Netanyahu and president Abu Mazen (Mahmud Abbas) ended their meeting, the armed wing of Hamas (the Ezzedin al-Qassam Brigades) sent its spokesperson Abu Obeida to the streets to announce a cooperation agreement with another 12 Palestinian fighting groups.

Abu Obeida, who claimed that new attacks are possible after the two recent ones in the West Bank, announced that ''On August 30 we set up a common operations room''. Hamas and its allies will also strike in Israel and he warned that the return of suicide attacks cannot be ruled out. Two of the groups (Islamic Jihad and the Peoples' resistance committees) were already gravitating around the al-Qassam Brigades. The others are deemed to be of small size, at least in Gaza. Meaningfully, some of the groups mentioned by Obeida (Saif al-Islam Brigades, al-Ansar Brigades, Humat al-Aqsa) seem to be connected to the Salafist movement, which is pro Al Qaeda.

In recent weeks Hamas drastically increased the virulence of its verbal attacks on Abu Mazen. from Damascus Khaled Mashaal, the political leader of Hamas, accused him of leading the Palestinian issue ''to the slave market'' when he accepted negotiations under the patronage of US president Barack Obama.

From Gaza another Hamas leader, Khalil al-Haya, warned that ''the heads of PNA leaders will be trampled by the Hamas militia'' should Abu Mazen give in to Israel. Yesterday Mahmud al-Zahar, the Hamas strong man in Gaza, stated that ''the West bank must be freed, just like Gaza was set free'' with the bloody coup against the PNa in June 2007.

Pro-Hamas websites believe that ''Ramallah will become a new Baghdad'', in other words that some day pro-Wet Palestinians could be targeted. Another website calls for ''people's tribunals'' for Palestinians negotiating with Israel. Already today the members of PNA security organisations are labelled by Hamas as ''criminals and cowards'' because of the wave of arrests that followed this week's attack against four Israeli civilians that were killed near Hebron, in the West Bank.

According to the humanitarian organisation Pchr in the West Bank the PNA has arrested at least 150 Hamas activists, and hundreds more were questioned. Daily paper Haaretz explained that these massive investigations are driven by substantial foreign funds received by Hamas, especially through Palestinian businessmen. Abu Mazen's security services were caught off guard and are trying to make up for lost time. Haaretz claimed that they have the feeling that sleeper cells in the West Bank received orders and means to destabilise the situation.

Wording and Terms in Legal Filings

You can learn the correct terms from filings findable on the Net. Unfamiliar terms can be looked up in Legal Dictionary contained in www.nolo.com and other readily findable on-line dictionaries. MOST IMPORTANTLY, so you won't be accused of perjury or slander/libel should your Statements of Fact later be shown incorrect - follow the example of lawyers. They typically either present any such claims of fact as opinions using such words/expressions as: "evidently", "clearly", "it is reasonable to conclude that" "..is consistent with 'something/somebody' being.." "it appears that". They also might say "We/This Plaintiff assert that..." or the verbs "aver", "claim", "allege" "We aver that..." Hardly ever do lawyers state anything unequivocally as fact. When stating dates they are also hedging; hardly ever just stating the date, but rather say "on or about 12/31/09". When quoting they usually put the actual quote in quote marks and then add "or words to that effect"

As the Rules of Civil Procedure state there are penalties for making statements which you cannot prove or support with any evidence. Using the words "said" and "same" - the said words are used to refer to something previously mentioned: instead of writing again "copy of the Employment Contract dated by 12/31/09" they would say "copy of the said contract" or "contract original and a copy of the same" Some useful and common expressions: "Attached hereto/thereto", "Enclosed herewith", "hereby(meaning this document)certifies that", "thereby(thus)causing further harm to the Plaintiff", "wherefore (in light of the above) we ask this Court..." Including large blocks of text from other documents is done by Reference: "the section of XXXXXXX attached hereto as exhibit B will not be re-iterated here but is included by way of reference as if fully set forth".

Harsh words such as lie, stupidity etc are likely to irritate the judge, thus words such as false, falsehood, misstatement, absurdity, deception, irrational etc are used. A litigant should NEVER use derogatory terms, court will penalize it and it is self defeating. Sarcasm is quite common and acceptable, sentence such as:"but it would not be fair to say that the whole Plaintiff's 'case' consists of falsehoods alone, as it also includes absurdities. For example Plaintiff's claim that...does not make any sense.." or "Thinking rationally it is impossible to understand this claim by the Defendant, as...".

Very importantly, the words in legal proceedings should be taken LITERALLY: if you see something like "there is no evidence that such and such took place" it means exactly that - they are not denying that something took place, but rather are alleging that there is no evidence. To give you an entertaining example: as I recall, Clinton denied in Court his liaison with Lewinsky - "There's not a sexual relationship!". When they started accusing him of perjury his answer was: it depends on how you define the word is. "Is not and has never been or is not at this moment" or words to that effect. When pressed to explain what his definition of "is" was, he went on to say he meant "is not at this moment" and further explained that what he said was: he did not have sexual relations at that particular moment(in court!). Another example in filings that I've seen, a lawyer claimed that the defendant was being sued for X dollars - full amount + costs etc of what she borrowed from a bank and that she did not pay "that" amount back. He knew perfectly well that she paid most of it back. But if we tried to press the issue, he would have said he meant "EXACTLY THAT" amount. Likewise facing question about a client's net worth related to his ability to pay child support a lawyer quite truthfully said that it's difficult to get an exact dollar amount, but he's sure his clients net worth exceeds $100,000 which was true but grossly misleading. If he said it exceeds $300,000 that would have also been true. Lawyers use these methods for saying untruths without actually lying and perjuring themselves. 

Abbreviations: USC - US Code, Fed.R.Civ.P - Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, FRAP - Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure

'killing Christians'

The Koran is a text that encourages Islam to impose itself with force and permits the killing of Christians, said Lebanon's Catholic Patriarch of Antioch Archbishop Raboula Beylouni, addressing a Vatican meeting of Middle East bishops.

"The Koran gives Muslims the right to judge Christians and kill them with Jihad," he said. "It gives orders to impose religion with force, with the sword. For this reason, Muslims don't recognise the freedom of religion among themselves or others."

Pope Benedict XVI on 11 Oct. the opened the two-week-long meeting of 246 Middle East bishops and other religious leaders by lashing out against violence "in God's name". The pontiff warned delegates to guard against the spread of "terrorist ideology" in the modern world. Among clerics attending the meeting were Muhammad al-Sammak, political counsellor to the Grand Mufti of Lebanon, representing Sunni Islam; and Ayatollah Seyed Mostafa Mohaghegh Ahmadabadi, a law professor at the Shahid Beheshti University of Tehran and member of the Iranian Academy of Sciences, representing Shia Islam.

http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/English/Religion/?id=3.1.1142668038