Arafat could stop attacks, Barghouti transcripts reveal (Arafat gave green light to terror attacks)

By Zvi Harel and Moshe Reinfeld, Haaretz Correspondents, Haaretz Service, agnecies

"When (Palestinian Authority Chairman) Yasser Arafat wanted a cease-fire, he would say so, and when he remained silent, it was understood as a green light to continue terror attacks," according to statements by Marwan Barghouti that were made public on Monday.

The Tanzim leader also said Arafat never asked him directly to carry out attacks.

The comments came from a transcript of Barghouti's April 29, 2002 Shin Bet interrogation, portions of which were released for publication Monday by the Tel Aviv District Court.

According to Barghouti's remarks during the interrogation, he had ties with Nasser Awis, the senior Fatah military activist in Nablus, who was responsible for dispatching cells that carried out attacks against Israelis. According to Barghouti, Awis asked him for financial assistance for terror activities. Barghouti said during the interrogation that on a number of occasions, he gave Awis close to NIS 20,000. Barghouti obtained the money through requests to Arafat. He went on to say that the money was transferred to Awis through a go-between.

According to the transcripts, when asking Arafat for money, Barghouti did not say for what purposes the money would be used, but wrote the name of the militant, the desired amount, and wrote that his opinion was that the money should be approved.

In the interrogation, Barghouti also said that Arafat never asked him directly to carry out attacks.

Barghouti also said in his interrogation that in the past two years, he felt that only armed resistance that caused pain to Israel would advance the peace.

One interrogator noted that, "Barghouti explained that only through the agony of terror attacks would Israelis understand what they have to lose, which would lead them to relinquish their tough stance."

He also told the Shin Bet investigators that the riots at the Temple Mount in September were "the straw that broke the camel's back," although the main reasons for the outbreak of the intifada were the failed Camp David talks in 2000 and settlement expansion.

Witnesses continue to frustrate prosecutors in Barghouti trial Palestinian witnesses called to testify in the murder trial of trial of Tanzim leader Marwan Barghouti refused to cooperate Monday, frustrating prosecutors for a second day.

On Monday, four handcuffed Palestinian prisoners, who prosecutors say collaborated with Barghouti, took to the stand in Tel Aviv District Court but did not answer questions and occasionally covered their ears with their hands to show they were not listening. Palestinian witnesses behaved similarly on Sunday, when the trial opened.

Asked if he knew Barghouti, one of the witnesses, Nasser Shawish, said, "There is no one who doesn't know Barghouti." The man denied that Barghouti backed any attacks on Israelis by militia gunmen.

Instead of answering prosecutors' questions, the witness said the court should try the Israeli soldiers who fired tank shells last year at a pickup truck owned by Hamas leader Hussein Abu Kweik but instead killed the man's wife and three children.

On Sunday, three Palestinians called up by the prosecution were declared hostile witnesses after they refused to testify against Barghouti or recognize the Israeli court's authority, Israel Radio reported.

The prosecution called the witnesses - all three of them convicted terrorists who received long prison sentences - as part of the trial's evidence phase, which began Sunday morning in the Tel Aviv District Court.

Barghouti has said he is not interested in legal representation because he doesn't recognize an Israeli court's authority to try him.

As he has done previously in the courtroom, Barghouti announced at the beginning of the evidence phase that he does not recognize the court, called the trial a "show," and said, "Occupation is terror."

Barghouti is charged with violating seven provisions of the penal law, including membership in a terrorist organization, activity in a terrorist organization, murder, complicity to murder, solicitation to murder, attempted murder and conspiracy to commit a felony.

At the recommendation of the Supreme Court, the public defender's office last week withdrew its petition to release itself from defending Barghouti.

Several weeks after his trial began last August, Barghouti's lawyer, Jawad Boulos, who represented him in custody proceedings, said that he would not continue to represent his client, leading the Tel Aviv District Court to instruct the public defender's office to immediately appoint an attorney for Barghouti.

However, Barghouti informed the court that he was not interested in the representation of the public defender's office, and later told his court-appointed attorneys that his legal advisors had told him to adopt a passive defense and exercise his right to silence.

Barghouti added that he did not recognize the public defender's office and that he would not submit a statement in response to the indictment. If the court forced the public defender's office to take up his defense, he said, he would demand that the attorneys refrain from cross-examining him and from questioning the admissibility of evidence against him.

Following Barghouti's refusal to cooperate, the public defender's office asked the district court to be released from defending him, noting that the accused had legal advice and that it was his right to choose his line of defense.

However, last week, the court rejected the public defender's petition and ruled that even if Barghouti refused to cooperate, his attorney was still charged with upholding his rights and preventing a miscarriage of justice. The court added that Barghouti's right to choose his own line of defense was not relevant, as in this case, the accused was not attempting to carry out his own defense, but to undermine the trial by refusing to take legal representation.

After the district-level decision, the public defender's office withdrew its request to the Supreme Court to be released from defending Barghouti, a move the Supreme Court had recommended.

Where are the rights of the murdered victims, and the living victims?

When do the free peoples mauled by Islamic terrorism get THEIR rights?

Given this animal's known record, the Israelis should have just taken him, drained all of the information that they could - using any means available - and then capped him. I don't understand why they wanted to put him on trial. This only makes him a hero/martyr to the Pallies. Big mistake, IMHO.

I was just watching NBC Nightly News (yeah, I know. It was an accident) and on one of the stories, the reporter was interviewing some "fedayeem" fighters in Arafat-Land.

He asked them if they would give up their weapons if their government asked them to, they said, (paraphrasing) "As long as there is an occupation, these weapons will be legitimate. We will do whatever Arafat tells us to do."

There you have it. Arafat gives the orders to his terrorists and they carry them out.

Maybe someone knows how to get a transcript of this story, that was on the NBC Nightly News, 5/27/03.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.