CONFLICT OF (S)INTEREST: Why Israel Dumped Pedophile Jeffery Epstein Pal & Attorney Alan Dershowitz

"Before his arrest, Epstein learned some of his victims had spoken to police. His immediate reaction was to enlist Dershowitz’s legal services."

If any nation knows firsthand about ethnic cleansing and genocide, it is South Africa, long a victim of European colonization. There is a measure of historic justice in the nation now spearheading the case taking Israel to the International Court of Justice on charges of genocide. That Israel was actually thinking of having Jeffrey Epstein long-time buddy and confidant, attorney Alan Dershowitz argue the case before the ICJ was about as outrageously tone-deaf as conducting a genocide where almost half of the known victims have been innocent women, children and infants.

The following MintPress article gives an excellent update on the Epstein case and Dershowitz’s roles in the various legal issues. There are also links to good stories on the case.

Mark Taylor
DeMOCKracy.ink

---

Alan Dershowitz has long-loomed large among Epstein’s suspected pedophile confederates, and with good reason.

By Kit Klarenbach
MintPress (1/9/24)

At the start of January, South Africa instigated proceedings of the gravest kind against Israel in the International Court of Justice for the crime of committing genocide in Gaza. The indictment is highly detailed, supporting the charge with a wide-ranging welter of evidence, the most compelling of which may be public statements by Israeli officials in their assorted proclamations on and offline since the twenty-first-century Holocaust commenced on October 8.

Almost immediately, media reports indicated Benjamin Netanyahu’s government favored prominent U.S. lawyer and veteran Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz to lead their ICJ defense. As a hardcore, committed Zionist who has authored multiple apologetic books minimizing or outright whitewashing Tel Aviv’s heinous crimes against Palestinians since 1948 – his most recent being “Defending Israel: Against Hamas and its Radical Left Enablers” – he was no doubt an eager candidate. Yet, within days, he was quietly dropped from the running.

No explanation was forthcoming for this abrupt volte-face. Yet, the rationale is obvious – concurrent unsealing of wide-ranging documentation on official police investigations into, and civil lawsuits leveled against, Jeffrey Epstein.

Principal among them

These disclosures shed fresh light on the billionaire pedophile’s life and crimes, in particular, those among his extensive assortment of celebrity friends, associates, and colleagues who were “clients” – paying customers for sex with underage women procured by the reclusive mogul. Principal among them was none other than Dershowitz.

Allegations of pedophilic abuse have dogged Dershowitz – who defended notorious serial rapist Harvey Weinstein in court and, in an amazing conflict of interest, negotiated Epstein’s extraordinary 2008 Non-Prosecution Agreement – for many years. Since the releases began, he has openly boasted about his name appearing 137 times in the documents dropped to date, claiming the contents fully exonerate him of any sexual wrongdoing. As we shall see, this is deeply divorced from the truth. …

Read the rest

---

South Africa's Genocide Presentation Against Israel Called 'Overwhelming & Devastating'

"Whatever the outcome, we are witnessing an amazing moment of rule of international law history," said Amnesty International secretary general Agnès Callamard.

By Brett Wilkins
Common Dreams (1/11/24)

Human rights defenders and legal experts on Thursday lauded what many called South Africa's "compelling" opening presentation at the International Court of Justice in The Hague in a case accusing Israel of genocide against Palestinians in the embattled Gaza Strip.

In a bid to obtain an ICJ emergency order for the suspension of Israel's relentless 97-day assault on Gaza, South African jurists including Justice Minister Ronald Lamola argued that Israel is violating four articles of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, commonly called the Genocide Convention. The landmark 1948 treaty—enacted, ironically, the same year as the modern state of Israel was born, largely through the ethnic cleansing of Palestine's Arabs—defines genocide as acts intended "to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group."

South African lawyers detailed Israel's conduct in the war, including the killing and wounding of more than 80,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children, forcibly displacing over 85% of the besieged enclave's 2.3 million people, and inflicting conditions leading to widespread starvation and disease. They also cited at length statements by Israeli officials calling for the destruction and even nuclear annihilation of Gaza in their presentations, which eschewed graphic imagery in favor of arguing "clear legal rights."

Compelling case

"In its opening argument thus far, South Africa has made a compelling case showing how the genocidal statements by [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and other senior officials were interpreted as official orders by Israeli forces in their attacks against Gaza," U.S. investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill said on social media.

"Beyond the citations of the vast civilian deaths and injuries caused by Israel in Gaza, [South Africa's] lawyers argued effectively that Israel's 'evacuation' orders were in and of themselves genocidal, demanding the immediate flight of a million people, including patients in hospitals," Scahill continued.

"This also should prompt reflection amongst all those governments and media outlets who supported [Israel's war,] because they have been supporting a genocide.”

"What becomes crystal clear listening to the openly genocidal words of Netanyahu and other Israeli officials is that they know exactly what they are saying," he added. "And they are comfortable saying these things publicly because they know the U.S. will shield them from accountability."

Left-wing author and activist and former South African parliamentarian Andrew Feinstein said that "South Africa's presentation to the ICJ thus far has been exceptional, overwhelming, and devastating," opining that "the only way the ICJ doesn't impose interim measures is if the judges are open to pressure from 'the West.'"

"South Africa's lawyers have done the nonracial, post-apartheid country proud," he added.

Legal scholar Nimer Sultany, a Palestinian citizen of Israel, called South Africa's presentation "compellingly argued and powerfully presented."

"Given the court's case law, and given the lower threshold required for issuing provisional measures, it will be very surprising if the court does not issue provisional measures against Israel," Sultany asserted.

"This also should prompt reflection amongst all those governments and media outlets who supported [Israel's war,] because they have been supporting a genocide," he added.

Sultany and numerous other observers said the most powerful presentation of the day was made by Irish lawyer and case adviser Blinne Ní Ghrálaigh, who delivered South Africa's closing statement.

Israel—some of whose officials have condemned South Africa's case as a meritless "blood libel"—is scheduled to present its defense on Friday. Israeli jurists are expected to focus heavily on the atrocities committed by Hamas-led attackers who killed more than 1,100 Israelis and took around 240 others hostage on October 7. They will likely argue that the country has a right to defend itself, and that it is seeking to eliminate Hamas, not the Palestinian people.

While an emergency order from the World Court would not be enforceable, it would represent a major international embarrassment for Israel, which is increasingly isolated on the world stage. A growing number of nations including Brazil, Pakistan, Turkey, Malaysia, Venezuela, Colombia, Saudi Arabia, Bolivia, Jordan, and Bangladesh are supporting South Africa's case, as are the Arab League, more than 1,250 international human rights and civil society group, and progressive U.S. Congresswomen Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Cori Bush (D-Mo.).

"Whatever the outcome, we are witnessing an amazing moment of rule of international law history," said Amnesty International secretary general Agnès Callamard.

Link to story