Why Would Celebrities Call to Free a Terrorist Murderer?

Instead of using their fame to promote peace, over 200 celebrities and public figures are using their platform to call for the release of convicted Palestinian terrorist Marwan Barghouti. They join a long list of other activists calling for similar action. The question begs: do these people actually know why Marwan Barghouti is in prison?

Why is Marwan Barghouti in prison?

When Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat accepted U.S. President Clinton’s July 5, 2000, invitation to attend the Camp David peace talks, the world assumed that the former terrorist had indeed abandoned terror and chosen the path of peace. Unfortunately for Israel and the Palestinians, he had not. In fact, Arafat had already planned to reject any peace offer and to revert to terror as a means to achieve the political aspirations of the Palestinians: the destruction of Israel.

According to his plan, soon after returning from Camp David, the terror attacks by Arafat’s Fatah organization gradually intensified and exploded into a full-blown terror war in September 2000.

As part of the ruse to disguise his true intentions, Arafat claimed that the terror war was a popular uprising – in Arabic, “Intifada.” In reality, the terror activities were carefully organized and coordinated by Arafat and his various terrorist henchmen.

While Arafat and Barghouti had previously clashed over internal Palestinian issues, they were in complete agreement on the subject of using violence and terror to promote the political goals of the Palestinians.

Soon after the start of the violence, Barghouti established the “Tanzim” and the “Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades,” both part of Fatah, as organizational structures to carry out acts of terror.

For a year and a half, from September 2000 through April 2002 when he was arrested, Barghouti and the other terrorists carried out over 1,000 terror attacks that resulted in the death of over 150 Israelis.

With specific reference to Barghouti, a report¹ published by the Israeli government in May 2002, based on documents seized during Operation Defensive Shield,² noted that “The Al-Aqsa Brigades organization, headed by Arafat, was put under the direct authority of Marwan Barghouti, who had no compunction in using women and even children to execute terrorist activity, which killed hundreds of Israelis.” The report included a sample of some of the documents showing not only the involvement of Arafat in the terror, but also of Barghouti.

After his arrest, the decision was made to prosecute Barghouti in the Israeli civilian courts, and not in the Military Courts of Judea and Samaria.

In the indictment submitted to the Tel Aviv District Court,³ Barghouti was accused of membership and active participation in a terrorist organization, for his role within Tanzim and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, multiple counts of premeditated murder and attempted murder, and for his role in 37 different terror attacks between December 2000 and April 2002.

To prove the different counts in the indictment, during the trial the prosecution presented the court, inter alia, with physical evidence and testimonies of other senior terrorists who had operated under the direct command and instruction of Barghouti.

Barghouti refused to participate in the trial, claiming only that he rejected the jurisdiction of the court to try him.

Since Barghouti offered no defense, the court adopted a particularly stringent approach to the legal theory of the prosecution regarding Barghouti’s culpability for the different attacks. Thus, in its final verdict regarding his responsibility, the court convicted Barghouti only for the offenses for which he had not only been implicated by the other terrorists, but for which he had personally confessed to during his interrogation.

During his investigation, Barghouti considered confessing to all the attacks in which he had participated, but eventually only confessed to the attacks for which others had directly implicated him and only after his interrogators had shown him the actual confessions of the other terrorists. He did so, in his words, so that his confession would not negatively affect his aspirations to be a “future leader of the Palestinian people.”⁴

Accordingly, Barghouti was convicted of membership and active participation in a terrorist organization, five counts of murder for his direct involvement in the terrorist attacks that claimed the lives of: Greek Orthodox monk Tsibouktsakis Germanus, murdered driving in his car, June 12, 2001; Yoela Hen, murdered at a gas station, January 15, 2002; Yosef Habi, Eli Dahan, and police officer Sergeant-Major Salim Barakat, murdered in a shooting and stabbing attack at the Seafood Market restaurant in Tel Aviv, March 5, 2002; and one count of attempted murder for a failed car bombing attack at the Malha shopping center in Jerusalem that ended only with the death of the two terrorists driving the car.

Barghouti is a Self-Confessed Arch Terrorist

There is no real or legitimate question regarding Barghouti’s guilt for the offenses for which he was convicted. There is no question that he headed internationally-designated terrorist organizations at a time when those organizations were carrying out hundreds of terrorist attacks that claimed the lives of over 150 people. Barghouti himself confessed to his involvement in the three attacks that lead to the murder of five people. For these offences, Barghouti was sentenced to five life sentences to be served consecutively.⁵

Are There Any Palestinian Leaders Who Are Not Terrorists?

The drive to release Barghouti is based on his alleged potential to become the leader of the Palestinian people. This position is simply outrageous. Surely there must be potential Palestinian leaders who are not terrorists and convicted murderers. If not, what does that say about Palestinian society?

Instead of expressing support for terrorist murderers, the time has come for the useless idiots of Hollywood to promote real reform and accountability in Palestinian society. It is time for them to demand that the Palestinian leadership abandon terror.

* * *

Notes