Dershowitz

In his piece bemoaning the silence of the "extreme left" on the massacre in Beijing, Dershowitz uses a deceptive and irresponsible device. By condemning Kunstler, Chomsky and others for what they didn't say, Dershowitz is free to infer from their unstated positions whatever is most convenient to his thesis. In doing this, Dershowitz departs significantly from professional ethics. Most important, if a journalist phones someone for an interview--Dershowitz had his assistant make the calls--and the interviewee is not there or refuses to respond to the call, the writer is forced to stick to previous statements or other verifiable evidence.

Re "Hamas' war crimes," Opinion, Jan. 10 Israeli apologist Alan Dershowitz ignores the lengthy and debilitating economic blockade that Israel had imposed on encircled Gaza. The Egyptian-sponsored cease-fire between Hamas and Israel required that the devastating blockade be lifted. Far from eliminating the border closure, Israel increased the blockade. Thus it was Israel that violated the cease-fire by refusing to drop the blockade as well as continued bombings and assassinations.

I agree with Dershowitz that the assassination of President Kennedy should be investigated much more thoroughly than it was by the Warren Commission. Dershowitz recalls the innocence of the '60s, his trust in government, compared to "the lies about Vietnam, the Watergate cover-up, and the Iran-Contra scandals." When did he lose his innocence? In June, 1972, the time of the Watergate break-in? Was not the assassination of President Kennedy enough to shake his innocence? Vietnam did not begin with the "incursion" into Cambodia, the 1968 presidential campaign, the Tet offensive, or even the Tonkin Gulf Resolution of August, 1964.

The Case for Peace How the Arab-Israeli Conflict Can Be Resolved Alan Dershowitz John Wiley & Sons: 246 pp., $22.95 * ON the subject of Israel, Alan Dershowitz writes in a white heat, and what he's defending is not always so much Israel but himself. His latest book, "The Case for Peace," is a mishmash of quotes, screed and rant; it's topped by a Dostoevskyan assault on Dershowitz's detractors, a cabal -- as he sees it -- of entrenched anti-Semites.

The May 7 commentary by Alan Dershowitz ("Statutory Rape Is an Outdated Concept") pointed out an important gap in the enforcement of statutory rape laws. However, it failed to demonstrate the most important aspect of the subject. Adolescents, even well up to the age of 18 and beyond, are in the most intense phase of their psychosexual development, and therefore often cannot make mature consensual decisions about sexual intercourse. This is even more true if an adult partner is involved.

Jon Weiner's column, "Chutzpah and Free Speech" (Opinion, July 11), omits important facts. My letter to the University of California Press was precipitated by an e-mail from Norman Finkelstein to the dean of Harvard Law School claiming Finkelstein was writing a book that "will demonstrate that he [Dershowitz] almost certainly didn't write the book ['The Case for Israel'], and perhaps didn't even read it prior to publication." This defamatory claim was followed by Finkelstein comparing me to Adolf Eichmann and asserting that my books are churned out for me "like a Hallmark line for Nazis."

Governors are asked by members of the public to do lots of things, but the request Arnold Schwarzenegger got from Alan Dershowitz in December was unique: to intervene with the University of California Press' plans to publish a book. Why does Dershowitz care? Because the book in question -- Norman Finkelstein's "Beyond Chutzpah," due out next month -- is harshly critical of Dershowitz. Schwarzenegger, to his credit, answered with an unequivocal "no."

Nationalism, the vehicle on which Europe's history rode during the 19th century, spread to the Middle East in the 20th, becoming the region's driving force. The Arab world, which had submitted meekly to centuries of Ottoman oppression, was suddenly transformed when Western armies arrived to feast on the dying empire's remains. The Arabs distinguished the tyranny imposed by the Ottoman Muslims from domination by the Christian West, a distinction that made East-West conflict inevitable.

Alan M. Dershowitz ("Make the Case Against Bin Laden," Commentary, Oct. 4) wanted to hold the U.S. to the proof "beyond a reasonable doubt" test before it launched any military action against Osama bin Laden, the Al Qaeda network or countries that have supported it. Pathetically, Dershowitz attempted to question the way in which the U.S. presented evidence of Bin Laden's guilt, evidence that Dershowitz believes would have to meet this standard....

Re "Is a Fair U.S. Trial Possible in Attacks?" Commentary, Oct. 2: As usual, Alan Dershowitz is far more concerned about the rights of murderers than he is about justice. He attempts to make the case that the American people are unreasonable in their expectation that criminals should be punished for their acts. He believes that we are unfair when we complain that criminals all too often are allowed to go free because of clever lawyer tricks and technicalities. Dershowitz and his kind are too clever by half--they want us to believe that they are super-patriots because they are willing to defend the indefensible.

Re "Bush Starts Off by Defying the Constitution," Commentary, Jan. 24: Is Alan Dershowitz serious? He won't even allow an inaugural Christian prayer? I thought liberals were tolerant of all cultures, religions and forms of speech? What is wrong with a newly elected president wishing to publicly affirm his religious beliefs at an inauguration? Apparently, Dershowitz, being a good, conscientious liberal, feels religious elected officials must never profess their religious beliefs in public for fear of offending those who hold different religious views or none at all. But as long as Congress doesn't establish an official government-sponsored religion in defiance of the 1st Amendment, future presidents should feel free to express their religious beliefs, in accord with the 1st Amendment.

Celebrity defense attorney Alan Dershowitz has joined the team of lawyers appealing the conviction of Sandy Murphy in the murder of casino heir Ted Binion. Attorneys for Murphy and Rick Tabish, who was also convicted by a Nevada jury in May, filed a joint notice of appeal Thursday. The Nevada Supreme Court will decide whether the lovers are entitled to a new trial. Murphy's attorneys John Momot and Tom Pitaro said Harvard law professor Dershowitz has agreed to join the Murphy legal team.

"Would you give a young person a book whose heroes cheat, lie, steal, murder--and get away with it?" asks Alan M. Dershowitz in his provocative book of modern biblical exegesis, "The Genesis of Justice." "Chances are you have. The book, of course, is Genesis."