DEFENSE ATTACKS PEARL-SLAY VIDEO

New York Post ^ | July 05 2002 | AP

[knighthawk]

July 5, 2002 -- HYDERABAD, Pakistan - The lawyer for the key defendant in the kidnap-slaying of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl argued yesterday that evidence was fabricated, testimony was contradictory and confessions were coerced.

Abdul Waheed Katpar, lawyer for British-born Islamic militant Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, said a gruesome 3-minute video documenting Pearl's death should never have been shown in court. Under Pakistani law, a videotape is inadmissible unless either the maker or a witness is produced to substantiate its authenticity, according to Katpar.

[knighthawk]

Ping

[Free the USA]

Index Bump

[watchin]

... demanding a hearing in an Islamic court under Muslim law

I can see his point. Under Islamic law, cutting the heads off Jews is not a crime, but a duty.

I thought you'd be interested in hearing about a discussion I had with a palestinian Christian recently. He said that not all palestinians are militants and terrorists "because most of them are secular".

I stopped him to make sure I understood his point. He cautioned that there are other issues, like poverty, Israeli abuses, etc. - but that the more immersed in Islam a young man becomes, the more militant he becomes.

Peaceful Islamabump.

[knighthawk]

Here in the Netherlands the Moroccan youth, who are much more fundamentalists then their parents, are very militant. On a Dutch islam forum (al-islaam.com located in California to escape Dutch law) they call for jihad and even a bombing on a Dutch mosque for homosexual muslims!

[watchin]

I thought it was interesting to hear a former muslim defend the palestinians against the generalized terrorist label - not because islam is a religion of peace - but because most palestinians don't follow islam, which IS the main problem.