• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does Alan Dershowitz protest too much?

Does Alan Dershowitz protest too much?

  • Total voters
    8
It appears that not all Jews feel obligated to support Dershowitz simply because he is Jewish. One person feels Jews have NO obligation to do such in part, because Dershowitz has spoken in support of Obama.

Defending Dershowitz, To A Fault? | The Jewish Week

Ronn Torossian, founder and the executive of 5W Public Relations, emails, “I do not believe he is a good spokesman for Israel or the Jewish people.”

For example, writes Torossian, whose clients include those on the Jewish right, Dershowitz defends President Obama, speaks out against settlements, and “advocates for the discrimination of Jews when he proclaims that Jews should not live in Hebron,” the flammable yet holy West Bank city, from which Jews were driven out in 1929 before returning in 1967.

Says Torossian, “As a proud Jew, I find the argument that [Dershowitz] should be protected because of his Jewishness to be despicable.” Torossian doubts Dershowitz even received all that many emails from anti-Semites, “but it is smart PR — sympathy does help when you are accused of rape.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Here's Ronn Torossian's piece.

Defending Alan Dershowitz is Not a Jewish Issue | New York Observer

Of course, because of the nature of who he is, those clients he has represented, and what he has been outspoken on, he has accumulated a decent sized following of haters. So, using the anti-Semitic messages he is said to have been receiving, of which he has certainly received many throughout his career prior to these allegations, is smart PR. Sympathy does help when you are accused of rape.

Yet, Dershowitz’s assertion that Jews should support him, such as telling the Jerusalem Post, “I’m not only defending myself here but I am defending other values as well. I am defending the values that I have represented and stood for, for so many years” is, frankly, offensive.

Maybe the values people are offended by include the fact that he got Michael Jackson, a child molester, off the hook, or that he served on the O.J. Simpson dream team that saw to the acquittal of an “alleged” double homicide suspect.

And then there are the many in the Jewish community who disagree with his viewpoints on our people. He is wrong to support a Palestinian State, and other Jewish believers differ from his viewpoint that is highly “skeptical about the Torah’s divine origins.” As Mitchell Bard, an American foreign policy expert and author has said, Mr. Dershowitz has suggested that “Jews should be more like Quakers who are ‘less concerned about mixed marriages, more willing to share their message without conditions or conversions, more confident that they have something positive to offer in the marketplace of ideas.’” Controversial ideas at best.

Like I said before, I have no idea whether Alan Dershowitz is guilty, and he should be given the same benefits that the American justice system guarantees to all. I simply know that defending him is not and should not be a Jewish issue.

As a proud Jew, I find the argument that he should be protected because of his Jewishness to be despicable.
Click to expand...
 
Ahhhhh. That's pretty much what I was wondering- if this was a Jewish issue for you, or a Dershowitz issue, or a question of legal issues wrt the question of thinking someone is innocent until proven guilty.
It appears that it's a Jewish thing in your mind. That's all fine and good, but to me, it's an issue of the law.

I've never been a huge fan of Dershowitz, but in this case, I have no idea what his status of guilt or innocence is. I hope it isn't true, because in spite of my ideological differences with the man, I have never seen evidence that he was of poor character. I guess we'll see, as time allows the evidence to be presented.
 
lizzie said:
Ahhhhh. That's pretty much what I was wondering- if this was a Jewish issue for you, or a Dershowitz issue, or a question of legal issues wrt the question of thinking someone is innocent until proven guilty.
It appears that it's a Jewish thing in your mind. That's all fine and good, but to me, it's an issue of the law.

I've never been a huge fan of Dershowitz, but in this case, I have no idea what his status of guilt or innocence is. I hope it isn't true, because in spite of my ideological differences with the man, I have never seen evidence that he was of poor character. I guess we'll see, as time allows the evidence to be presented.
Click to expand...

Although it is not entirely a Jewish issue, the fact that he is a rather prominent Jew and that he has spoken out forcefully on Jewish issues, means that it is of interest how Jews will react, AND whether or not the fact that he is Jewish will have an effect on the court of public opinion. It's just like Bill Cosby. Will black people support Cosby simply because he is black? That was a big issue in the O J Simpson trial as well.
 
At this point, there's no evidence against him and it's just another run-of-the-mill scandal that Dershowitz has been caught up in because of his friends/clients, who appear to be the primary focus of any civil suits/criminal investigations.

A fat lot of nothing, basically.
 
DiAnna said:
At this point, there's no evidence against him and it's just another run-of-the-mill scandal that Dershowitz has been caught up in because of his friends/clients, who appear to be the primary focus of any civil suits/criminal investigations.

A fat lot of nothing, basically.
Click to expand...

Not everyone agrees with you. Here's another side:

 
MildSteel said:
Not everyone agrees with you. Here's another side:

Click to expand...


Nobody has to agree with me, and he may be guilty as sin. Personally, I've never liked the guy... or any of the scumbag lawyers who helped O.J. get away with murder. I just don't shriek "Guilty! String 'em up!" until I see actual hard evidence; I've not seen any.
 
DiAnna said:
Nobody has to agree with me, and he may be guilty as sin. Personally, I've never liked the guy... or any of the scumbag lawyers who helped O.J. get away with murder. I just don't shriek "Guilty! String 'em up!" until I see actual hard evidence; I've not seen any.
Click to expand...

That is a fair position to take. However, it appeared that your position was that the whole matter was nothing, and that is simply not true madame.
 
MildSteel said:
That is a fair position to take. However, it appeared that your position was that the whole matter was nothing, and that is simply not true madame.
Click to expand...

The allegations are serious; most allegations are. However, without evidence to back them up... and at this point, there really is none... it's just another scandal du jour, since most of these things seem to disappear as soon as they fall out of the headlines. To me, it's still a fat lot of nothing until somebody shows me, well, something.

I feel the same way about Cosby. Lots of smoke around the Cos, has been for decades, so although I have my suspicions that some of that smoke comes from real flames, there is no concrete evidence beyond myriad allegations, many of which have been proven false previously and many of which have been proven to be money/extortion based... so to me, it again is just another scandal du jour until proven otherwise. :shrug:
 
DiAnna said:
The allegations are serious; most allegations are. However, without evidence to back them up... and at this point, there really is none... it's just another scandal du jour, since most of these things seem to disappear as soon as they fall out of the headlines. To me, it's still a fat lot of nothing until somebody shows me, well, something.
Click to expand...

What you have said here is fine with the exception of your assertion that there really is no evidence. You don't know that first of all. Second of all, there is indeed evidence that supports the notion that it is possible that the allegations could be true. But, certainly there is none that has been made public, that would lead one to conclusively believe that they are true. Therefore, I agree, we should not string up individuals under such circumstances. Having said that, because there is indeed evidence that demonstrates that it is possible, I don't agree with your assertion that it's a fat lot of nothing. But that is subjective, and we are both entitled to our opinions in that regard, and I respect yours. I hope that you will do the same.

DiAnna said:
I feel the same way about Cosby. Lots of smoke around the Cos, has been for decades, so although I have my suspicions that some of that smoke comes from real flames, there is no concrete evidence beyond myriad allegations, many of which have been proven false previously and many of which have been proven to be money/extortion based... so to me, it again is just another scandal du jour until proven otherwise. :shrug:
Click to expand...

In Cosby's case, that's quite a few people making accusations. I say that as someone who has been a great admirer of Cosby. He reminds me a lot of my father. His mannerisms, wit, etc.
 
Here's something about Paul Cassell, one of the lawyers who is representing the victims.

Meet the Lawyer Who's Giving Dershowitz Hell

Who's Paul Cassell? And why is he giving Alan Dershowitz such agita?

Cassell, a law professor at the University of Utah, has alleged, with co-counsel Brad Edwards, that Dershowitz had sex with a minor when the Harvard law professor was a guest of billionaire Jeffrey Epstein over 10 years ago. Dershowitz says "no one can understand [Cassell's] motive" in getting involved in such a sensationalistic case. (Cassell and Edwards are seeking to void a plea agreement, which Dershowitz helped draft, that spared the billionaire federal charges for sexually abusing minors. Click here for more details about the case.)

Though Dershowitz has called both Cassell and Edwards, a Florida personal injury lawyer, "liars"—he seems most vexed (and perplexed) by Cassell. That might be because Cassell also has an elite resume—one that might lend extra credibility to the case: A former federal judge, Cassell was also a US Attorney, clerk for Chief Justice Warren Burger and president of the Stanford Law Review.

So who's this mysterious law professor taking on the Harvard icon? I contacted Cassell to find out. Here are excerpts from our three phone conversations and various email exchanges:

..............

How strong is this case? Do you think you can void Epstein's plea agreement with the feds?
We always look for cases with strong claims that have wide ranging impact. We feel we have a strong case against the government for violating the rights of victims. We're not commenting on the details of the case; we prefer to speak through our court pleadings.
Click to expand...

This guy seems to think he has a strong case. I don't think it bodes well for Dershowitz.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom