The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), fighting a lawsuit in New York City, has acknowledged that it is still at war with Israel and that it considers the use of terrorism against Israeli civilians as legitimate acts of war. The lawsuit, Sokolow v The Palestine Liberation Organization, alleges that the PLO carried out two machine-gun and five bombing attacks in the Jerusalem area between January 2001 and February 2004. In reply, the PLO, represented by former Attorney-General Ramsey Clark (who in a distant age, 1967-69, was attorney general of the United States), replied that the attacks were acts of war rather than terrorism. The presiding judge, U.S. District Judge George Daniels, summarizes the PLO argument in these terms: “defendants argue that subject matter jurisdiction is lacking because this action is premised on acts of war, which is barred under the ATA [Antiterrorism Act of 1991], and further is based on conduct which does not meet the statutory definition of ‘international terrorism.'”

In short, the PLO is stating openly in a U.S. court of law that, four years since Mahmoud Abbas, often described as a moderate and peacemaker, assumed control of the Palestinian Authority (PA), which is dominated by the PLO, it is still waging war on Israel. Moreover, it is saying that acts of terrorism, which are war crimes, are legitimate act of war. These assertions have been rejected by Judge Daniels, who said, “the Court finds that the attacks, as alleged to have occurred in the amended complaint, do not constitute [legitimate] acts of war nor do they, as a matter of law, fall outside the statutory definition of ‘international terrorism.'” He went on to point out that civilians, not soldiers were the intended victims of these assaults (Daniel Pipes, ‘PLO Acknowledges: Still at War with Israel,’ Hudson Institute, October 28, 2008).