A Postcolonial Critique of the Linde Et Al. V. Arab Bank, Plc ''terrorism'' Bank Cases

This book provides readers with a postcolonial reading of the case of Linde et al. v. Arab Bank, PLC, and argues that American courtrooms are being used by rhetors to tell Anglo-American stories about Hamas, the causes of the Second Intifada, and the importance of 'drying up' terrorist financing. "Offering a postcolonial reading of the case of Linde et al. v. Arab Bank, PLC, this study argues that American courtrooms are being used by rhetors to tell Anglo-American stories about Hamas, the causes of the Second Intifada, and the importance of 'drying up' terrorist financing. While legislation like the 1990 Anti-Terrorism Act appears to be formalistic and neutral in the way that it references the importance of cutting down on the financing of terrorism, the author argues that American courts have often interpreted this in one-sided ways that target 'Arab' banks or 'Palestinian' terrorism. This critique posits that ostensibly objective and apolitical judicial cases on terrorism are in fact serving the ideological purpose of justifying both the Israeli and American vilification of controversial organizations like Hamas. Moreover, by labeling institutions like the Arab Bank abettors of terrorism, American judges and juries hurt Middle Eastern charities and hurt the cause of moderates in the region"--Back cover Offering a postcolonial reading of the case of Linde et al. v. Arab Bank, PLC, this study argues that American courtrooms are being used by rhetors to tell Anglo-American stories about Hamas, the causes of the Second Intifada, and the importance of 'drying up' terrorist financing. While legislation like the 1990 Anti-Terrorism Act appears to be formalistic and neutral in the way that it references the importance of cutting down on the financing of terrorism, the author argues that American courts have often interpreted this in one-sided ways that target 'Arab' banks or 'Palestinian' terrorism. This critique posits that ostensibly objective and apolitical judicial cases on terrorism are in fact serving the ideological purpose of justifying both the Israeli and American vilification of controversial organizations like Hamas. Moreover, by labelling institutions like the Arab Bank abettors of terrorism, American judges and juries hurt Middle Eastern charities and hurt the cause of moderates in the region Cover......Page 1 Half-Title......Page 2 Title......Page 4 Copyright......Page 5 Contents......Page 6 Acknowledgments......Page 7 1 Appreciating the Significance of the Linde et al. v. Arab Bank, PLC “Terrorism” Bank Cases......Page 10 2 A Critical Genealogical Study of 19th and 20th-Century Colonial and Imperial Concerns about the Financing of Terrorism......Page 40 3 A Critical Reading of the Passage of the 1990 Anti-Terrorism Act and the Filing of the Linde et al. v. Arab Bank, PLC Cases......Page 57 4 A Critical Review of the Linde Plaintiffs’ Framing of the Role that Financial Institutions Played in the Rise of Hamas, 2000 to 2014......Page 78 5 Situational Factors and the Defense’s Framing of Banking Innocence in the Linde et al. v. Arab Bank, PLC Cases......Page 96 6 Conclusion – The Lingering Influence of the Linde et al. v. Arab Bank, PLC Cases......Page 111 Bibliography......Page 127 Index......Page 140