February 10, 2005
Stewart Goes to the Slammer: Terrorist Lawyer Convicted
Far left New York attorney Lynne Stewart was convicted earlier today by a jury in federal court of criminal charges, stemming from her smuggling of violence-inciting messages from one of her convicted and imprisoned clients to the foreign terrorist group he led. She now faces up to twenty years in prison. (Story here.)
Stewart, a close buddy of leftwing lawyer Ramsay Clark, was the attorney for Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman (referred to as “The Blind Sheikh” in the 9/11 Report). The Blind Sheikh lead the Egyptian terrorist organization known as “Islamic Group,” and was convicted in 1996 of conspiring to blow up a number of NY landmarks. Among other things, Stewart later violated existing prison regulations by declaring to the press that the Blind Sheikh had withdrawn a “cease-fire” order, thereby calling upon IG to engage in renewed terrorist activities. (There is also a post on Stewart at Jihad Watch.)
In 2003, Stewart stopped by Seattle and made presentations at Seattle University School of Law. The leftwing Lawyer’s Guild Chapter invited her to the school, touting her as a hero. The SU Federalist Society Chapter, of which I was President at the time, staged an information campaign about Stewart. We ran off over 1,000 flyers about Stewart and included them as inserts in the (now defunct) underground paper at SU, known as The SU Review. Professor Eugene Volokh was kind enough to post pdf files of both flyers (here and here) with his comments at the Volokh Conspiracy.
Further, my op-ed "A Terrifying Presence at SU," discussing Stewart ran in the University-wide newspaper, The Spectator. It is still available online here. My op-ed was later quoted in a story with Front Page Magazine. (The typo in the second sentence of the op-ed was the editor’s doing--I sent him an error-free draft.)
While it was all too clear that Stewart had, at the very LEAST, acted irresponsibly and put many lives in danger by her actions, at the time of her visit I did not know the significance of the Blind Sheikh. After reading Bill Gertz’s book Breakdown and the 9/11 Commmision Report, I was struck by how significant of a figure he was. Usama Bin Laden greatly admires the Blind Sheikh and had even issued threats and carried out attacks in the Blind Sheikh’s name. It has long been an intention of UBL to liberate the Blind Sheikh.
Fortunately, the Blind Sheikh remains behind bars. The world is much safer that way. And there is also a little bit more justice in the world with Stewart soon to join her old pal. Bravo to the New York U.S. Attorney’s office!
(Cross-blogged at Seth Cooper's personal blog.)
Posted by Seth Cooper at February 10, 2005
03:47 PM | Email This
Perhaps they'll both be joined by Ward Churchill soon?
Medved was RIGHT on last night at PLU!
3. I think they should hang her for treason!
4. it's for people like Stewart and the Blind shiek that capital punishment be inforced. Why provide the comforts of a Federal Prison at taxpayers expense?
5. Wow,that's great, it's time to line them up against the wall and allow the squad to do it's thing. Concerning another terrorist sympathizer, Ward Churchill you need to check out what this site has on him.
Stewart is a traitor in Word and Deed
. For the deed
she deserves what she got.
Ward Churchill may be a traitor by his words, but I am not aware of any deeds by him that are treasonous.
The fathers of this country understood from personal experience what it meant to be traitors (remember, they didn't start out as Americans) and they made sure that political speech was protected from government censorship.
If we start to split hairs on what "Free Speech" means, and forbid unpopular speech for Churchill, where will it end?
Seth, re your: "op-ed "A Terrifying Presence at SU," discussing Stewart... "
You were so right! In more ways than one. That is the UGLIEST person I have ever seen! Why are so many lefty-libs ugly?
8. "That which ye sow, ye reap."
9. How soon before we hear that this is all about political dissent?
10. I am glad to see her go to jail. It was because of her that many informers where killed. It was because of her that a period of time with no intelligence on terrorist activities. SHe should be an accessory for all terrorist attacks on US Citizens around the world. OR am I too mean. It is lawyers like this that terrorist feel they can use the court system against us and find the moles informing on them. I hope this becomes a message to other terrorist lawyers that if you do things like this you can be held accountable for the actions of the terrorists. Yes terrorists captured in the US have a right to a lawyer but the lawyer has no rights to pass confidential messages to terrorists. Espicially if the data can be used to keep us from catching them. I would like our intelligence gathering capability to be a secret so we can continue to catch the bad guys.
11. Maybe they can arrange for Stewart to get a jail cell with Sheikh-yer-bootie so she can find out what it's like to be shagged by a blind dude that smells bad.
12. Thank goodness--
The fact that Stewart was able to carry on her active and overt aide and comfort of the enemy and still stay out of jail as long as she did is IMO a glaring miscarrige of justice and an indictment of the current state of our legal system in this area.... But ditto kudos to NY US Attorney for finally getting it done.
Eugene Volokh and his father Vladimir are a story all in themselves. Before Eugene became a super-lawyer, he was (and still is) one of the most brilliant computer techies anywhere. I know because I work on the same computer system their company (VESoft) specializes in: The HP e3000 and its MPE/iX OS (and if anybody on this list knows what they are, you are probably showing your age (like me)). On the odd chance that somebody cares, just google "Vesoft volokh 3000" for some interesting reads...
Deadwood, then why don't you suggest that the college invite a Ku Klux Klan member to speak and pay that person for the privilege.
Churchill does NOT represent a free speech issue. Libs confuse free speech and being paid to speak with tax dollars. They are not the same. He can spew all the garbage he wants. Just don't ask sane people to give him public money for it; especially when he's not even of indian ancestry, as he claims.
If a private group wants to sponsor someone so dishonest and crazy, let them contribute their own money for such. But forcing taxpayers to subsidize his crazy hate speech (ah, lefties, how does it feel to have that one thrown back at you???) is improper.
1. Incitement of discontent or rebellion against a government.
2. Any action promoting such discontent or rebellion.
Michele S wrote:
Churchill does NOT represent a free speech issue. Libs confuse free speech and being paid to speak with tax dollars. They are not the same. He can spew all the garbage he wants.
No, I'd say Churchill is a very good example of a free speech issue.
He's been fired from his job, and almost no organizations are willing to pay him to speak. He's still occasionally in the news, because he's a name people have heard of, but his views are so far out of the mainstream that he isn't convincing anyone that isn't already deeply into self-loathing anyway. He has become a joke.
He has managed to completely marginalize himself, and unless he commits a crime, he's as harmless as it is possible to make him. Put him in jail and you make a martyr of him.
Next time one of us "lefties" trots out Richard Butler, you are welcome to trot out Ward Churchill. They seem about equally far out on the fringes.
I believe it was C.S. Lewis that said "The devil cannot abide to be mocked".