« This Morning's Notables | Main | New Conserva-Puppy »
February 12, 2005
Lenninist Lynne
As I noted in a post below, attorney Lynne Stewart was convicted Thursday of conspiracy, providing material support to terrorists, defrauding the government and making false statements. She had been representing Egyptian sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman. Rahman is the "blind sheik" who was convicted in 1995 for conspiring to assassinate Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and destroy several New York landmarks, including the U.N. building and the Lincoln and Holland Tunnels.
We heard the expected garbage from her lawyers (I know, it's also in my post below, but it's so good I just have to quote them again)
"It's a dark day for civil liberties and for civil liberties lawyers in this country," attorney Ron Kuby said Thursday. "In the post 9-11 era, where dissidents are treated as traitors, it's perhaps no surprise that a zealous civil rights lawyer becomes a convict."
Stewart says that "political motivations" were driving the prosecutors.
Most news outlets simply described her as a "veteran civil rights activist". A few, to their credit, went farther, characterizing her as a "left-wing activist", but that's about as far as most stories I've seen go.
Civil rights activist my foot.
She's on record as supporting the worst communist dictactors that the twentieth century had to offer.
Some know the truth. Attorney Scott Johnson of the Powerline blog calls her conviction "a milestone in the war on terrorism." He's right. Stewart is a Fifth Columnist, seeking to destroy us from within. Her motivation for helping the sheik is simple; she hates this country and wants to see it destroyed.
Frontpage Magazine, edited by David Horowitz, someone who knows the left better than most because he was once a member of it, described the importance of the trial this way;
Yesterday’s trial – which was in many ways a trial of the Left itself – will not still the anti-American fanaticism of Stewart’s and Yousry’s campus cult-worshippers. Their hatred of this country blinds them to its greatness just as it excused their evil deeds – and will probably cause them to overlook the pro-terrorist actions of Stewart’s comrades in the future. What the verdict did guarantee is that those who flaunt their country’s laws and help terrorists shed innocent blood will not escape serious consequences, anymore than their terrorist heroes have.
Who exactly is this Lynne Stewart?
There is no better way to understand who she is than to quote her directly. From the invaluable David Horowitz' latest book, Stewart is quoted as saying that
"We have in Washington a poisonous government that spreads its venom to the body politic in all corners of the globe. We now resume...our quests...like David going forth to meet Goliath, like Beowulf the dragon slayer...like Sir Galahad seeking the holy grail. And modern heroes, dare I mention? Ho and Mao and Lenin, Fidel and Nelson Mandela and John Brown, Che Guevara who reminds us 'At the risk of sounding ridiculous, let me say that the true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love.'"
(emphasis added)
And how does she view "Muslim fundamentalists"?
"They are basically forces of national liberation. And I think that we, as persons who are committed to the liberation of oppressed people, should fasten on the need for self-determination....My own sense is that, were the Islamists to be empowered, there would be movements within their own countries...to liberate."
As for violence;
"I don't believe in anarchistic violence, but in directed violence. That would be violence directed at the institutions which perpetuate capitalism, racism, and sexism, and the people who are the appointed guardians of those institutions, and accompanied by popular support."
I think we know how she sees capitalism, but let's just be sure. She describes corporate capitalism as
"...a consummate evil that unleashes its dogs of war on the helpless; an enemy motivated only by insatiable greed...In this enemy there is no love of the land or the creatures that live there, no compassion for the people. This enemy will destroy the air we breathe and the water we drink as long as the dollars keep filling up their money boxes."
Oh but she's a great "civil rights activist," right? In an interview with Monthly Review, she "was asked to imagine that she ws part of a revolutionary government that had 'liberated' its people from the horrors of capitalism. If stewart herself were to become part of such a government, the interviewer wanted to know, was there a point at which she would think that monitoring and controlling the counterrevolutionary adversaries of that government was acceptable?"
"I don't have any problem with Mao or Stalin or the Vietnamese leaders or certainly Fidel locking up people they see as dangerous. Because so often, dissidence has been used by the greater powers to undermine a people's revolution"
Got it?
(All comments taken from David Horowitz, Unholy Alliance )
Horowitz describes Stewart as "...a protege of William Kunstler and Ramsey Clarke," two icons of the radical left, and both America-haters.
Want more? Check out Scott Johnson's (Powerline blog) "Face to Face with Lynne Stewart"
Johnson sat next to her at a debate on the Patriot Act, hosted by the National Lawyers Guild.
Stewart referred several times to 9/11 as providing the "pretext" or "excuse" for snuffing out idealistic "activists" such as she. Her indictment, she acknowledged, was not brought under the PATRIOT Act but, according to Stewart, it resulted from the same "aura" of hatred directed at Islam in the wake of 9/11. Stewart never once acknowledged the reality of the war against the United States or the peril that those such as her client the blind sheik pose to it. Stewart's conclusion articulated her theme in the old Guild tradition, accusing the Bush administration of accomplishing the "usurpation [of civil liberties] by voracious corporate government."
Enough. I can't take it anymore!
Update
Ok, so I lied. Here's a bit more.
Guess who funded her defense?
Rachel Friedman tells us that she'd like to see mainstream liberals condemn her more forcefully.
Wretchard provides good analysis and perspective
The Nation doesn't seem to have much to say on this. No articles since Dec 23, from what I can tell.
And, hold the presses: the National Lawyers Guild calls for a "Day of Outrage!" in support of Stewart.
Posted by Tom at February 12, 2005 11:00 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.theredhunter.com/mt/refer.cgi/288
