Stewart Sentence Fallout

I know people have gone in longer for doing a far lesser crime. It is a light sentence considering the state of the world today.

Traitorous Whore!

She should be Drawn and Quartered, then feasted upon by ravenous rabies ridden hounds.

Is it just me or does this traitor look like Ralph Wiggum (with glasses)?

Hahaha!!
Good call!

What's brash (and in my opinion nauseating) is her appealing the sentence. I wish that the judge hearing the appellate case had the authority to overturn the original ruling and instead hand down a longer sentence.

What Stewart did was wrong, and it's fitting she lose her license for it - but to call for thirty years is excessive and unjust, but unsuprising given the state of our nation today.

Good going Lynne!

Yeah, she fucked up and should do time, but I don't get the violent reactions here (actually, the Hilary reference is consistent with the psycho right wing). I never see such bile for, say, rapists and murderers.

I posted similar commentary on the last Gothamist story regarding this news item; as I feel very strongly about this matter, I am reposting:

I will qualify this comment with the following:

I was the editor for the translation agency that handled this case. I viewed and heard and read EVERY single piece of evidence that was considered - including countless FISA taps of Yousry, Sattar, Stewart, and the other "lawyers" who were "fortunate" enough not to be indicted. While I am not at liberty to discuss the actual information provided therein, I am allowed to share my opinion regarding the facts.

To the following individuals:

"Far King A they should have shot the B**tch
[1] Posted by: Zarlat Absilok | October 17, 2006 2:18 PM"
"I know people have gone in longer for doing a far lesser crime. It is a light sentence considering the state of the world today.
[2] Posted by: Urban Thought | October 17, 2006 2:34 PM"
"black and deal drugs: 30 years
old, fat, white and commit treason: 28 months
[3] Posted by: nick | October 17, 2006 2:43 PM"
Traitorous Whore!
"She should be Drawn and Quartered, then feasted upon by ravenous rabies ridden hounds.
[4] Posted by: Sam Adams | October 17, 2006 2:52 PM"
"Article Three of the US Constitution defines treason as levying war against the United States or "in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort," and requires the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act or a confession in open court for conviction. [...]"
[7] Posted by: edEx | October 17, 2006 4:08 PM"
"What's brash (and in my opinion nauseating) is her appealing the sentence. I wish that the judge hearing the appellate case had the authority to overturn the original ruling and instead hand down a longer sentence.
[8] Posted by: anonymass | October 17, 2006 4:26 PM"

Firstly, I recommend that if you are going to take such a violent position on this matter that you actually understand the case. Try reading the indictment: USA v. Sattar et al..
You especially, edEx - for one so savy on the law, you ignore the fact that Lynne was not indicted on treason at all, nor were any of the other defendents.
Secondly, I must say that I feel sorry for you - Zarlat, Nick, Sam Adams, edEx and Anonymass - that you should go through life with such a misunderstanding as to human beings, politics and the nuances of the law. Such polarized thought is pitiful. I recommend that you remove your American flag-blindfold, let go of your blind hate, read something other than the NY Post and open your mind to actual information and facts.

As for the case itself: the press release was an erroneous step on Lynne's part - ONLY because she was in violation of the SAM (Special Administrative Measures) imposed against OAR (Omar Abdel Rahman). Unwise, yes. But an act of terrorism? NO. If you were to have followed her career as a lawyer and have listened to her speech patterns throughout her lifetime - rather than myopicly and ignorantly regard this occasion as her life's ambition - you would realize that she is, was and always has been a pundit for human rights and free speech, including those/that of prisoners.
Furthermore, keep in mind the fact that most of the evidence being examined and weighed in this case took place before 9/11; whereas the media perspective taken regarding this case is one of a post-9/11 stance. When Lynne misstepped, she did so in a new environment of paranoia, one in which the Patriot Act moved freely across the land as the totalitarian Bush's appendage.

I also wish to point out that Lynne was HIRED as Rahman's appeals lawyer - ALONG with three others: Abdeen Jabara (I will refrain from speculating as to his allegiances as a lawyer - but note that he spoke Arabic and OFTEN conversed with the Shaykh sans Yousry and was NOT indicted), Lawrence Schilling, and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark. NONE of these other three were indicted... even though they acted in tandem with Lynne.
Yousry was APPROVED by the GOVERNMENT - not Lynne Stewart, not any foreign defense agency. He has worked for countless years as a government trial translator and interpreter. His father was a promininent individual in the US-supported Egyptian government. He is an intellectual. He is married to a fundamentatlist Christian. He is NOT and NEVER has been a Muslim.
The sole reason for his indictement is that OAR did not speak English; Lynne did not speak Arabic; without the translator/interpreter, there would have been nothing for Lynne to disseminate. Yousry did not disseminate information. He did not mis-translate. He simply did what THE GOVERNMENT HAD HIRED HIM TO DO: i.e., translate for one individual and said individual's legal representation. If the government were to have meted out justice fairly, they should have indicted AT&T for facilitating the Shaykh in making his legally allowed calls to his lawyers; they should have imprisoned the telephone on which he spoke; they should have tried themselves for allowing the law that anyone is entitled to legal representation to exist.

I will end with this comment: I am HONORED to have met such a good and genuine and kind and sincere and jovial and intelligent individual as Mohamed Yousry. He loves this country more than any detractor of terrorists ever will as he is willing to stand up for what the country is supposed to exemplify. An amazing human being, a kind soul, a loving father and husband, a purely good and gentle person - Mohamed Yousry is the true victim in this trial.

No, noone got schooled.

"extraordinarily severe criminal conduct"

Should get you more than 28 months.

To quote the News.

The sheik was only the man who had plotted to blow up city landmarks and assassinate the president of Egypt. And Lynne Stewart, consciously and knowingly, gave him material assistance.

Oddree is just as much a fool as Stewart, or he is just as much a criminal as the sheik.

I based my opinions on the judge's comments as well - they seemed fairly damning, wouldn't you agree? True - I didn't attend every hearing and I'm not dismissing his post outright, but let's be honest - there's a bit of an agenda there.

Ah, Sam... you are right. "Noone got schooled." Not until you commented, at least.
I say this because you only shore up my point - you take media spin for fact, editorial commentary for absolute truth and selective information for the whole picture.
"To quote the News" - (let's not dally in wondering when "News" became a proper noun, like "God") It's interesting to consider what part of the above EDITORIAL excerpt you chose to quote. My wonder at individuals such as yourself compels me to ask -
Do you indeed not even see or read the part of an article/editorial/text that disagrees with you?
I am also intrigued as to why you automatically assume I am a man... but that's neither here nor there.
I guess all I can say is... Sam, good luck with yourself. I'm sure you will live a happy life surrounded by good friends and good people.

Anonymass - I admit, I do not know that my position would be the same had I not seen and heard and read all of the case materials myself. Going solely on the judge's commentary, perhaps I would feel more censorious regarding Lynne's actions. However, Koetl's sentence ruling is also an indication as to how he regards the level of guilt. Keep in mind that Sattar was issued a 24-year prison sentence; Koetl is clearly willing to severely punish someone if he deems said person worthy.

I must add that not all the evidence was presented in trial. I wonder, if the jury had spent their time hearing and reading everything that was collected over the course of a decade rather than the samples provided them, would they have reached the same verdict.

I must also add that the jury was given one-hundreth of the greater picture. The media gives you one-hundreth of THAT picture. Working on this case really enlightened me as to how little information the public gets to see.

As for an agenda, I believe that each news media outlet has its own agenda. I believe that the post 9/11-government had an agenda in indicting Lynne and Mohamed. I believe that Lynne had an agenda - but not the one she was found guilty of having; rather, one that was as absent of terrorist ambitions as you are or I am or even my good friend Sam from above is.

Excellent comments Oddree. And so true.

I'm a Spanish/English certified interpreter and I've worked with both the State & Federal Government for years. I can tell you one thing for sure; since 9/11, working for the Feds SUCKS.
There's a new pervasive mentality that is VERY FASCIST in nature. Fascism being defined as "putting the interests of the State ABOVE that of the citizenry & individuals".
Nowadays the propaganda machine in the Federal work environment constantly spews beauts like:
"You're either with us or against us!.",
"Only traitors criticize!",
"We must make America safe!".
It's getting frealin' Orwellian.

The fact is this: in today's America, having an Islamic name is like having had a Jewish name back in Germany in the 30's & 40's. We're a nation of idiots that needs to conveniently stereotype everything and thanks to Bush (who started this whole hate-Islam thing instead of going after Bin Laden and his pitiful handful of crazies) from now on Muslims and any other turban-wearing darkies will be eventually branded as "terrorists" and shipped-off to God knows where.
So you gave $50 to the Nile Charity Fund once?. TERRORIST!. Didn't you know that organization gives money to children who in turn work in sweat-shops that make the clothes worn by the elderely gentlemen who toil in Kabul refilling AK-47 ammo catridges?. Oh yeah, it's like that.

Mohamed Yousry was railroaded as was everyone else involved in this case.

Even tho I'm a Hispanic, I would NEVER work for the Federal government until Bush is out (or IN ...jail). After all, Chavez is probably the next "terrorist" on the hit-list so that would make me a prime target.

Hijos de remil puta.