To be honest, I’m not sure what this piece is trying to argue, but I think it’s an interesting read for some of the information, especially three years after the fact.
Related Posts
Panic Strikes – Lets Profile Muz-lums
Here we go again. Another terrorist bombing and another call to profile Muslims, or shall I say Moz-lums. Here is a great gem from NYC Councilmember Oddo: It is important to acknowledge that nearly every Jihadist who has engaged in terrorist attacks has been a young man who called himself Muslim – the common denominator among the recent bombings in London and Madrid, the 9/11 attacks, the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the would-be millennium bombers, the destroyer Cole, the embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, Pan Am Flight 103, TWA Flight 847 and the bombing of the Marine barracks in…
Hijab
There is an op-ed written in a NY Urdu language paper (English translation) that deals with the issue of hijab. I’m looking for the Urdu version, but the English translation reminds me very much of what some of the early debate was like in NY in English. You would throw out a whole bunch of arguments and see what would stick. The arguments have become much more sophisticated and targeted, helped both by time and the easy accessibility of more academic material. I think this article is important, not because of what it says, but because of the language and…
PFBC – Roots and Branches
[formatting is off. notes are incomplete. go read Rachel, she’s better.] Rabbi Arthur of the Shalom Center. Quoting friend and teacher: Different religions are like different organs in the body. Want them to do what they do, and nothing else, but also realize they have the same DNA. What is the DNA? and what unfolds for itself? Chris Walton, Philocrates: Do people interact with different perspectives within own faith tradition? (Good show of hands) Rachel: How do we connect across faith lines, and internally? easier to talk to other faiths than internally (Christian Alliance for Progress, Public Theologian) ep fracture…
One thought on “John Walker Lindh”
Comments are closed.
It’s funny how Lindh was first an example to civil rights activist as to how a prosecution of an enemy combatant should work (especially compared to Hamdi and Padilla), and now he’s an example of how a prosecution should not have worked. I remember all the complaints that the white boy from Marin County was treated better (in that he had the opportunity for a trial and well-heeled counsel) than Hamdi and Padilla. Now, the same people see Lindh as a victim treated far worse than Hamdi (and we’ll see how mi cabron, Padilla, will end up).
Plenty of smarmy ideas in the article (it’s Mother Jones, after all) and I don’t have time to whack them all — one lie is that Lindh had no support outside his family at the time. Not true, a handful of Salafis were protesting and praying outside EDVA every day Lindh was there. You can google “free john walker lindh” and take a look at the support now for this moron (am I telegraphing my opinion here?). But I do have a suggestion: he can sue his lawyer for malpractice for counseling him to cop the plea. Just kidding, Jimmy (if you’re a blog reader) — I don’t advocate suing lawyers : ^).
One other comment — the article clearly takes the view that the war on terror is a legal problem the success of which can be judged by the number of convictions the government has won. And that is probably the biggest problem of all — the idea that we can depose, subpoena and “Mirandize” our way in this fight.