At the risk of sounding like a boring old ACLU liberal, which I am, it doesn't mater what silly, half-assed, dumb, dispicable, or wicked views Lynn Stewart holds. The US Atty's and Justice Dept's attack on her is an attack on the right to counsel of everyone accused (or convicted) of a political crime, or any other kind of crime. It is not only people with impeccable or even decent political credentials that are entitled to representation. The worst of us need it most. And the threat to all starts with the worst. They pick on a Padilla because he's not easy to sympathize with, a Lynns Stewart because she's easy to demonize. \
May I remind of two things: The CP supported the Smith Act prosecutions of the Trots because they though that Trot politics where bad. At the end of the decade they ended up in federal prison on Smith Act convictions. And there is that famous Niemoller quote, First They Came For The Communists . . . . . which on your reading would be OK because the Communists had bad politics. I think that is worse than a crime. It is a mistake. (De la Meurthe, on the execution of the Duc d'Enghein, 1804)
If you are half the liberal you claim to be, you will take my position, that when the Village of Skokie attempt to bad a Nazi march, you defend the Nazis' right to march. When the RCP burns the flag, you defend their right to make fools of themselves. When Terry Nichols needs a lawyer, you appluad Michael Tigar for taking the case. That's the difference between us and Lynn Stewart. Or between me and Lynn Stewart. Is it a difference between you and her, or do you only defend of the rights of people whose views you approve of?
jks
--- Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
> Michael Pugliese wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 12:02:19 -0600, Stephen Philion
>
> ><philion at hawaii.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>--In her whole defense, there are NO
> denuniciations of the North Korean baby
> >>eating conspiracy that threatens to become an
> epidemic world wide, in
> >>ADDITION to their overpowering use of massive
> Nuclear and Biological
> >>Weaponry! Forget it, she won't get MY support!
> >http://www.google.com/search?q=lynne+stewart+stalin
> > Monthly Review Interview with Lynne Stewart
> >by ROSENTHAL STEVEN 25 November 2002 20:53 UTC on
> the Progressive
> >Sociologists Network list, click the google cache
> copy, via the
> >above googling. >...Is Islamic fundamentalist
> Sheikh Omar Abdel
> >Rahman a left wing "force for national liberation?"
> According to
> >his attorney Lynne Stewart, he and his fellow
> terrorists are
> >progressives whom we should support.
> ><SNIP>
> > http://www.lynnestewart.org/monthlyreview.html
> > L(ynne) S(tewart): I'm such a strange amalgam of
> old-line things
> >and new-line things. 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.
> The CIA pays a
> >thousand people and cuts them loose, and they will
> undermine any
> >revolution in the name of freedom of speech.
>
> Michael, so fucking what? Her indictment is an
> outrage. Quoting
> things like this makes you an apologist for the
> prosecution. I doubt
> you intend that, but you can't control the
> interpretations.
>
> Doug
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/