Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman isn't an actual terrorist. Rahman was convicted of "seditious conspiracy":
<blockquote>United States v. Rahman
Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, a Muslim cleric, was convicted in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York of seditious conspiracy under a little-used, Civil War-era sedition statute. n146 Several of Rahman's followers were tried with him and convicted of seditious conspiracy involving plots to blow up the Lincoln Tunnel and a variety of government buildings. n147 Although certain documents in the case have been sealed and (as of this writing) remain under seal, indications are that Rahman's role in the "conspiracy" was limited to fiery sermons and dispensing religious advice in the form of interpretations of Islamic law. n148 In short, Rahman's terrorist followers would seek their religious leader's advice about whether certain terrorist plots were sanctioned by the Qu'ran and Islamic law. n149 There is apparently no evidence that Rahman ever came in contact with, let alone touched, an explosive device or otherwise participated in the conspiracy. n150
Rahman's conviction on the seditious conspiracy charge, therefore, seems to be based on pure religious speech. No conduct, even "expressive conduct," was involved. (Holly Coates Keehn, "Terroristic Religious Speech: Giving the Devil the Benefit of the First Amendment Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses," 28 Seton Hall L. Rev. 1230, 1998)</blockquote>
What is noteworthy about the Rahman case is that the American criminal justice system under the Bill Clinton Administration was already more liberal in its application of "seditious conspiracy" charges than the Egyptian one under emergency powers: "After <strong>failing five times</strong> to convict the sheik for crimes he allegedly committed in Egypt, including conspiring in the 1981 assassination of President Anwar el-Sadat, Egyptian officials are plainly relieved that a court has finally put Mr. Abdel Rahman behind bars" (emphasis added, Douglas Jehl, "Egypt Downplays News Of Sheik's Sentencing," <em>New York Times</em>, January 20, 1996, sec. 1: p. 2).
Mutatis mutandis, the same charges, precedents, and reasonings may very well be applied to political speech that has nothing whatsoever to do with Islamism. -- Yoshie
* Critical Montages: <http://montages.blogspot.com/> * Greens for Nader: <http://greensfornader.net/> * Bring Them Home Now! <http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/> * OSU-GESO: <http://www.osu-geso.org/> * Calendars of Events in Columbus: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html>, <http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php>, & <http://www.cpanews.org/> * Student International Forum: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osudivest.org/> * Al-Awda-Ohio: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio> * Solidarity: <http://www.solidarity-us.org/>