This is taken from today's New York Times, which I've not yet gone downstairs to get. The fact it is circulated from a Marxism list has nothing to do with the merits of the facts, which I find deeply disturbing (as I do many of the comments made by Ali al-Timimi). The sentence (and the charges) reflect a clear attack on free speech.
I've two comments to make about the sentence, beyond my own profound shock that the man was given life in prison for words. First, free speech, for those of us who believe in civil liberties, means free speech, not just free speech when the speech doesn't threaten us, or free speech when we agree with [the] speaker. No evidence was presented that the speech led anyone to actions - the conviction is on the basis of the views expressed by al-Timimi. My feelings would be the same if al-Timimi had called for the burning of black churches, the murder of homosexuals, the gassing of Jews, etc. - what I feel about the speech is one thing, and what actions can be taken under the Bill of Rights is another. If we depend on the State to protect our free speech, and let the State decided what speech is permitted and what speech is not, we are headed in a dangerous direction.
Second, one has to ask what incites some Muslims to acts of terror. Is it the speech of al-Timimi or is it the forty year repression of the Palestinians, to which the world has largely turned a blind eye (note the continued construction of the "Iron Curtain" in Israel - which would be fine, if Israel was building it on Israeli territory - but it is being built on Palestinian territory). We are (I hope) all stunned by the horrors of the London bombings, the earlier terror attack in Spain, the memory of 9.11. Or all except those like al-Timimi who rejoiced - yet such rejoicing, however repellent I find it, is not a crime. But can we separate the actions which cause our grief from the actions taken by the US and British governments (and others as well) in Afghanistan and Iraq? At the very least, at the lowest possible estimate, tens upon tens of thousands of civilians have been killed by US and British forces. (And by common agreement, at least 500,000 civilians died in Iraq due to the US/British sanctions in the years prior to the invasion). Did we think there would be no response to this? That such actions would not inflame the Islamic world?
So one has to ask, if the words of al-Timimi result in his getting a life sentence, what sentence is appropriate for those whose actions have created the climate in which al-Timimi spoke? Real actions lead to real results. Al-Timimi was dealing in words - the US and British governments are dealing in actions.
Peace,
David McReynolds
Date: 7/14/2005 10:20:55 AM
NY Times, July 14, 2005 Scholar Is Given Life Sentence in 'Virginia Jihad' Case
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
ALEXANDRIA, Va., July 13 - An influential Muslim scholar, whom prosecutors called a "purveyor of hate and war," was ordered on Wednesday to spend the rest of his life in prison for inciting his young followers in Northern Virginia to wage war against the United States in the days after the Sept. 11 attacks.
The scholar, Ali al-Timimi, was defiant to the end, telling a federal judge as he was about to be sentenced that he considered himself a "prisoner of conscience" who was being persecuted for his strong Muslim beliefs.
"I will not admit guilt nor seek the court's mercy," Mr. Timimi told a hushed courtroom filled with more than two dozen Muslims who have rallied around him. "I do this simply because I am innocent."
The federal district judge hearing the case, Leonie M. Brinkema, ordered the life sentence grudgingly, saying she was bound by federal guidelines.
While Judge Brinkema said there was significant evidence that Mr. Timimi had incited his followers toward violence, she said she considered the prison terms mandated by the guidelines under four counts of the conviction to be "very draconian." She said she had no choice but to impose the life sentence after refusing a defense request to set aside the guilty verdicts.
Mr. Timimi, an Iraqi-American cancer researcher who lectured at a mosque in Northern Virginia and circulated his religious writings on the Internet, is the most prominent Muslim prosecuted in connection with what federal prosecutors have labeled the Virginia jihad network.
Prosecutors portrayed Mr. Timimi as a spiritual and intellectual leader of the young men in the network, as they traveled to foreign training camps and prepared to wage a holy war in defense of Islam by playing paintball and gathering weapons and explosives.
Gordon Kromberg, the lead prosecutor in the case for the Justice Department, called Mr. Timimi "a purveyor of hate and war" in court on Wednesday.
"Al-Timimi hates the United States and calls for its destruction," Mr. Kromberg said in urging lifelong imprisonment. "He's allowed to do that in this country. He's not allowed to solicit treason. That's what he did. He deserves every day of the time he will serve."
At one dinner meeting on Sept. 16, 2001, Mr. Timimi told some of the men in the group that it was their Muslim duty to fight for Islam overseas and to defend the Taliban in Afghanistan against American forces, according to testimony at his trial. And in an Internet message in 2003, he described the destruction of the space shuttle Columbia as a "good omen" for Muslims in an apocalyptic conflict with the West.
Defense lawyers for Mr. Timimi argued that his language, while offensive to many, was free speech protected by the First Amendment. At Wednesday's hearing, the defense lawyers used that argument and others in seeking to have the judge set aside the guilty verdicts handed up by a jury in Alexandria in April.
The jury convicted Mr. Timimi on charges of conspiracy, attempting to aid the Taliban, soliciting treason and soliciting others to wage war against the United States, and aiding and abetting the use of firearms and explosives. The last charge carried a mandatory life sentence.
Judge Brinkema said she found the free-speech defense "unpersuasive" and refused to throw out any of the verdicts.
"This was not a case about speech; this was a case about intent," she said, specifically Mr. Timimi's intent to incite others to commit crimes against the United States.
She said the testimony "did strongly support" the legitimacy of the verdicts.
Several Muslim supporters of Mr. Timimi wept as the life sentence was imposed. Mauri Saalakhan, a leader of a Maryland human rights group called the Peace and Justice Foundation, which supports Islamic causes, said outside the courthouse that the sentence was "a tragedy not just for Dr. Timimi but for all of us."
Edward B. MacMahon Jr., one of the defense lawyers, described Mr. Timimi as "a gentle man" and said he was "not a criminal," but Mr. MacMahon acknowledged that the life sentence was the only possible penalty once Judge Brinkema refused to throw out the convictions.
Mr. Timimi delivered to the court an impassioned and often eloquent speech that lasted nearly 10 minutes, touching on Greek and Roman philosophy, religious history and the United States Constitution.
Quoting Aaron Burr, Mr. Timimi said the idea that a cancer researcher like himself would incite his followers to violence was the stuff of "crudities and absurdities." He said that he and other Muslims had been "denied justice" for speaking about controversial religious ideas and that his prosecution reflected an abandonment of an American tradition of protecting individual liberties.
"And that which is exploited today to persecute a single member of a minority," he said, "will most assuredly come back to haunt the majority tomorrow."
Lawyers for Mr. Timimi, who had been free on bond since days after his indictment in September 2004, sought to have him remain out of custody pending his appeals, but Judge Brinkema refused the request.
"It is time," she said in ordering him into custody.
Mr. Timimi thanked the judge, then flashed a smile and waved to relatives in the courtroom as he was led away.
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. The Socialist Party of Oregon has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is the Party endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm