Don't blame me, I'm just the translator

The WaPo has an interesting story about the conviction of Mohammed Yousry, a translator involved in the Sheikh Abdel Rahman case. The story brings forth the possibility the jury convicted him unfairly, more as a statement verdict to punish terrorists. The trial was held in New York after 9/11.

Yousry was teamed with Radical lawyer Lynne Stewart, who was earlier convicted of trying to help Rahman's cause. The government was not playing around--the Sheikh's words carried considerable weight. Prosecutors felt that as his translator, Yousry must have been aware of his role.

In a nutshell, Stewart, with Yousry's help as translator, was passing messages from Rahman to his flock, using flimsy tactics to obfuscate the intent. In one example Yousry read Rahman letters from his Egyptian followers asking whether to continue their violence. Rahman dictated, "The militants...should not cancel it altogether." However, Stewart later told Reuters the Sheikh was against violence. Four months later a fatwa in Rahman's name was issued calling for the killing of Jews everywhere. People died as a result. Sounds like the ole 180 trick.

The jury probably believed prosectors in that Yousry was just too intelligent not to have known his translation skills were helping the cause. Wretchard weighed in on this last year, as did the London Times. It's understandable some would believe he was being used, but it seems a stretch.

There was no mention of WTC bomber and superterrorist Ramzi Yousef in this story. If Yousry was indeed helping Stewart he belongs in jail, since she was aiding all the followers of Rahman, including Yousef and if Able Danger can be believed, Mohammed Atta.

It's also interesting that Ramsey Clark, involved in Rahman's defense, evidently broke the signed pledge to not allow transmissions from the Sheikh to reach the press. He suffered no consequences, but there was a different adminstration in power at the time. Now Clark is involved with Saddam's defense.

That brings me to a final question. Why would socialist/leftists believe that helping radical fundamentalist jihadists would possibly further their own cause? After all, the fundamentalists desire fascist theocracies that violate women's rights, to name just a few contradictions. Are we left to believe the old saw...the enemy of my enemy is my friend?