Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

The Real Story of John Walker Lindh

By Frank Lindh, AlterNet. Posted January 24, 2006.


After years of almost total silence on his son's arrest and imprisonment, Frank Lindh sets the record straight about the 'American Taliban.'
john

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Frank Lindh

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Editor's Note: The public has heard little about John Walker Lindh since the media frenzy over his capture in the winter of 2001. On January 19, John's father Frank Lindh delivered an address at The Commonwealth Club of California. Lindh explained that he and his family have avoided the press for nearly four years; he now wants the public to understand the truth about his son, who he says didn't stand a chance of getting a fair trial in the emotional days following 9/11. Immediately characterized as a "terrorist" by the press and politicians, Lindh faced a jury in Northern Virginia, just a few miles from the Pentagon. The trial date scheduled by the judge was the anniversary of 9/11. Initially facing 11 criminal counts -- most relating to terrorism -- the only charge that John Lindh was found guilty of was violating economic sanctions by supporting the Taliban government, for which the 20-year-old was sentenced to 20 years in prison. The following is excerpted from Frank Lindh's speech.

I believe the case of John Lindh is an important story and worthy of this audience's attention. In simple terms, this is the story of a decent and honorable young man, embarked on a spiritual quest, who became the focus of the grief and anger of an entire nation over an event in which he had no part. I refer to the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001. The reason I think this story is important is because our system broke down in the case of John Lindh. My goals today are first, just to tell you the story of John Lindh. Second, to ask you to reflect, based on the fact of John's case, on the importance and the fragility of the rights we enjoy under our Constitution. And my third point is to suggest that the so-called war on terrorism lacks a hearts and minds component.

I want to begin by asking you to call to mind the September 11th terrorist attacks and the shock and horror they engendered in the hearts of everyone. On that awful day, a band of terrorists, who claimed Islam as their cause, hijacked four airplanes and flew three of them full of passengers into occupied buildings without warning -- the World Trade Center Twin Towers in New York and the Pentagon in Washington. They crashed the fourth airplane, also filled with passengers, into a field in Pennsylvania. Three thousand innocent Americans lost their lives that day.

But for those attacks, John's activities, which I will describe, would have been treated with indifference, or perhaps curiosity here in the United States. But, viewed through the prism of the September 11th attacks, those very same activities caused this young man to be vilified as a traitor and a terrorist.

Childhood

John was born in February 1981 in Washington, D.C., during a time when I was working for the federal government. He's the second of my three children. John was the kind of kid that any parent would want. From the time he was a baby, he was very centered, peaceful and content. Later, after he converted to Islam, I told John that I thought he had always been a Muslim, and he simply had to find it for himself.

I'm a practicing Catholic myself, and we raised John as a Catholic. He attended Sunday school along with his brother in Washington. In 1991, when John was 10 years old, we moved from the D.C. area to the Bay Area. At age 12, John saw the movie "Malcolm X" by Spike Lee and became deeply interested in Islam. He later wrote in his autobiographical statement for the court, "I had first become interested in Islam during 1993, after becoming aware of the Hajj, in which thousands of Muslims all over the world gather at Mecca, a holy site in Saudi Arabia. I learned that all Muslims are required to make this religious journey at least once in their life. I was very moved by the image of thousands of people praying together. Perfectly equal and perfectly humble. I began to read all that I could about Islam."

When he was 16, John formally converted to Islam at a mosque in Mill Valley in Marin County where we live. An elder at the Mill Valley mosque testified in John's case and wrote a statement for the court in which he said that in all of his experience in knowing Americans who had converted to Islam, "no one has come close to John in the embodiment of piety and of the true noble Islamic character." By the time he was 17, John was ready to embark on a course of studies overseas and he went to Yemen to study Arabic.

Travels in the Middle East

His first trip to Yemen lasted from July of 1998 to May of 1999, and then his visa expired, so he came home for a few months. Then, in February of 2000, just before his 19th birthday, John returned to Yemen to continue his study of classical Arabic and Islam at a school in Sanaa, Yemen. Again, he had visa trouble, so in November of 2000, John made a decision to go to Pakistan and to continue his Islamic study, memorizing the Koran. It's the goal of every scholarly Muslim to memorize the entire Koran verbatim, and John's goal was to become both fluent in Arabic and to memorize the Koran so that he could then go on and become a Muslim scholar. His goal was to attend the Islamic university at Medina in Saudi Arabia or a comparable world-class Islamic university.


Digg!

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
American Journalism
Posted by: Poederbach on Jan 24, 2006 4:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Reading John Linds story is a chilling experience. Reasons to believe why some bullying cowboys and their nodders are running the US is a complete abcense of main stream critical journalism and a well functioning Senate and Congres. The simplicity of denying any nuance but simply hold on to if you are not with us you are against us shows the level of thinking of a 6 years old spoiled child, and these people are judging John? A crital journalist is simplified to a traitor.
The second observation is that democracy in the US system is not working. To much uncontrolled lobbying and to much false emotions are involved. Even old Rome did better.
The US should wake up and realize that they are in a large Holywood set up, many can't make the distinction between fiction and civilized reality. Please wake up out of this night mare. For John I can only say he was very unlucky he was casted in the wrong plot. Hopefuly one day there will be someone that be a real Christian that shows him the other cheek and real justice (no entertainment) can be done. Some Holywood movies do have a happy end so there is hope.

Tom,
Amsterdam

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: American Journalism Posted by: Jimbo
alternet readers know who the real terrorists are
Posted by: karyse on Jan 24, 2006 4:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is one of the most informative articles I've ever read on alternet. The only thing missing is a contact to send a "you are not forgotten" card from Amnesty International.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A difficult subject to respond to but good to get the other side!
Posted by: Pepper on Jan 24, 2006 4:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I guess first, I had read that John's father who wrote this was a corporate attorney at the time and supported GW Bush. Now I don't hold that against him, but I do think it makes his commentary even more powerful because of that fact. I am just curious what took him so long to come out of the dark to give the people the story?

Second of all, I am glad he has chosen to speak out now about the facts of this case and the number of charges that this gov had to drop or plea bargain. It means they had a weak case against him. It also shows the presumption of innocence is long dead and gone in this country.

Third, its a perfect example of the difference in treatment he received as an AMERICAN BEFORE the law was passed called the "Safety Enhancement Act" as opposed to afterward. Had this boy been arrested under the same circumstances under the new act as an AMERICAN, he would have been:

A. Stripped of his American citizenship, then because he is NOT an American, he would not have been afforded all the rights under the Constitution that he received in this case and

B. he would have languished in Gitmo or some other hellhole prison without benefit of counsel, without a trial, without contact with family or even knowledge as to which rendition he was relegated to in Europe or Some other torture country.

C. He may well have been tortured or killed and no one would be the wiser.

I believe his fathers commentary doesn't even begin to touch on the worst of what "could" have happened under this repressive nazi regime.

I am glad though to know there is documentation to the crimes committed by Rumsfeld against this prisoner and the instructions to torture. It will make the prosecution of this crazy piece of filth easier to conduct when the time comes.

I wish to thank his father for the other side of the story and to say that while I am sorry for the injustice his son has received at the hands of our placating press, weakkneed politicians on both sides of the aisle, that I am sorry he had to discover the rapid decline in our Constitutional republic in such a horrible way. I wish he could have seen it earlier like some of the rest of us back before we went into Afganistan.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Freedom & Justice are just words in the USA
Posted by: mizipi on Jan 24, 2006 6:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In October 1989 just a few weeks after the first Pres. Bush gave his War on Drugs speech and held crack cocaine on national TV, I was arrested in upstate New York and charged with smuggling cocaine into the US from Canada. The substance was styptic powder and amazingly it was in my toiletry bag. Under Zero Tolerance, everything except my driver's licence, car tag and the clothes on my back was confiscated. I was treated like a modern day prisoner in Iraq. No one believed me when I said I was innocent. My senators and my congressman refused to help me, even after it was proven by the state of New York that I had no drugs. I was thrown in jail and had my property seized, though I had never been convicted of a crime. No one cares about liberty and justice in our government. It took me months and several thousands of dollars to get my car and the contents in it. I was never apologized to. I was a poor redneck a long way from home and learned that our Constitution is just some words scribbled on a piece of paper a long time ago.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Justuce!
Posted by: Mouna on Jan 24, 2006 6:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Every person who reads John Lindt's father's story of his son's
condemnation before his trial should insist that the New York Times print the entire speech. It is the most graphic and telling story of where this country has devolved. Hate, revenge, condemnation before the fact are sicknesses that become ever more malignant. If the media has the power to influence unthinking minds in such a manipulative manner, we are all lost. "Entertainment" at this level, as the previous responder from the Netherlands pointed out, is an even more insideous malignancy. SHAME!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Justuce! Posted by: RavenSteele
» RE: Justice! Posted by: Mouna
» RE: Justuce! Posted by: Poederbach
Democritus
Posted by: Democritus on Jan 24, 2006 7:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
John Lindh's story provides a cautionary tale. Don't expect your elected representatives or the media to help you seek justice. Why was there such a public outcry against him? It's easy to say that Americans were angry and frustrated by the al-Qaeda attack on the World Trade Center and needed a focus for their wrath. A more sinister reason for the prejudicial statements of public officials made against John was that the Bush administration was bent on war with Iraq and needed to whip up public support for their Middle East adventure. Shame on the media, and shame on Hillary Clinton for taking part in this scheme. The fact that Clinton joined in the piling on is truly a black mark on her reputation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Democritus Posted by: SufiLizard
John Walker Lindh
Posted by: FedUp on Jan 24, 2006 9:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This a quite a story for a loving, concerned father to keep from the world for so many years. It's very moving.
Yet, somehow, the story is missing something..........
I'm going to re-read it before making any comments.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: John Walker Lindh Posted by: Jimbo
The purpose of war
Posted by: ScottP on Jan 24, 2006 9:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The purpose of the war on terror is the same as most wars: to make more wars. Those who gain money and power through warfare take advantage of the emotions of the mob. An honest man going to a restaurant says the reason he's going is to eat a meal. A war profiteer makes a speech about the patriotism of eating in restaurants. Until the public wakes, we will go from one war to the next, from drugs to terror to Iraq to gays to Iran to socialists to Bolivia.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

otto
Posted by: otto on Jan 24, 2006 9:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I thought John was the one arrested on a plane for having explosives in his shoe; I guess I lost this story in all the hype. It's another terrifying example of American injustice today.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: otto Posted by: brunowe
juliasews
Posted by: juliasews on Jan 24, 2006 10:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Reading this article reminds me of why I am subscribed to Alternet! I had no idea that John Lindh was NOT a traitor. I am a typical citizen who has been barraged by mainstream media's biased reports of John's treachery to his country. And although none of the mainstream articles ever answered my questions, which were "how could this young American man have managed to infiltrate and join a clandestine operation like Al Queda and why on earth would he want to do that?" (reasonable questions, aren't they?) it never ocurred to me that the press was not giving me the truth on this subject. Boy was I duped! But I am persistent, and always turn to Alternet to find the deeper truth about events. Thanks for the great work you do to help us keep our heads above the slime that passes for "news" in this country! And I especially appreciate the thoughtful responses from readers that add even more useful information to the articles. Reading Alternet is like attending a radical "world affairs" college course for an hour each morning, complete with seminar at the end.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: juliasews Posted by: launcher
Ask yourself: Isn't catching a 'traitor' going to sell more papers than ...
Posted by: Sojourner on Jan 24, 2006 10:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...just another bureaucratic boondoggle? Of course.

Just drive the streets and notice how traffic comes to a stop so the Lookeeloo's can relish the blood.

We are a sick people. So sick that we find pleasure in others' misery. The press just gives us what we want.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Listen to this
Posted by: Jhodes on Jan 24, 2006 11:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You should listen to this speech rather than read it. The emotion in his voice is very moving. There are also some things left out in the text version and a Q&A at the end. I just wish he had come out with it sooner and maybe the Dems could have pressed Alito more on his views of Hamdi v Rumsfeld.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

John Walker Lindh
Posted by: FedUp on Jan 24, 2006 11:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have a question: Why did John decide to go to Pakistan, after studying in Yemen? Why didn't he select Egypt, Syria, or perhaps Jordan? What do these aforementioned countries lack, that he felt was available in Pakistan?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: John Walker Lindh Posted by: djisabella
» RE: John Walker Lindh Posted by: FedUp
» RE: What the hell does it matter? Posted by: Againstthewindwalking
» RE: John Walker Lindh Posted by: jonathanw
And yet...
Posted by: jamester on Jan 24, 2006 11:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When John was on "sentry duty" with his loaded AK-47, if American forces had advanced upon his position, what action would he have felt committed to at that time? I don't want to sound like a reactionary zealot, but he decided to take up arms in service to a foreign government, which eventually directly opposed American policy (and American troops). It lead to some dreadful consequences (and I most emphatically do not support the "war"!), but lost in all of his mistreatment by our country (and in our name), mightn't Dad suggest John might have made a mistake, even if of youthful enthusiasm for his spiritual quest? If I had gone to join the Vietnamese in opposition to US troop during that war, which I believe would have been the "more moral" trigger to pull, if fight I must, would I not still have been a traitor to my country? If I was caught with the VC, would I be less a traitor if I hadn't fired my rifle?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: And yet... Posted by: FedUp
» RE: And yet... Posted by: djisabella
» RE: And yet... Posted by: brunowe
» And Yet, History Buffs Posted by: limestone
» RE: And Yet, History Buffs Posted by: brunowe
A Father's Viewpoint
Posted by: bookwoman on Jan 24, 2006 12:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can understand why Mr. Lindh is upset about what happened to his son. However, may I point out a few things. It was my understanding that John Walker Lindh, because he was working in the same vincinity as bin Laudin, was privy to the fact that "something big" was going to happen in the United States. Even if this was just rumor, threats about Yr, 2000 had been made, and people had been arrested trying to smuggle explosives across the Canadian border at that time. John Lindh never made any attempt to warn anyone about this what he heard in Afghanistan. Given the response to other warnings, he may have been ignored. However, at least he would have tried. His priorities seem to have been very clear.

Mr. Lindh states that his son's activities would have been treated as just another young man's search for "truth" and would have been ignored if it wasn't for 9/11. I would agree with him on that. The reason that the 9/11 attackers were so successful was that our whole country was not paying attention to what was going on.

To act as if the Taliban was a benevolent Muslim group is a bit naive. They were a violent group of Mujahadeen who had broken away from the main force after the war with the Soviet Union ended, and they had taken control of the all but the northern most portion of Afghanistan. Their rule was known for its violence and "take no prisoners" policies which beat anyone not agreeing with them into submission. These policies were especially harsh against women, many of who died, simply because they had no clothing or male escorts to accompany to doctors or hospitals. This brings me to another point - the anger of the Northern Alliance. On September 10, 2001, I heard a radio report about how the leader of the Northern Alliance was blown up, in his home, by two Al Quaida members posing as newspaper reporters. Gee, let me think, might that have made the Northern Alliance troops a little on edge.

The Al Quaida had found a home with the Taliban. They shared a propensity for using violence in getting what they wanted. I am sorry Mr. Lindh thinks his son got a bad deal. I think, in getting his bad deal, he shares the fate of the 3,000 men, women and children who were killed when the Al Quaida members on those four planes completed their mission. If one lays down with dogs, one will probably get up with fleas.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A Father's Viewpoint Posted by: djisabella
» Hindsight/Foresight Posted by: limestone
» RE: A Father's Viewpoint Posted by: cold2touch
Listen to this
Posted by: Jhodes on Jan 24, 2006 12:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You should listen to this speech rather than read it. The emotion in his voice is very moving. There are also some things left out in the text version and a Q&A at the end. I just wish he had come out with it sooner and maybe the Dems could have pressed Alito more on his views of Hamdi v Rumsfeld.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

American justice isn't blind, just squinty eyed
Posted by: cold2touch on Jan 24, 2006 12:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
John Lindh may have been naive, he may have been idealistic or bloodthirsty. What is relevant is that he acted on the same essential impulse as American born Jewish "settlers" who go over to Occupied Territories with view of earning a few Palestinian scalps. However, they board planes at the JFK airport in full battle dress, their automatics loaded. Do they get John Lindh treatment by DOJ or press? You gotta be kidding. And that, more than anything exposes the pit of slime America has become.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Good points, all, and yet...
Posted by: jamester on Jan 24, 2006 2:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I guess my real question is (or point was), there's gotta be a risk any time you align with a foreign power. If I'd romantically joined the French Foreign Legion on Sept 10, 2001, and Dick Chaney had been just a leetle bit more peeved, and gone that teensy step past "Freedom Fries" to invasion of France...well, as I'm standing armed on the Maginot Line, do I not share in some responsiblity for my predicament?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Lackawanna Sleeper Cell
Posted by: Maryanne on Jan 24, 2006 5:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
President Bush has often commented on his success in protecting America by having located and imprisoned a sleeper cell that existed in Lackawanna, NY.

The following information, is based, to the best of my recollection, on what was available to the public on the news and in the papers at the time.

The Lackawanna boys were ordinary young men, typical of their classmates and most just had graduated from high school; some had recently married, one I think had young children. Lackawanna is very ethnic, a poor area economically since the steel mills and auto plants no longer provide employment. These young men, apparently quite religious, were influenced by a visiting religious at their Mosque to seek more religious training in the Middle East. Who paid their way is suspect since their circumstances do not indicate that they had the means for such a trip.

A trip to the Middle East was not illegal at the time. Young, naive and influenced by the religious leader, they somehow ended up in a military training camp. The oldest in the group, suspecting something very wrong, concocted an excuse to get out which was accepted, but the others were not so fortunate.

When they returned home, they were soon under surveillance, eventually arrested, and jailed, pending trial. Ultimately they settled with plea bargains.

However the attorney for one of the young men reported that these young men were told that if they did not plead guilty (with resultant 15 years or so in prison), they would go to trial, be found guilty and be put to death. The attorney said that they were terrified and, facing the alternative, pled guilty.

I have a vague recollection that one of them may have remained in the Middle East (apparently had family in Yemen). He was sought out and his car was bombed from the air by the US. So he did not even have the option of a trial. Nothing was done about the "religious" leader who influenced them to take this trip. He left the area to speak at other Mosques.

This incident seems to follow in the same pattern as that of John Lindt.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A confused young man surely, but not entirely innocent
Posted by: seltzer on Jan 24, 2006 7:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
John Lindh may have had noble intentions and been on a "spiritual quest," but he made some pretty poor decisions after going to Pakistan. Why did he feel the need to acquire basic training from the Taliban? I might remind Alternet readers that the Taliban are a group of Islamofacists who have imprisoned their wives and daughters behind burkhas and in a state of perpetual slavery. No, Lindh wasn't a terrorist, and he was undoubtedly mistreated, but he was also associating with some of the cruelest people on the planet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Never said John Lindh is not accountable
Posted by: Poederbach on Jan 25, 2006 4:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am the first poster to this thread and reading all your arguments gave me the idea that some posters think I meant to point out that John Lindh is not accoutable for where he was, there and then, why he was there and what he did, of course he is.
His story has two sides and he has the right in a civilized society to have the truth exposed (which means the outcome is somewhere beteem the one and the other story) It could mean he has not commited any crime at all. You are innocent unles the opposite will be proved.

If you are in a bank and the bank is robbed at that time, does not automatically imply that you have commited the crime by just being on the crime scene. There need to be proof even if your fingerprints are all over the place this is no proof at all. You have to come with something better. Witnesses do lie (something which is common practice in the US government, I hear) material proof can not lie (Gill Grisom, Las Vegas Crime Lab), just wrongly interpreted or manipulated (that is another crime), in case of doubt you are innocent still.

My experience with what I see comming out of the US that you have problems with what truth is and to handle that. Because some want it to be different, and this is politics, the dirtiest game in te world. Journalism plays an important role here, but journalism is no judge, but unfortunalely a larger part of US journalism judges, for various reasons, emotion, just being stupid, entertainment, story told this way makes money, just nodding what people like to hear. That has very little to do in finding the truth. But I explained that already in my first post.

No power ( governemental, military), however awsome can withstand the power of truth and every illusion, however grand, eventually runs up against reality.
Someone said that on the web and I fully agree. Sad thing however that there are powers that can delay the finding of the truth.

Tom,
Amsterdam

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

American citizen
Posted by: Smokey5 on Jan 25, 2006 11:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I guess I was not caught in the Bush "terrorist fear factor" that seemed to be so hypnotic to so many Americans. After Mr. Bush was appointed to head our country illegally I knew who I should be worried about . I saw the television show where John was on the gurney being treated by a doctor and I almost cried that he was being allowed to have the reporter question him. John was suffering and weak and on pain medicine: But his big prblem was that he was like a little kid having been "saved" by friendly people and he could speak freely. It was so sad! It was the Media without any consciense just after a story! I so wanted to write to him and apologize for my countrymen's behavior and let him know "not in my name" (which I have to say a lot now).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Still not the truth
Posted by: nptexas on Jan 26, 2006 12:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It looks like everyone who read this dad's story as gospel overlooked the OTHER article that was on the same AlteNet page about the journalist from CNN and his eye-witness account of the entire arrest and detainment of the traitor Lindh. Now I can't even find that article on the site. That story refutes just about everything in John Lindh's fantasy. I'm surely no Bush fan, and have been against the war from the outset. But there is more to this whole episode than Daddy's spin.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Still not the truth Posted by: AndyG
» RE: Still not the truth Posted by: jonathanw
Maybe, I can help a little
Posted by: rmj on Jan 29, 2006 5:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I never believed that John was guilty. My heart goes out to John and his whole family. Frank, this case needs more coverage. If I can help by interviewing you , please contact me.
rosemarie jackowski Bennington, Vermont

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Revolution, the need for a slave revolt.
Posted by: Spinoza on Jan 30, 2006 3:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Capitalist Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.


It is time that Americans stood up for liberty.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No sympathy here . . .
Posted by: JohnieTaliban on Feb 9, 2006 6:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Regardless of whatever "innocent" circumstances led up to the event, John Lindh was found as a participant in an armed revolt against his captors, which included US agents. There were a lot of poor decisions that Lindh had to make to come to that place, so I'm struggling to feel to sorry for him.

I cannot help but wonder if Frank Lindh is doing his son any favors by making excuses for him--at some point the boy should learn to take responsibility for his actions. But giving lessons in accountability does not seem to be Mr. Lindh's strong suit. This is the man who reportedly left his family to live with another man, as reported by the San Franciso Examiner. What kind of impact did that have on a teenage boy? And within a year, John Lindh has an "identity crisis" of his own? Surprise, surprise . . .

And why was the boy permitted to study abroad without parental supervision at the age of 17? His father cared so little, he admits he didn't even know his son's whereabouts in 2001. I'm sorry, folks, exaclty what kind of household was this?

I'm sorry to hear that an enemy combatant was abused at the hands of our troops (not really, but let's pretend). But it was hardly the first crime against poor little Johnny. Not that parental neglect excuses him. I'm not sure what his father is complaining about . . . Lindh got a 20 year sentence in a plea bargain he agreed to, and he could be out of prison before this decade ends. That's a slap on the wrist for someone who could have faced the death penalty.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: No sympathy here . . . Posted by: jonathanw
And then they came for me...
Posted by: dee.halz on Mar 6, 2006 6:46 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When they rounded up immigrant Muslims there was no hue and cry. When they rounded up Americans who had converted to Islam , there was no hue and cry. They were, in fact, pilloried in the press. And then we got the PATRIOT ACT and now none of us are as free as we were when we were born. I do not recognize this country that Bush and his cohorts are creating.

I suspect, remembering how viciously they went after that lawyer from the Northwest on the basis of mistaken evidence, that John Walker Lindh's biggest offense was one for which they could not try him--he converted from Christianity to Islam. That would certainly explain former A G Ashcroft's misbehavior. The Muslim chaplain whose case was trumped up was also a convert.

The article leaves me frustrated at the inability to do much of anything about the injustice of it all. I think we should all forward the article to our Congressional Representatives and Senators and demand justice.

Dee

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

wars are between countries, not people
Posted by: jonathanw on Mar 29, 2006 10:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
john lindh was not against the united states and did not intend harm, and the harm that was done was done by another's hand, i understand why american press made such a huge error on judging this man, but now they need to make up for it and the american government owes john an apology

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A certain slant of light
Posted by: waiting-for-lefty on Jun 20, 2006 11:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Everything we know about Lindh has been passed through a narrow filter, and the slant of every story seems to "engage" the question of whether or not you can trust Americans to find out about the world on their own, or whether they risk being traitors if they do not come on strong as "patriots."

I have doubts that John Walker Lindh is anything but an actor playing a part, serving to frame the argument for the Pentagon and the neocons that we are in a war all around the world and that Americans had better watch out who they get involved with. Yes, yes, you nod, or you might get twenty-to-life like Lindh. Or the firing squad.

I would think that in a world in which dead CIA appear on a wall as anonymous stars, it is a little funny to find a Mike Spann actually named and filmed during an interrogation for all the world to see, and then to blame it on a kid. Doesn't fit.

Even the history of this supposed "traitor" is a little too cute by half. We are supposed to blame Marin and the permissive lifestyle, when in fact his naissance was the Beltway of DC (if it was).

The Lindh story is bullshit. His lovely arms (when he is caught with that dirty face) are white, fishbelly white. The fact it that if you are in Afghanistan with a complexion like that, the sunlight goes right through your clothes and toasts you like a marshmallow. Anyone who has spent any extended time in a desert climate knows how this works.

Since our leaders are great liars and propagandists, it would behoove us not to fall for their "discussions" of what is and isn't treason. They are the traitors, but maybe they do not even have the brains to know it. They betrayed us into a war on false premises. They flout the Constitution. They give New Orleans as an example of how to treat Americans when given all the power of FEMA. If you catch the hook baited with cute little Johnny Walker, you are stupid.

Wag the Dog is more real than most of us like to think.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is another side to this story
Posted by: pgw on Jul 8, 2006 6:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of course, there is more than one side to a given story. Here is an account by Robert Young Pelton (the CNN journalist who "unethically" interviewed Lindh when he was captured) disputing much of what Lindh senior has to say in the above article. Here is a response by Jonny Spann, father of Mike Spann, the Marine interrogator killed in the prison uprising that Lindh took part in.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is another side to this story
Posted by: pgw on Jul 8, 2006 6:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of course, there is more than one side to a given story. Here is an account by Robert Young Pelton (the CNN journalist who "unethically" interviewed Lindh when he was captured) disputing much of what Lindh senior has to say in the above article. Here is a response by Jonny Spann, father of Mike Spann, the Marine interrogator killed in the prison uprising that Lindh took part in.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]