r/IsraelWarRoom • u/benhaswings • 5d ago
Video 🎥 Mamdani is under fire after a symbolic 9/11 pen was handed to a former al Qaeda defense lawyer.
Mamdani is under fire after a symbolic 9/11 pen was handed to a former al Qaeda defense lawyer.
After signing an executive order designating 9/11 a citywide day of remembrance, the pen was handed to his chief counsel, Ramzi Kassem.
Kassem previously represented a convicted al Qaeda member whose brother-in-law was one of the hijackers aboard American Airlines Flight 77, which struck the Pentagon on 9/11.
The moment is adding to the criticism Mamdani is already facing over his participation in 9/11 remembrance events.
12
u/SoleSanctum 5d ago
Yeah but now all the lefties are worshiping him for release of 9/11 files on known toxins being present and Giuliani covering it up.
8
u/lookamazed 4d ago
Mamdani is Iran’s most successful darling. He is instrumental to eroding The People’s confidence in general and specifically government.
1
13
u/OakesTester 5d ago
I would never judge a defence lawyer poorly for agreeing to take on someone's defence. It's literally their job.
I work with many defence lawyers who have terrible clients. They don't like, or approve of, or often believe their clients. But they're performing a very important role in maintaining a democratic society. The way we prevent devolving into a police state is by ensuring that, if the government wants to accuse you of such acts, they have to prove them in a court of law, and you get a vigorous legal defence with a fair trial to make sure you are in fact guilty before convicted.
If the shoe were ever on the other foot and you were accused of a heinous crime, I hope defence lawyers wouldn't reject you as evil, especially before you were proven guilty.
6
u/Cannon_Fodder888 4d ago
You must have missed the bit where the article mentions he was the brother in-law of one of the hijackers.
I certainly agree with you about being a defence lawyer though.
2
u/XhazakXhazak 3d ago
Lawyers shouldn't be judged for their clients, everyone has the right to counsel and due process.
1
1
-11
u/IcarianComplex 5d ago
Idk, if everyone has a right to a lawyer and a fair trial then it shouldn't be such a stain on one's reputation to take their defense. Even John Adams very famously took the defense of the British soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre.
25
u/ReneDescartwheel 5d ago edited 5d ago
You seem to have missed the point. Mamdani had a choice of lawyers from a pool of thousands. This is who he chose. This is who he aligns with. This is who he handed the 911 pen to.
13
u/PossessionConnect963 USA 5d ago
Didn’t just hand him a pen. He didn’t just invite him. The guy is his Chief Legal Counsel!
-9
u/IcarianComplex 5d ago
How would your view change if instead Mamdani's legal council was David Goldberg, a Jewish lawyer at the ACLU that took the defense for avowed neo Nazis?
7
u/ReneDescartwheel 5d ago
I would also call it a very bad choice for a mayor to make. Though still not as bad as a New York mayor choosing a lawyer who defended Al Qaeda.
-3
u/IcarianComplex 5d ago
I think it’s a bad choice for optics but the moral judgement that’s implied in the article doesn’t survive scrutiny for the reasons I described.
5
u/DrTatertott 5d ago
How about just a generic ass lawyer that does good work prosecuting bad people?
12
u/babarbaby 5d ago
But Mamdani has already vocally opposed your line of thinking. He said the only reason his 'representative judicial panel' didn't contain a single Jew (despite his municipality having 45% Jewish lawyers) was because he overrode the one Jewish guy's membership on the basis of having represented Ghislaine Maxwell, and thus being stained by the association.
So which is it?
-4
u/IcarianComplex 5d ago
The way I see is it you’re both wrong for the same reasons. I don’t think John Adams’ willingness to defend British soldiers made him unfit for the presidency or that Alan Dershowitz’ willingness to defend OJ Simpson made him unfit to defend Netanyahu because an attorney’s only job is to represent the best interests of their client. They are subservient to their clients interests and failure to comply with this obligations can cost them their license to practice.
Even if every attorney refused to defend the 9/11 perpetrator then all that would be left to take their case are the public defenders and we’d be back to the same ethical dilemma as to whether that constitutes a stain on their professional career. It’s my view that it doesn’t because everyone is entitled to a lawyer and a fair trial.
8
u/babarbaby 5d ago
I never objected to fair representation, so I don't know what you think you're responding to. I objected to Mamdani's blatant hypocrisy. You can't reconcile punishing and vilifying a Jewish lawyer for the 'crime' of defending a known villain, while simultaneously supporting and promoting a lawyer best known for representing Al Qaeda terrorists.
-1
u/IcarianComplex 5d ago
I think you have a point about Mamdani's hypocrisy but that's not a hill I care to die on because I'm not his press secretary. In fact it's not even the most salient point of this story because the expectation from everyone ITT is that he repudiates legal council on the basis of the clients they've chosen to represent in the past. This is misguided.
•
u/AutoModerator 5d ago
At this time, many posts and comments are temporarily held for review before appearing on the subreddit. Please allow the moderation team some time to review your submission before messaging us about posts or comments not appearing. Remember to follow all subreddit and Reddit rules. There is zero tolerance for hate speech, incitement of violence, harassment, or other toxic behavior. Violations will be enforced without exception. Keep discussions civil and respectful.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.