In 1999, Sarah Jane Olson lived a quiet, comfortable life in St. Paul, Minn. The mother of three daughters ages 18, 17 and 12, and the wife of Gerald Peterson, an affluent local doctor, Olson was one of her neighborhood's most well-liked members.
One day in June, while driving around the plush Highland Park community in which she lived, Olsen was stopped and arrested by FBI personnel. She was a wanted terrorist.
Come again?
Terrorists don't drive minivans. They don't wave to you as they jog by your house. They do not attend PTA meetings.
Terrorists are supposed to be from the Middle East, right? Or maybe they're disgruntled former military personnel or members of some obscure militia group.
Either way, terrorists are fanatics, aren't they? I mean, they aren't soccer moms whose favorite activities include gardening, running and acting in local theater productions.
In the aftermath of Sept. 11, the United States government has officially declared terrorism to be a "great evil" and has pledged to combat all its forms with the full force that America can muster.
But middle-aged housewives living in suburbia don't constitute a potential threat to the United States, do they?
Well, as anyone who has been following the case is now aware, it turns out that Olson's real name is Kathleen Soliah and that she had been a member of the Symbionese Liberation Army during the turbulent 1970s.
After the group split up, Olson changed her name and went into hiding. Her husband and daughters had absolutely no clue as to her previous life.
Last week, Olson was sentenced to two consecutive 10-years-to-life terms for her role in the planned bombing of two Los Angeles police cars, and she is still facing first degree murder charges, along with four other former members of the SLA, for the killing of an innocent bystander during a botched bank robbery.
Olson will be going to prison for acts she committed 25 years ago. In theory, her incarceration is a triumph for the American legal system and is justice for her past involvement in an American terrorist organization.
I think anyone who examines Olson's case will realize that the issue is not so black and white. First off, sending Olson to jail will be a life-shattering and potentially crippling blow to her three daughters and husband.
Imagine having the person you love more than anything else in the world stripped away from you; it's a pretty sobering thought.
Now, the obvious response to such a sad repercussion is that while unfortunate, Olson has to pay for her deeds, and her family will simply have to absorb the loss. Again, I think Olson's story is not at all clear-cut.
By most accounts, Olson was not the foremost figure of the SLA. Her jail sentence is for aiding and abetting members of her organization who planted bombs under police cars and not the actual construction of the explosives or their placement. Also, her involvement in the notorious bank robbery is rather suspect.
Olson's principle accuser regarding the armed hold-up is Patty Hearst. Most people are familiar with Hearst's bizarre story. Hearst was sentenced to seven years in jail because she drove the getaway car in the 1975 robbery. She claims to have been brainwashed and has since been pardoned. Needless to say, Hearst does not have compelling integrity as a witness.
Hearst has recently been doing the talk show circuit and has been speaking in sensational catch phrases. Earlier this week on "Larry King Live," Hearst declared that in 1975 the SLA had their "own little jihad going." Furthermore, she added that the SLA "planned on forming cells and going on until they started a full-scale war in this country."
Hearst's choice of words is deliberate. She uses the term "jihad," or holy war, with clear intent on drawing parallels from the SLA to Sept. 11 and today's terrorist threat to the United States. After 25 years of embarrassment, during which Hearst frequently refused to talk about the SLA, she has now seized a moment to come forward and appear patriotic.
The definitive word in Olson's case is "terrorist." If Olson had just been living with a gang of California misfits, her life would be completely different now. Even if her friends were bank robbers and even if they threatened the lives of policemen, as long as Olson was an accomplice and not a direct perpetrator, Olson's situation would not be the same.
First, she would not have been found. The FBI discovered her only after spending hundreds of thousands of dollars and placing her on their most wanted list. The FBI doesn't do this for secondary members of a random bank robbery.
Second, even if Olson were to be arrested 25 years later or even if she turned herself in, I think there would be huge public outcry to have her pardoned.
Olson has received huge support from her St. Paul community, whose members depict her as a model citizen. Her family has spoken glowingly of her. At Olson's sentencing, her daughter, Leila, pleaded: "She's one of the best mothers anyone would want."
Can you imagine what Oprah would do with such an emotionally charged courtroom? Can't you just see the compelling case for a pardon? Don't punish this woman because she hung with the wrong crowd when she was a young girl. Don't deprive her family of her love and support.
However, currently Oprah is nowhere to be seen, and Olson is going to jail for a long time. Why? Because she has been branded a "terrorist."
Personally, I can't really say how much sympathy Olson deserves. If one of the 1975 bombs had gone off, it would have killed a police officer--a grave and serious deed.
Olson's case clearly represents the distinct power that the simple association of a person with the word "terrorist" can have. Before Sept. 11, Olson's case would be a footnote; now, though, it is prominently displayed in the headlines.
Nick Christie is a Trinity junior and a sports writer for The Chronicle.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.