May 7, 2012, - 12:50 pm

Cheryl Bormann: Gitmo Defense Lawyer Wears Hijab, Demands Other Women Cover Up to Respect 9/11 Terrorists

By Debbie Schlussel

I’d call her, “Al-Bitch.” But to be technical and use the language of the terrorists, Cheryl Bormann is a kalbeh [Arabic for dog] and a dhimmi.

In case you thought members of the legal profession couldn’t sink any lower, check out the photo, below, of Bormann, lawyer for one of the Islamic terrorists on trial at Guantanamo Bay for their roles in the 9/11 hijackings and mass murder of 3,000 Americans.  She represents Walid bin Attash, a Yemeni who ran Al-Qaeda terrorist training camps and researched flight simulators and timetables to help perpetrate the attacks.

Cheryl Bormann: Clown Dhimmi of the Gitmo Bar

Cheryl Bormann, 52, who represents Walid bin Attash, said that her client had demanded she wear the clothing and insisted that other women at the hearing also wear ‘appropriate’ clothes out of respect for his religion.


She further requested that the court order other women to follow that example so that the defendants do not have to avert their eyes “for fear of committing a sin under their faith.”

At a press conference Sunday at Guantanamo Bay, Bormann said she dresses in a hijab at “all times” when she meets with her client “out of respect” for his beliefs. . . .

Bormann, who is not Muslim, claimed the issue came up several years ago, when a paralegal wore “very short skirts” and it became a distraction for the defendants. She said that on Saturday, “somebody” was also dressed “in a way that was not in keeping with my client’s religious beliefs.”

“If because of someone’s religious beliefs, they can’t focus when somebody in the courtroom is dressed in a particular way, I feel it is incumbent upon myself as a counsel to point that out and ask for some consideration from the prosecution,” she said. “Suffice to say it was distracting to members of the accused.”

Yup, that’s Islam. The men can’t take it upon themselves to control their impulses. The women–even on American soil (and the U.S. Naval Base at Gitmo is, indeed, American soil)–must cover themselves completely up, lest someone’s hair or ear’s turn them on.  In Islam, there is no personal responsibility and discipline, contrary to popular belief.  Instead, it’s just women who “deserve to be raped” because they are “unwrapped meat,” as several prominent Muslim imams around the world have declared.  And Ms. Bormann’s display is just more pandering to that backwards world that is quickly, rapidly expanding on U.S. soil beyond Gitmo.

Again, as I always say, the West v. Islam ain’t a clash of civilizations. Because that assumes that the latter is, in fact, a civilization.

The evidence proves otherwise. As do the silly, chutzpahdik pronouncements of this jihadist’s dhimmi lawyer-ette.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

46 Responses

a clown rather than attorney

pat on May 7, 2012 at 1:07 pm


1) these Muslim turds should have been tried in a MILITARY court (you can thank cocoa coa puff Eric Holder for that one).
2) if their counsel wants to wear the Ninja suit that’s fine but keep your Third World pie holes shut about any other Western women. We dpn’t follow Islam here dumdasses.
3) what is in the Islamo-nogen to want to come to the West when they know they’ll be offended? What’s up with that?
4) don’t want to hit this one too hard but F… Islam!

ex mossad on May 7, 2012 at 1:10 pm

Maybe this baghead wannabe should live in a Muslim country where she has to wear one of those cloth coffins all the time…out of respect for her terrorist clients.

Rocky Lore on May 7, 2012 at 1:14 pm

Just one more reason why criminal defense attorneys are the lowest form of human life.

Red Ryder on May 7, 2012 at 1:18 pm


    Are you a defense Attorney?

    Mike on May 8, 2012 at 10:26 am

…and keep young boys out of the courtroom as well. Just sayin’.

Kent on May 7, 2012 at 1:19 pm

Lady Gaga should show up to one of these hearings in one of her meat outfits – I think a bacon wrapped mini skirt would be appropriate.

Jarhead on May 7, 2012 at 1:22 pm

Well, if their eye offends them because they see a beautiful woman, then they should pluck out the eye. eh?

jake49 on May 7, 2012 at 1:36 pm

    How many near naked women do they see on TV at Gitmo?

    And why is it Christian, Jewish and Hindu men can control themselves around women who are not modestly dressed but Muslim men can’t?

    Then there is the irony of a woman attorney defending misogynistic male barbarians. Sure, even male barbarians merit a defense since what they take to be our weakness is actually our strength – but full blown dhimmitude?

    C’mon – especially in regards to Islam there should be limits!

    NormanF on May 7, 2012 at 1:47 pm

In addition, if this clownery on the part of the defendents continues then gag them and put them in a room with a TV monitor.

jake49 on May 7, 2012 at 1:38 pm

Yup. We must conform to them while they don’t have to be modest.

Hey, Debbie – I’m wondering what those Gitmo terrorists porn stash is and odds are good Bormann knows about it but doesn’t care.

Just sayin’.

NormanF on May 7, 2012 at 1:42 pm

Good.points ex-mossad.
What if these terrorist suspects were required to wear full Christian regalia, crosses etc, while in court or be stood up in front of a firing squad if they refused? Wonder how they would like that?

It is also said that the worshipers of the Moon god are disrupting proceedings while in court. This trial could go on for years. At tax payer expense of course and running into millions of dollars.


Charles Johnson, Mental Patient on May 7, 2012 at 1:52 pm

Why are not these Islamic pigs not bullwhipped first and that should have been a long time ago.
Jefferson Davis, Sam Davis, and numerous other leaders of the Cinfederacy were bullwhipped,hanged, and treated far more harshly than these Islamic pigs.

Confederate South on May 7, 2012 at 1:57 pm

I think the judge should allow bikinis in the courtroom, just this once.

Occam's Tool on May 7, 2012 at 1:58 pm

Seriously, he deserves no consideration for his religious beliefs on this score. Women should be allowed to dress in the courtroom in courtroom normal clothes, which are business suits or appropriate dresses in all the courts I have ever been in, which are quite a lot as an expert witness. Screw him.

Occam's Tool on May 7, 2012 at 2:00 pm

Mama Cass in a g-string should be walking around in there. Brushing up against them.

Charles Johnson, Mental Patient on May 7, 2012 at 2:05 pm

Better yet, the judge should be a woman of middle age and should conduct the trial topless, having one beast larger than the other and both hanging downward like a pair of socks.

Charles Johnson, Mental Patient on May 7, 2012 at 2:08 pm

oops, that’s breast, not beast.

Charles Johnson, Mental Patient on May 7, 2012 at 2:12 pm

Cheryl Bormann is a buffoon.

DS_ROCKS! on May 7, 2012 at 2:46 pm

If this so called attorney will bow to wearing “appropriate clothes” for her pig dog client, I wonder if she will allow him to have sex with her after he murders her?

Hey babe, he believes in that too. You idiot.

Panhandle on May 7, 2012 at 2:51 pm

Given that Bormann is in court without a male relative as her “escort”, and Attash no doubt find that “offensive” as well, why doesn’t Bormann have one of her male colleagues represent this client? Then again, consistency isn’t something we expect from a dim-witted and dhimmified liberal.

Raymond in DC on May 7, 2012 at 3:02 pm

Looking @ her photo above, I don’t blame her for wearing a hijab. It’s probably out of envy that she demands that other women wear it as well, or else, why would anyone in their right mind expect relatives of the victims to respect Islam?

If the jihadis lose their case here, is it over, or do they get an OJ like trial within the US? I thought that thanks to SCOTUS and Jihad McCain, military trials weren’t allowed.

Infidel on May 7, 2012 at 3:15 pm

These scumbag terrorists, Thanks to our Islam appologist POTUS and AG, are now once again making a mockery of the United States. It’s bad enough that these freaks were responsible for 9-11. They get to stay at GITMO were they get prayer rugs,korans,three good meals(in a just world pig meat)and a new playgroud. All funded by guess who the taxpayer. Now this devils get to have their day in court. Enter exhibit D. An emptyheaded terrrorist loving Islamic wannabe lawyer. Cheryl Boremann is the epitome of why people hate defense attorneys. Look here sister. If you want to wear a rag on your head that is your business. Just do not expect the following to happen:
1. For regular people to not think that your not a total moron and aren’t easily swayed by douchebags in sheets.
2. For any American, except for the really dumb ones (liberals) to feel sorry for or give a rats ass about your client.
3. And lastly with your actions making us feel compassion for Islam and crazy killer Muslims.
Because in the just world that I mentioned eariler. These pathetic lower than whale crap scum sucking worms wouldn’t even get a trial. They’d have met the same fate as USS Cole bombing mastermind Fahid al Quso and Osama bin Laden.

Ken b on May 7, 2012 at 3:23 pm

To call said defense attorney confused would be generous in the extreme. She wants to honor their “religion”, does she? How much does she think they appreciate a woman attorney? Who hasn’t noticed by now that catering to these demons, hellbent on world domination, offers them reassurance of the effectiveness of their evil beliefs and tactics? Time and again the Islamic beasts are lobbed a wiffle ball to contrast with their dead serious game of hardball. They’re offered good will in one feeble way or another to which their response, “submit…or else”, is as predictable as a liberal’s appeasement reflex.
Her client was complicit in the murder of 3000 innocent people. Perhaps their Sharia law would be best honored by stoning them to death. Devil attire would be most appropriate for pleading his (nut) case.
Witness here the Liberal mindset: Appease, grovel, make nice to our committed stone-cold enemy.
My one complaint about Debbie’s post. It should have begun with a barf alert.

lee, of the lower case "l" on May 7, 2012 at 3:38 pm

Let’s see. If the Amalekite Walid bin Attash is “a good Muslim,” it follows that mass murder is a part of Islam. In which case, the “religion” hardly deserves respect. Alternatively, if Attash is not a good Muslim, we hardly need to “worry” about uncovered women.

This aside, I wonder where the US caselaw or statute(s) are that permit the court to allow this ridiculous request by defense.

skzion on May 7, 2012 at 4:18 pm

It will be interesting to see how the judge rules. Debbie, in a military tribunal, is it a judge or a magistrate or just the highest ranking officer? Anyway, I wonder if Bozobama will require whoever is running this trial to comply with Sharia law? If the judge is a military officer, he could. Personally, I think that the judge should just say that normal rules of dress will apply just as they would at any other trial. If the defendants can’t control themselves, they could be excused from the room and watch on CCTV.

Another question Debbie, isn’t it customary for a defense attorney to ask for all kinds of outrageous things in pre-trial hearings at high profile trials? Maybe this is a ploy on the part of this attorney who doesn’t really expect the judge to rule in her favor on this, but that maybe by ruling against this – and having to endure the faux outrage by the “Muslim community” – he will be more inclined to rule in her favor on other things her clients want. Just curious about trial strategy.

Frankly, I can’t believe these “defendants” would be winning to have a female attorney. I wonder who is paying her, and I wonder if she has any idea what her “client” says about her behind her back.

DG in GA on May 7, 2012 at 5:37 pm

Why the hell should anyone care if they “offend” Muslims by failing to dress according to their standards? They’re on OUR soil — and for ulterior purpose of destroying our nation.
If we do offend them, well…good!

Piety, in all forms, is the enemy of laughter. Hopefully, we can muster the courage to laugh at the ridiculously self-dhimmified, self-promoting Ms. Bormann.

Seek on May 7, 2012 at 5:38 pm

Ms. Bormann sounds like a real drip to me.

Ghostwriter on May 7, 2012 at 5:49 pm

If a person is half naked and there is no bath nearby means (s)he’s ready for bed, so if it’s in public (s)he’s not sure which stranger to go with, sooner or later (s)he’ll find one or the one… then there are those bare breasted baristas selling coffee with or without milk, double exposure to double their tips… Some ladies are attractive enough for a muslim or unintentionally get one… first they attract them then they get or may have to get into a “bag” with them, some like it some don’t, that’s the life of a liberal… the whole pair-a-leg-al and legal system is an extracurricular activity in ethics, mini skirts for self control tests, so now bags to limit or prevent all that private ecstasy in public places –all these millions of strangers to choose from and bare breasted baristas didn’t see their messiah cuming?!

Oleg Gielman on May 7, 2012 at 6:01 pm

bush should have wrung them out like a wet dish cloth then tossed them out of a c-130 over the gulf with bad he lost his nerve because of the communist media.i think my great neice should be the judge because she lost her husban to ragheads who were surpose to be on our side.pisslam and communisim should be outlawed and all members forced to leave america with in 24hrs after passage of said law.if they try to stay then it will be stand your ground against all ragheads and commies.

BRUCE on May 7, 2012 at 6:38 pm

I would say ‘Al-Cunt’ is more fittingly used here.

#1 Vato on May 7, 2012 at 6:42 pm

You can thank every Progressive hippy 60’s freak for the mishagas and utter outrage that this trial is.

The Moooooooslim pigs on trial are playing USA for the silly fool it is. Using our own PC vomitous ways against us.

The 60’s were NOT the answer and Liberalism is the disease that will kill us all.

Skunky on May 7, 2012 at 7:37 pm

i’m a nudist attorney

not only do i demand
the right to be nude
in court

i demand that everyone else
in the room be nude also

so that i am not offended
by their clothing

prestigio on May 7, 2012 at 8:58 pm

Cheryl Bormann is an Al-Idiot.

JeffE on May 7, 2012 at 9:46 pm

Well there might be an upside to this nonsense, she and other libtards like her will be the first the savages turn on and kill, Darwin loves a winner, then we can get on to the business to eliminate this scourge once and for all.

Drakken on May 7, 2012 at 10:31 pm

Cheryl Bormann

You are a cuntemptible piece of islamic shit. Carma will catch you baby.

jim obrien on May 7, 2012 at 10:43 pm

Debbie I would like to retain your services. I only require that you wear a Detroit Lions cheerleader outfit when meeting with me. Also please note that bras offend me.

A1 on May 7, 2012 at 11:16 pm

Why should the religious sensibilities of men who have already admitted to their crimes in the past be catered to? Punishment does entail not being able to do all of the things one was able to do while free. Bormann is an inane drone and misogynist. Finally, the defendants should have been shackled and returned ot their cells as soon as they started their childish antics, rather than being indulged in them.

Worry01 on May 8, 2012 at 5:20 am

A good argument for never taking prisoners on the battlefield.

Jo on May 8, 2012 at 10:28 am


Ron Wolf aka "Columbo" on May 8, 2012 at 12:29 pm

    Why are you using capital letters in your post? Does screaming make your incoherent ravings any more coherent? You might try posting again after the intoxicants that you have consumed wear off.

    Worry01 on May 8, 2012 at 3:44 pm

I’d like to take “the appropriate clothes” and insert them firmly up her ignorant, unctious ass.

JeffT on May 8, 2012 at 1:59 pm

This greatly disturbs me as a Soldier who worked in the camps in GTMO. If this lawyer gets her way, how much longer will it be until they force female guards to do the same so the prisoners are not “offended”. Absolute ridiculousness.

lisa on May 8, 2012 at 5:29 pm


Ken b on May 8, 2012 at 8:03 pm

I am surprise that leftist will bend over for requests from Muslims. Their arguement of seperation of church and state seems to go away when Muslims demand that they not be “offended” in any way. I am wondering if this woman would do the same if a Catholic asks her to wear a crucifix or open the court with a prayer? Liberals/lefties/progressives are big hypocrites and what is sad many can not see it or are unwilling to admit that they are.

Al Sayyid on May 9, 2012 at 3:37 am

I do not know what to say. Americans are acting stupid at every level; personal or governmental. Now we have treachery and treason lurking in the State Department and in the White House. How can Americans be that stupid, I do not have a clue.
Sadley both parties fell prey to the Saudis ploys. I have no idea who to vote for any more. Bush hands the Saudis America’s foreign policy and Obanam/Clintonopen the doors of our intelligence and defense for the Islamists to roam in. Huma Abdine is now running America wirth her i don’t know what!
And please tell thes sucide bombers that G-D does not have a brother up there for these idiots to enjoy sex and get drunk there. I am baffled how can any intelligent person believe this junk. By the way your enemies were hacking your site today. It took me a long time to break through.

I asked you yesterday to tell me ; Why would Moslem Huma Abdine go sufragette and marry a Jewish lawyer???? Not that I care about this but because I know that she is a Saudie Moslem Sister and Moslems would kill any girl that marries outside Islam. There is something there.

G. R. Scharoubim on July 20, 2012 at 3:14 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field