Najibullah Zazi, the Afghan American the U.S. government says was involved in a plot to detonate a bomb in New York City, has agreed to a plea deal, according to the Associated Press. In anticipation of the expected pro-lawlessness complaints of conservatives about this development, I offer this prebuttal:
Zazi never would have gotten a plea deal if he had been put in military detention. Wrong, Australian David Hicks, who fought alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan, copped to a plea deal in the midst of his military commissions trial in 2007. He was one of three cases the military commissions actually tried.
We're losing out on intelligence because of this plea deal. Theoretically possible, but not supported by previous examples. As Ken Gude from the Center for American Progress notes, plea bargains are effective in soliciting accurate information because they provide incentives to cooperate that can be taken away. You can't "un-torture" someone. The recruitment efforts of the al-Qaeda affiliated Al-Shabaab have been disrupted with the aid of cooperating witnesses. American Mohammed Babar, who pleaded guilty in 2004 to providing assistance al-Qaeda, has since provided "detailed knowledge of Al Qaeda plans and training camps in South Waziristan, Pakistan" as well as testifying in terror trials abroad. Moreover, according to the AP, Zazi has already "volunteered information to federal prosecutors about an alleged plot to attack New York City with homemade bombs."
B-b-b-but Miranda Rights! After failed underwear bomber Umar Abdulmutallab was taken into custody, he was interrogated until he stopped talking. He was subsequently read his Miranda rights. Since then, he's reportedly revealed the existence of other al-Qaeda plots utilizing English-speaking terrorists. He wasn't the first, and he won't be the last person taken into criminal custody who has subsequently provided important intelligence information.
Zazi's going to get off easy now; he wouldn't if he had been in military custody. Nope. As Gude points out John Walker Lindh, who, as a Taliban fighter, committed offenses similar to those of Hicks, got a substantially larger sentence from a civilian court than Hicks did from a military commission. Hicks was free after a nine-month sentence plus six years time served in detention, Lindh got 20 years. Lindh reportedly wasn't very happy about the disparity.
-- A. Serwer
