I'm not sure you're answering my question. Did you, yourself, know prior
to
Sept. 11th, that support of the Taliban was also support of Al Qaeda and
that AQ was responsible for those acts of terrorism? It's not as if much
of
our news media was covering the Taliban. And if you, yourself, knew this,
do you also think that Walker also undoubtedly did? I have a very hard
time
believing that more than a very small number of people would have known.
For myself, I don't think I had even heard of Al Queda, couldn't have come
up with bin Laden's name, though I'm sure I saw news reports, and didn't
know much about what was going on in Afghanistan. Sadly. (And still have
trouble spelling some of these names...)
Nick
I think you're missing the point, Nick. He wasn't just a Taliban supporter
- although I should point out that _everyone_ in Afghanistan knew that Bin
Laden was closely linked to the Taliban, as he was very much a public
figure. In fact, Bin Laden's official position was Inspector General of
the Taliban Army. I certainly knew that supporting the Taliban was
supporting Al Qaeda before the attacks (although I was not aware of the
extent to which that was the case until after 9/11) and, from reading the
accounts of people in Afghanistan, that seems to have been common knowledge
within the country, although not within the general populace of the United
States. Bin Laden and Mullah Omar were, for example, widely known to be
close personal friends.
All of that, however, is immaterial. Walker apparently trained in an Al
Qaeda training camp. He was a member of Al Qaeda, not just a supporter of
the Taliban, to the extent that those things are distinguishable. He
apparently fought as an Al Qaeda member in Kashmir, or at least that's what
I've read. He was clearly an active member of an armed group whose
explicit purpose was the destruction of the United States of America. It
is, from what we know of the camps, impossible to go through them _without_
learning this fact. Certainly, anyone who knew enough about Al Qaeda to
join them knew enough about them to know that they were attacking the
United States. He has publicly stated his support for the bombings of the
World Trade Center and the USS Cole - both Al Qaeda operations carried out
while he was a member. So he seems clearly to meet the legal standard for
treason.
It is, however, possible that he cannot be tried for treason. By fighting
as a member of armed forces opposed to the United States, he may have
forfeited his citizenship, and only citizens can be tried for treason.
Since Al Qaeda is not the armed forces of a state, however (again, they are
illegal combatants under the laws of war, not soldiers), it is possible
that this does not apply to him, and he remains a US citizen. If he _is_ a
citizen, then he should be tried for treason in a civilian court. If he is
_not_ a citizen, then he should face a military tribunal that charges him
for any war crimes that he might have committed. If it is true that he
fought in Kashmir and he is not a citizen, I'm sure that the Indians would
be happy to deal with him for us if we are averse to handling the
situation. My own reading of the case - and I'm still in the midst of
reading up on treason law, so this is a fairly unformed opinion - is that
he probably is covered by the legal definition of treason and should be
tried for such by American courts.
Gautam
