Your name is John Walker. You are either in custody, on the USS Bataan, a U.S. Navy warship in the Arabian Sea, or you are the recipient of the infamous letter that the group “Asleep at the Wheel" sings about. Which John Walker would you rather be at this point in time? At this point, if I was John Walker, I’d be opting to be the recipient of the letter.

The U.S. Justice Department made its decision final, and official, on January 15, 2002, concerning the fate of John Walker, the infamous American-born and captured Taliban fighter. The Taliban fighter now has four charges pending against him. They are:

• Count 1: Conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals outside the United States. (The possible
  sentence is life in prison)



• Counts 2 and 3: Providing material support and resources to terrorist organizations
  al-Qaeda and Harakat ul-Mujahideen. (The possible sentence is 15 years in federal prison, or life in prison if the action resulted in death)



• Count 4: Engaging in prohibited transactions with the Taliban (No information could
  be found concerning the possible sentence for this charge)
 

To view the actual court documents click here. They provide a little more insight into John Walker, but not much more than has been broadcast on TV news since the November 25 prison uprising. That uprising led to the death of CIA operative Johnny “Mike" Spann.

Over on soc.culture.usa, I found webjunk20000 writing that “The double standard that the US is trying to impose with Military Tribunals should now be quite clear. One law for Americans and One law for everyone else, this in the face of US protestations that one cannot pick and choose ones terrorists. Apparently the US can. What a joke given that supposedly ‘All men are born Equal’-Thomas Jefferson and the US Constitution- (It does not say All 'American-'men')."

Webjun20000 goes on, saying that “one can already see the smiles on the faces of Lebanese-Hizbullah which the US calls a terrorist group while the EU does not. Fugitive Taliban and Al-Qaeda members must also be smirking knowing full well that now it will be next to impossible to try ANY of them in Military Tribunals without the US facing the full charge of double standards with each and every case."

I’m not sure I agree that it will be “next to impossible" to try other Taliban members, or other people accused of being terrorists in another forum, such as a military tribunal, but I do agree that it is a double standard. The Justice Department has 45 days to decide, deliberate, and discuss how to handle the case of the treasonous American.

Over on the alt.polyamory newsgroup, I found Owen Hutchins saying “Too often we hear ‘He seemed so nice’ applied to killers." I agree, but many killers, and yes, traitors, too, smile and seem personable. How do you think they find victims? They have to have some kind of magnetism or charisma, don’t they? Need an example? Look at Jane Fonda and her treasonous escapades in Vietnam? Seems her family name was her saving grace.

Owen goes on, saying that “Walker isn't going to face the death penalty, if that makes you feel any better. But He appears to have been involved woth (sic) either the Taliban or Al-Qaida, neither of which are shining examples of ‘kind and generous’ behaviour."

In Walker’s case, though, as U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft pointed out, “He chose to embrace fanatics, and his allegiance to those terrorists never faltered," said Ashcroft. “Terrorists did not compel John Walker Lindh to join them. John Walker Lindh chose terrorists."