[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 10]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 13847-13848]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                     LINDH PLEA BARGAIN REASONABLE

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. DOUG BEREUTER

                              of nebraska

                    in the house of representatives

                         Monday, July 22, 2002

  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member wishes to commend to his 
colleagues an editorial from the July 17, 2002, edition of the Omaha 
World Herald entitled ``Justice for Lindh.''
  As the editorial notes, the plea bargain agreement in the case of the 
``American Taliban'' John Walker Lindh is appropriate because it will 
allow the U.S. Government to shield sensitive information from public 
release and to perhaps garner additional information through the 
debriefings in which Lindh has agreed to participate.
  Mr. Speaker, this Member does not want to provide false hope that 
Lindh will be able to provide extensive insights on the operations of 
the Taliban in Afghanistan. However, this member strongly supports 
efforts to continue to investigate all available resources in an effort 
to paint the most complete picture possible of the terrorists' 
operations.
  Furthermore, this Member would commend to his colleagues the 
editorial from the July 18, 2002, edition of the Lincoln Journal-Star 
entitled ``Lindh's dad just keeps bile flowing.'' It correctly blasts 
Frank Lindh's ludicrous statements comparing his son, John Walker 
Lindh, with South African anti-apartheid leader Nelson Mandela. 
Clearly, Frank Lindh does not grasp the full scope of his son's 
decision to take up arms with the Taliban and the consequences of that 
decision.

              [From the Omaha World-Herald, July 17, 2002]

                           Justice for Lindh

       The plea bargain arranged between the U.S. government and 
     John Walker Lindh is a reasonable deal for both sides. 
     Moreover, it offers Lindh, the notorious ``American Taliban'' 
     captured in Afghanistan last November, an opportunity to 
     atone for his crimes against his native land.
       Critics will say--and their view-point is entitled to 
     respect--that the punishment isn't harsh enough. Lindh 
     betrayed his country. True enough. But consideration must 
     also be given to how much damage his enlistment with anti-
     Western forces actually did to America.
       By all evidence, it wasn't much. The young Californian 
     wound up as a grunt--a low-level foot soldier--who apparently 
     never fired a shot at anyone. All parties agree that he was 
     never in direct combat against Americans.
       However, it is assuredly also true that he was part of a 
     vicious foreign regime that for years lent aid and comfort to 
     al-Qaida. For that alone, we'd be content to see him serve 
     the maximum of 20 years to which he has been sentenced.
       This outcome serves U.S. interests well on at least two 
     counts. First, it allows the government to avoid airing 
     sensitive information that might have become public if it had 
     pressed its case vigorously at trial. Second, Lindh has 
     committed himself to cooperate fully, answering truthfully 
     any questions government investigators come up with. He also 
     has agreed to take lie-detector tests to help assure that he 
     stays on the straight and narrow.
       How much is his information worth? That's hard to say, and 
     may never become publicly known. His involvement was so far 
     removed from that of the Sept. 11 hijackers that it seems 
     doubtful he can shed much new light on their operation.
       Still, he was a low-level operative with the Taliban's de 
     facto government. He may be able to offer names not 
     previously known to investigators. At a minimum, he probable 
     can describe some levels of the organization's decision-
     making processes, methods of passing along orders and so on. 
     If the Taliban and al-Qaida soldiers being held at the 
     Guantanamo naval base are remaining as tight-lipped as some 
     news reports have suggested, then Lindh's knowledge has real 
     potential to add to the pool of what's known about these 
     thugs.
       From Lindh's standpoint, if he serves the whole sentence, 
     he will emerge from prison having endured about as many years 
     behind bars as he spent as a free American. He'll be 41--
     still young enough to live something like a real life in his 
     remaining years, especially starting from the advantages that 
     probably will be afforded by his family's wealth.
       John Walker Lindh knowingly made himself into a turncoat, 
     whether out of studied enmity or sheltered naivete. No 
     matter--his acts were a danger to the land that nurtured him. 
     His punishment will address that. Now he has a chance to make 
     amends. We hope he'll approach that task with contrition and

[[Page 13848]]

     dedication. It's about time he did something right.

                                  ____
                                  

                    [From the Lincoln Journal-Star, 
                             July 18, 2002]

                  Lindh's Dad Just Keeps Bile Flowing

       From an objective perspective, the 20-year sentence and 
     plea bargain for John Walker Lindh may very well be 
     reasonable.
       But it would be a lot easier to accept if his father would 
     just shut up.
       Frank Lindh said he compared his son to Nelson Mandela, 
     ``another good man,'' who spent 26 years in prison.
       John Walker Lindh is no Nelson Mandela.
       Mandela is a hero, a political prisoner who courageously 
     stood for freedom and dignity against the apartheid 
     government of South Africa.
       Lindh chose to carry an AK-47 and grenades in the service 
     of one of the most repressive regimes on the planet.
       Neither is Lindh quite the friend of America that his 
     father tried to portray. ``Never, in all the interrogations . 
     . . did John ever say anything against the United States. Not 
     one word. John loves America, and we love America,'' his 
     father told reporters. ``God bless America.''
       Before Lindh was facing life in prison he had considerable 
     criticism for the United States. ``What has America ever done 
     for anybody?'' he asked in a February 2000 note to his 
     mother, urging her to move to Britain after his parents 
     separated. Lindh told his mother. ``I don't really want to 
     see America again.''
       In truth, now that the shock of discovering the dirty, 
     bearded American Taliban in Afghanistan has worn off, Lindh 
     seems more pitiable than threatening.
       Lindh said he never fired a gun or tossed a grenade. The 
     government had no evidence to the contrary.
       Lindh seems more like the ``poor fellow who obviously . . . 
     has been misled'' described by President George W. Bush than 
     Abdul Hamid, the holy warrior whom Lindh aspired to be.
       What Lindh--known as Johnny Jihad to would-be humorists--
     actually might have done or not done while in the service of 
     the Taliban probably will remain a mystery. Facts other than 
     Lindh's own statements are in short supply.
       Under the circumstances, putting the 21-year-old behind 
     bars for 20 years arguably fits the crime. The government had 
     some legitimate reasons to accept the agreement. Lindh has 
     agreed to share information about his tour of duty with the 
     Taliban. The agreement also shields the government from 
     having to reveal details about its effort to root out the 
     Taliban in the war against terrorism.
       And if Frank Lindh can just keep quiet, some of the anger 
     and bitterness Americans feel toward his son might subside by 
     the time he gets out prison in 2023.

     

                          ____________________