Former Intel Engineer Pleads Guilty To Taliban Aid

theodp writes "Following up on an earlier Slashdot story, software engineer Maher "Mike" Hawash pleaded guilty Wednesday to conspiring to provide services to the Taliban, agreeing to testify against other suspects in exchange for the dropping of other terrorism charges. He will serve at least seven years in federal prison under the deal. In March, federal agents seized Hawash from a parking lot outside Intel Corp., where he worked, and held him as a material witness until charges were filed five weeks later."

Comments

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Treasonous criminal or not...

[Shenkerian]

Whatever else people will say about this guy, he did not get what he deserved. Everything after and including his arrest was fair and deserved, but the five weeks of being held as a material witness were complete bullshit. The officials abused the statute to hold him indefinitely and complete their case research. If it hadn't received the media attention it did, they probably would have held him longer before finally arresting him.

Re:Treasonous criminal or not...

[KrispyKringle]

Are you aware of the term "habeus corpus?"

People often say, "Yeah, but he was a terrorist! He has no rights! I have no sympathy. Do you really want this guy to go to trial and risk him being set free?"

Yes. He does have rights. As an American citizen, he is innocent until proven guilty beyond the shadow of a doubt. He is an alleged terrorist. Quite a difference. And if you really think tearing to shreds the fundamental basis of our freedoms does a whole lot to protect them, you are very sadly wrong.

If the terrorists really want to destroy our way of life, all they have to do, at this point, is sit back and hope the Bush administration gets re-elected. Ashcroft's disdain for the rule of law--his disdain even for court orders he doesn't feel like complying with--shows him to be worse than just a silly ideologue. He has no conception of justice, no respect for the ideals he claims to be defending, and is more of a threat to our American way of life than any terrorist.

Re:Remember when..

[Omnifarious]

They still were. Them happening to be right about him being a criminal doesn't excuse it. If you have all kinds of secrets from the people who are supposed to ostensibly be your boss (We, the people, remember?) you have to expect them to get really cranky and upset with you. The FBI had no business being so secretive about it all.

Re:Remember when..

[ramk13]

Remember when 'innocent until proven guilty' meant something?

I'm sure you'll change your tone if the government decides to 'own' you.

You know what's sad about this?

[Faizdog]

Soo many people had rallied around him because of the problems minorities (especially Muslim ones) face in today's conditions. Unfortunately because he has pleaded guilty, next time people will just assume the person is guilty, and they won't rally around the new person, even though he/she may be innocent.

Mark my words, there will be innocents who get caught up, and due to cases like this people will be reluctant to support them. Sad.

Re:Remember when..

[shivianzealot]

Remember when the Feds snatching this guy from Intel was a big deal here at /.? When we all thought that the FBI was overstepping their bounds? When we all thought that they were wrong; that an Intel engineer couldn't possibly be guilty?

...owned.

You're not a lawyer, and niether am I, but I think it should be noted that in the US _justice_ system, regardless of innocence or guilt, a plea bargain is often going to be tempting in proportion to how likely you are to win a case (your legal re$ources vs. theirs). Really, as I recall (I have not RTFA, of course!) he was otherwise facing something like ten times this to life. What would you do, even if innocent?

Re:Remember when..

[elmegil]

Exactly. It is not reasonable to hold people for weeks without charge, regardless. I think it's also interesting to note that a plea bargain may be what it says it is, or it may constitute a coerced admission (coerced by the alternative of losing even if you're right, and spending 20+ years instead of 7 in jail). Beyond all that, this guy utterly failed to actually provide any aid to the Taliban, and it seems unlikely that he'd undertake any "true" terrorism (I think there's some significant difference between attempting to be a mercenary for your cause in a battlefield and bringing the battlefield to civilians after all).

All that said, there's nothing for it but to accept the plea as presented until such a time as Mike recants it. And if he'd been successful, and caught on the field of battle, he would deserve having a book thrown at him as much as John Walker Lindh. But having failed at that, I think it's outrageous that he was facing the same or greater sentence than Lindh himself (20 years).

Re:Remember when..

[Safety State]

Actually, the complaint was (and remains) that due process was not followed. Why should this matter? Because someone who is locked up, with no prospect for release and a possibility of deportation to a third-world nation for third-party torture, is much more likely to confess to crimes of which he/she is innocent.

And it does happen. People confess to crimes they didn't commit, often because the risk of being executed otherwise is too great. In return for a confession to lesser crimes than in the original accusation, government prosecutors will seek a less harsh sentence.

Due process exists for other reasons as well; if we go around imprisoning people for years before trial, you're right, there is no excessive penalty for those eventually sentenced to more time than served waiting for a trial. But all of the others who are eventually found innocent will have served time for no reason but your willingness to ignore their plight.

Re:shoulda shaved or something

[Anonymous Coward]

So you're asking him to go against his religious beliefs so that YOU can feel safer? (ok so he WAS a terrorist.. but not everyone with scrappy looking beards are, some are just trying to make a living like you and I)

Why do most assume he is guilty?

[Frodrick]

After having weasel DOJ lawyers wave "possible life inprisonment" and "possible execution" in his face every day for the past 4 months - possibly even threatening to deport his family - of course he pleaded guilty to a 7 year sentence. They probably threatened to delay the trial that long and just leave him in jail - or send him to concentration camp X-Ray.

I, for one, don't know if he is guilty or innocent, but I sure-as-hell am not going to believe a plea bargain arragement. Most of you predicted that the Patriot Act would be used in exactly that way - to force plea agreements.

As far as I am concerned, the government's case remains unproven.

Re:Why do most assume he is guilty?

[TPFH]

This guy plead GUILTY to the charges against him - not lesser charges - not pleading out of fear. He made a full admission of guilt, and as part of such he would have had to allocute to his crimes in court. That is, tell in his own words, what he did. Noone forced his hand, noone pulled his strings and put words in his mouth.

Yes and no.
He plead guilty to One of the charges against him. One of the lesser of the charges against him.

Personally, I am a bit skeptical about the whole thing, owing a lot to the violation of Habeas Corpus, and the current political situation. From what I understand there are still thousands of people being held as "material witnesses" without charges being filed. I think the main reason they bothered to file charges against Hawash is that he had a bunch of friends who made a big fuss.

So what "Conspiracy Theory" am I proposing? That he was somehow threatened and told to plead guilty. Why? Because the "gubment", err the politicians are afraid of looking foolish nowadays and they need to convict someone, and a No Contest plea wouldn't cut it for the political side of things. I think part of plea barganing is that he had to plea Guilty and not just No Contest.

OK, I have the 11pm news on and they just quoted someone (I think Ashcroft) saying they hope this guilty plea will restrain critisism of the FBI. (Or something to that effect.)

Anyway, hypothetically let's assume that he really is guilty. If he was really a Political Islamist Terrorist he would be prepaired to die or to spend the rest of his life in jail for his beliefs. Therefore if he really is a terrorist then he is unlikely to cooperate in any way, let alone testify against his "fellow conspirators."

He just doesn't seem to fit the profile. He has a family and a good job at Intel. He had a happy life and a lot to loose.

Another thing that's bugged me about the "Portland Six/Seven" conspiracy theory is this: Supposedly their plan was to fly/travel all the way to Afganistan to fight American troops. Now, considering that they were already in the USA, wouldn't it have been a lot simpler to attack Americans in America if that was really their goal? or that they would travel to one of the most remote (and particularly hard to get to at the time) regions in the entire world.

Until I see/hear real evidence I will remain skeptical of the "gubment" thank you very much.

Re:Talaban != Government?

[PeteyG]

After 9/11/01 the US asked the government of Afghanistan if they had him, they replied that he was under their control and that they would turn him over, if the US was willing to provide proof that he had done something wrong.

Get your dick out of your ass. The Taliban were just bullshitting us. There was plenty of proof for extradition, and everyone knew it.

bin Laden was known by everyone to be the head of the terrorist organization that was dedicated to killing as many Americans as possible. They took responsibility for bombing the USS Cole, the two African embassies, and many other terrorist acts.

On Sept 11, I and quite a few other people around the world, when we thought about who to blame, thought first of Osama bin Laden.

Why? Because everyone in the fucking world knew he was the head of an evil international well-funded terrorist organization dedicated to killing Americans! (and based out of Afghanistan)

ps. mod parent down as flamebait. I can't believe I got sucked in.

Re:Funny.

[pkling]

According to the article: "In March, federal agents seized Hawash, 38, from a parking lot outside Intel Corp., where he worked, and simultaneously searched his home."

Note Intel Corp., where he worked.

Get your facts right. They report you discredit with FUD

The FBI --DID-- overstep their bounds

[SuperBanana]

Remember when the Feds snatching this guy from Intel was a big deal here at /.? When we all thought that the FBI was overstepping their bounds? When we all thought that they were wrong; that an Intel engineer couldn't possibly be guilty?

They still DID overstep their bounds. We have some laws in this country which provide protection to citizens from potential abuse of power by law enforcement. Such as locking someone up for weeks without pressing charges, denying them access to a lawyer, etc. There's also unreasonable punishment- I'd say spiriting someone off and denying you've done so to their family etc certainly qualifies.

Police are required to file charges within a certain, rather short period of time(24 hours? I forget), or let you go- one or the other. You can't just lock someone up, and THEN go looking for evidence of a crime; you have to FIRST find the evidence, THEN arrest them and THEN charge them with a crime.

I don't care if he was guilty- their actions are improper, unjust, and remind me more of, say, dictatorships and communist governments than the country that supposedly leads the "free world". Inefficiency in law enforcement is the price we pay for our freedom, rights, and protections. When we throw any of the three out the window, what's left to protect? One only need to look as far as 1980's eastern germany to see what road we are headed towards.

That's really discusting.

[autopr0n]

... you are a very bad person. You are hereby sentenced to seven years in a federal pound me in the ass prison.

You know, it's really sick that we make jokes like this. The constitution outlaws 'cruel and unusual punishment' but the threat of being corn holed is actively used as a deterrent, and not much is done to prevent it. I think homosexual rape probably qualifies as 'cruel and unusual'

Hogwash on Hawash

[watchful.babbler]

I have never seen so much disgusting anti-Americanism as I have in this thread. .... Innocent people do not plead guilty. ... This government is protecting YOU, if you don't like that protection then vote for someone who'll do it your way.

Whoa there! Aren't you the same person who played Thoreau in a different thread?

It's an open secret of law that innocent people plead guilty all the time. Consider, for example, the recent furor in Tulia, TX, where a police source went bad and turned in dozens of innocent people on drug distribution charges. Those people -- uniformly poor and African-American -- chose almost to the one to plead guilty to lesser charges. Governor Rick Perry is currently reviewing papers to dismiss all charges and convictions in that case.

Likewise, in Dallas, the local police department has come under intense fire for planting fake drugs on poor Latino residents, many of whom accepted plea bargains (usually due to inattentive defense counsel, a real problem down this way). Because evidence was moved upwards into the federal courts, even those cases are now under review as judges seek to determine which defendants were truly innocent of charges.

Then there are those quasi-Art. III courts, such as the IRS and immigration courts, where people frequently accept deals even though they may not be guilty at all.

Why do people do this? Simple: it takes time and money to fight in court. If you're hauled in front of an IRS judge on charges you're innocent of, you may still rationally accept a lesser penalty knowing that it's less money than hiring an experienced tax attorney. (I've got a former IRS prosecutor as a friend who quite cheerfully explains every trick up that particular profession's sleeve.) If you're poor, a minority, or an immigrant resident, you may not have the resources or even the knowledge necessary to fight a criminal charge when it comes down the pipe; your defense counsel, who's either a private attorney getting less than scale for his time on your case, or a public defender who has literally hundreds of other cases sitting on his desk, has no incentive to spend more time than is absolutely necessary on your case -- and cutting a deal with the prosecutor is the fastest way to dispose of a pending case.

Now, this doesn't obviate the fact that Hawash doesn't seem to be an innocent party. He's admitted to conspiracy to provide material support of a foreign terrorist organization, starting on October 20, 2001, two years after the official designation of the Taliban as an FTO and following the declaration of hostilities against the Taliban by the United States.

The information set out in the plea arrangement is pretty precise regarding his actions, and the end result is not particularly favorable for Hawash -- if the judge accepts the sentencing level set out in the agreement (and there's no guarantee he or she won't apply an upward departure), Hawash gets a minimum sentence of over eight years. Now, the prosecutors certainly dangled a much harsher sentence over his head, but the specifics in the agreement (such as Hawash going to China and attempting to cross the border into Afghanistan) are precise, and serious, enough that I can't see him being truly innocent in this case.

Nonetheless, just as I can remain conservative while damning every sentence from an Ann Coulter or Michael Savage, I can affirm my belief in Hawash's guilt while saying of your statement: wrong, wrong, naive, and wrong.

Rubbish

[Sanity]

That is no more damning than when a captured US soldier is forced to denounce the actions of their government by their captors. We have no idea what kind of threats were made against that guy before his "confession" was extracted.

Re:Exactly, he looks like a terrorist so arrest hi

[York the Mysterious]

I seem to remember this one white guy that blew up this one federal building. Maybe it was too long ago for everyone to remember. I don't remember anyone breaking windows at white owned businesses after that. Do you?

Let's focus on another part

[Bueller_007]

"...held him as a material witness until charges were filed five weeks later."

Is anyone else disturbed by this?

Re:Exactly, he looks like a terrorist so arrest hi

[nyseal]

Probably the same time they stop looking like middle eastern gentlemen at a time when the country gets attacked by them. Right or wrong, looks (and appearence) play a great role in identifying suspects. If the attack were carried out by middle aged, caucasion males with pension plans linked to a Mexico bank account, I would EXPECT to be at least questioned.

Re:It's fucking war you stupid MONKEY.

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

It's called the consitution. It's there to make sure that under no circumstances can the Government take away my rights as a citizen.

There's a fine line between cracking down on terrorism, and terrorising the citizens to crack down on terrorism.

From an Afghani slashdotter

[mnmn]

I will begin by trying to define 'terrorist'. Anyone who terrorizes anyone else is a terrorist. That means the US ventures in Vietnam and Iraq where they tried to intimidate the civilians to drop support to their governments is just as terrorist as say the USSR trying to invade Afghanistan. So a government can be a terrorist organisation and all current governments are except some small ones ruling city states without their armies. Next, the Taliban were a political group. They also represent an extremist thinking. They supported the Al Qaeda because of what they believed, not because they wanted to terrorize US citizens. They were terrorists because they terrorized Afghans. By the way Al Qaeda and the Taliban both killed more civilians in Afghanistan each, than Al Qaeda did on 9/11. They also fought for years trying to take over Afghanistan fully but never really did. One well-known former CIA chief testified in his book that the Taliban were created by US funds during the Soviet occupation years to create a strong religious resistance against USSR. Couple these facts with the fact that few people in Afghanistan ever supported the Taliban, and they were mostly composed of Pakistani army, that hardly makes the Taliban Afghan, let alone Al Qaeda. A terrorist to some is a freedom fighter to others. People in foreign countries who supported the Taliban were usually sincere to their own countries and never supported them as a Threat to America or Democracy. They never knew of the Taliban's antics within Afghanistan. A Pakistani-British kid raised in London was caught among the Taliban when the Americans came, and was interviewed. He joined because he thought he would be fighting the Russians defending Islam. He didnt know there would be cries of "Allah o Akbar" from both sides of the hill. Most people in Pakistan under the current Taliban propaganda still believe the Taliban should rightfully be in Afghanistan without knowing who the enemy is exactly. Such is the sorry state of affairs of the region. I will just ask everyone to:

1. Never hate anyone single-mindedly. Information is skewed in every media and the world out there can be radically different.
2. Never sling around a word without completely understanding its definition and checking how it applies to yourself. Words like WMD, terrorist and wacky are some.
3. never treat anyone like the plague because he supported someone else. Many people even in America still defend communism, many others have strong religious affiliations of all sorts. None of them are absolutely evil, and evil only lies in the eyes of the beholder.
4. never support any form of government to the extreme that you impose it on others. Face it, democracy is a total failure in poorer countries where people only vote for the person most seen on TV, which is the richest politician around. The communists were in the same shoes a few years ago.
5. never assume yourself, your country or your religion to be the center of gravity of humanity. The Germans tried that half a century ago. Ask them how they feel now. Anyone is a savage/terrorist/evildoer/moron/unintelligent to someone else.
6. never start a political debate on slashdot. Ever.
7. Profit!

Try again, this time think a bit

[gaijin99]

but wait its about someone we feel should be free. I guess the freedom thing wins out. Even though this guy is gulity.

The problem with the Hawash case was never his guilt or innosence, but the whole issue of how he was arrested in the first place.

Hawash was secretly arrested. With a secret warrent. Based on secret evidence. The feds wouldn't even admit that they had arrested him until eleven days had passed. He was not charged with a crime until he had been held for more than two months.

The Constitution specifically states that people get speedy trials. The police are not allowed to arrest people and hold them without pressing charges. That is one of the main things that's wrong with communist nations like China and Cuba. The whole idea of "find charges, then arrest" is central to real justice. "Arrest, then make up charges" is a sure sign of Stalin and his ilk.

killing the patient in order to save him

[73939133]

Hawash pleaded guilty to conspiring to provide services to the Taliban. Prosecutors agreed to drop charges of conspiring to levy war against the United States and conspiring to provide material support for terrorism.

Plea bargains are a travesty of justice. Telling someone "we can prosecute you for a crime on which there is the death penalty, or you can plead guilty to a lesser charge" creates a grave risk of making the innocent plead guilty. This is really not all that different from the interrogation and torture techniques used by the inquisition or totalitarian governments. Furthermore, it allows the guilty to get away with lesser charges.

I think the utilitarian argument for these kinds of arrangements doesn't work: no matter how many criminals we catch through plea bargains or how many crimes we prevent, the cost of such arrangements--sacrificing a fair trial and a thorough, public examination of the charges and evidence--is just too high. Plea bargains are killing the patient in order to save him.

"You and the others in the group were prepared to take up arms, and die as martyrs if necessary, to defend the Taliban. Is this true?" U.S. District Judge Robert E. Jones asked Hawash during the hearing.

This, too, is rather chilling. It's not that conspiracy might not be a prosecutable crime under some circumstances, and maybe this is one of them. But in this phrasing, he didn't actually admit to doing anything, he was just "prepared to do" something.

Re:Try again your wrong

[Rares Marian]

I don't care if they thought Stalin was Jesus. Until they made any movement (like killing people, or stealing) they have a right to walk the streets like anyone else.

Wake up. There is such a thing as the outside world, and whether you like it or not it isn't part of any society, it just is regardless of what influence one person has on another.

I don't want a paradise on Earth. I want a place where I can live and learn things you'll never get trained or taught to do or understand. I want a place where I can test the world to see what's true and what isn't for myself. I exist dammit. I'm not just taking up space. I am. Therefore I will think. Therefore I will not be molded without prior agreement. As if Lieberman will get elected in 2004. HA!

Re:Wow

[the-build-chicken]

There are others _still_ being held that way...if you're an american, do something about it...your government is holding people against the rules of your own constitution...not even granting them basic rights of the geneva convention (enemy combatants? what the hell is that?)...almost 2 years they've been locked up without even access to a lawyer and they're still haven't been charged with anything...if this is 'by the people, for the people'...then you have a lot of really cruel and hypocritical people in your country...for god sake...make some noise about this!

Put the US Government on Trial too, eh?

[RevAaron]

While the Taliban was in power, the US gave quite a bit of aid and assistance to them. After all, they were our buddies- they were going to crack down on drugs! It's easy to turn a blind eye to everything and anything else that the US supposedly stands for, provided they tell us they'll crack down on opium production.

I mean, it's a well known fact that the US can never do any wrong- so, why is this guy going to jail?

Perhaps we should put this retarded administration on trial, along with the schmucks in previous administrations who thought it was a good idea to put a bunch of folks through Terrorism for Dummies, CIA Edition. Hell, perhaps we could even go so far as to look at our current actions- the CIA sponsors guerilla training like that given to our buddie Osama in a number of countries. You see, when the US wants something from some un-developed nationn we train a bunch of locals to despose the current dictator and put one in that is more to our liking... It's usually about getting some resource that the other guy didn't feel like sharing. Oil? COULDN'T BE!

USA! USA! USA!

Re:Exactly, he looks like a terrorist so arrest hi

[hazem]

Pretty lucky guess, if he's pleading guilty and that's all they had to go on when they picked him up.

Don't be so sure. I don't know if he is in fact guilty in this case, but people have been known to plead guilty when they are in fact innocent.

Here's a possible scenario. They pick him up on secret evidence and secret warrant, then hold him secretly with no access to a lawyer or his family. That's pretty scary right there.

Next, they tell you, "listen buddy, you look just like one of Osama's boys, so when we put you before a jury of your *peers*, they'll have no problem locking you away for the rest of your life being gang raped by muslim-hating white supremicists"... OR, if you plead guilty, we'll take it easy on you, put you in a nice prison, and you'll see your family in 7 years."

What does his lawyer tell him? Oh wait, he didn't have access to one for quite a while... in fact, nobody did.

What do you do given a choice like that?

Prosecutors have a lot of power in our system, particularly when they can frighten you into pleading guilty out of fear for what a guilty verdict means.

Re:GUILTY plea, not an ALFORD plea.

[WhaDaYaKnow]

Could we please, please, please stop seeing these self-important, self-aggrandizing rants from Damn-the-Man slashdotters who don't even care to learn about the difference between a guilty plea and an Alford plea, and why it's so significant that Hawash didn't plead Alford?

Which lawyer did he get, to explain this theory (which I've never heard of as a foreigner that has lived in this country for a quite while) to him while he was not allowed to contact the outside world?

I don't consider a confession of someone who has not been allowed a proper trial worth anything.

Re:That is some damning testimony

[ameoba]

It doesn't really matter; Ernesto Miranda, of "Miranda Rights" fame, kidnapped a girl and raped her. Even though he was later re-tried and convicted, the Supreme Court decision set a legal precident.

While a convicted felon loses some of their rights, until the point of their conviction they've got all of their rights and should still be treated as such until a conviction is reached. Innocence or guilt are irrelevant when it comes to imporoper imprisonment.

Yeah, it's terrorism

[siskbc]

This guy simply wanted to go home, and protect his country from what he viewed as US aggression.

The Taliban is not a country. In fact, the Taliban has never been a country. They were not generally, in fact, Afghani - many (I believe most) were foreigners who simply took over, as 1) Afghanistan wasn't able to resist, and 2) they wanted a country in which to practice the most extreme version of Islam. So it would be a mistake to assume there was hardly anyone in Afghanistan who voluntarily supported the Taliban.

Second, this guy was Palestinian as pointed out. So he's not defending a country - he's committing acts of aggression against a country he does not like by aiding an extremely violent terrorist regime with a history of targeted violence against civillians.

That's terrorism in pretty much any book.

Re:I understand his feelings.

[Pr3d4t0r]

As someone trying to make a case against prejudice and stereotypes, I found the following very interesting:

White America still wants minority people dead.

This is one the most aggravating posts I've seen on Slashdot in a while. In trying to show how you were pre judged because of your appearance, you go on to portray every white American as people who wish every minority would die!? Did you not learn anything about the stupidity of prejudice in your experiences?

Slashdot moderation in action

[jamesmrankinjr]

Slashdot for you. The factually false post bashing the US gets +4 Interesting, while the corrections pointing out facts that put the US case in a more favorable light get no higher than +2.

Figures.
-jimbo