Getting lucky with Padilla

Neil Kressal makes similar points to the ones I made right after the verdict when I said that those who favor the lawfare model of fighting terrorist are wrong to suggest the conviction demonstrates that the traditional judiciary process can handle terror cases. As I did he remarks that we got lucky with the al Qaeda job application which was the smoking gun evidence. Al Qaeda will not make the mistake of documenting its agents again and if they did, the chances that we could capture that evidence and get it admitted into court are remote. We had to fore go the case that caused his arrest, the dirty bomb plot because the evidence of that plot was not admissible.

Consider where we would have been if we had arrested Mohammad Atta and his 17 associates on September 10, 2001, before they executed their plans for mass murder. Lets say we connected the dots with various pieces of intelligence and some info off of a computer. In all likelihood, none of the intelligence data would have been admissible and admitting it would have compromised sources and methods of collecting it which would mean that those sources and methods would not be available to stop the next plot.

The results in that case would very likely have been freeing the mass murderers to work on their next plot.

We are dealing with an enemy that has declared war against us and it makes no sense to ignore his intentions and pretend he is a crook.