THE JAMES UJAAMA PLEA BARGAIN looks like a big win for Ashcroft:

James Ujaama, 36, who was charged last August with attempting to set up a terrorist training camp in rural Oregon, said as part of a plea agreement that he sought to provide “jihad fighters, currency, computers, software, computer disks and other items” to the Taliban, the Afghan rulers who sheltered al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and were crushed by U.S. forces after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. . . .

One of Ujaama’s attorneys, Peter Offenbecher of Seattle, called the agreement “a favorable outcome for both the government and Mr. Ujaama.” In addition to a recommended two-year sentence, the deal will also rescind severe restrictions on Ujaama’s contact with the outside world.

“He’s acknowledged his personal responsibility for the facts that are stated in the plea agreement,” Offenbecher said. “He stepped up to the plate and said, ‘I did these things and I regret them.’ “

“I did these things, and I regret them.” But only a two-year sentence? Either (1) the case was weak; or (2) he’s really helped them a lot. The other possibility would be that the plea bargain was coerced, which is an issue for concern in the Lackawanna cases, but — judging by the very light sentence — not one here. But, you know, the Lackawanna stories have made me a bit more skeptical of plea bargains in terrorism cases in general.

UPDATE: Judging from this story, it looks like the answer is (2).