Too bad.

There is no analogy to be drawn between Mehanna and King or Mandela. King and Mandela were men of conscience and peace; they advocated for justice for all, and for peaceful resistence to prejudice and hate. Mehanna is a wannabe terrorist. He seeks neither justice nor peace. He practices hatred, and advocates war, terror and revenge. He is exactly where he belongs.

The defendant in t his case and his father both whine about the defendant's conviction of terrorism being unjust. They invoke the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment as justification for the claptrap the defendant spewed out both during his on-line comment period and in the U.S. District Courtroom on April 12. J.W. Carney, the defendant's lawyer, often seems to meld his own mindset close to that of his clients - likely an ability that makes him a relatively effective advocate. But forget Carney as a man doing his job. Defendant Tarek Mehanna whined about FBI agents trying to persuade him to become a CI with suggestions of lesser penalties after his arrest. This was wrong, he maintained - he was only a good Moslem trying to aid other Moslems. But what seems to be ignored in this incident is a question of whether Mehanna and his father believe in Sharia, the legal code that is a major part of the Islamic faith. Does Sharia allow expression of any thought? And as for FBI agents trying to get Mehanna to convert to assist them in making cases against terrorists, some Moslem - doesn't Mehanna ever watch "Law and Order" reruns?