Free Speech or Terrorism?

Taken from NPR Online

During the past few weeks in class, we have been researching civil liberties during wars, and how certain rights have been changed for the good of the country. I was assigned World War II, so today, when my teacher showed me an article involving the restriction of free speech, everything became more real. It seems that things hold more of a weight when they are during your lifetime. The particular case is of Tarek Mehanna, a 29 year old Muslim from Pittsburgh. Mehanna is charged with conspiring to plot terrorist attacks using the particular medium I am writing right now, his blog. The interesting part of the case is his defense, the first amendment.

 Tarek is also charged with a few other crimes, but most of the evidence in those cases is circumstantial though. The primary source of evidence in the prosecutors case is Tarek's blog, where he has recently translated Islamic texts, one of which, "39 Ways to Serve and Participate in Jihad", is a text commonly used and referred to by Al Qaida. 

What was interesting to me about this case was that it is made off to be much more severe than it actually is. All of the evidence in the case is circumstantial, and the prosecution's case seems to be off of paranoia. It is one argument that civil liberties need to be suppressed during wartime, but I believe there needs to be a strong reason for those civil liberties to be suppressed. Mehanna only translated a text, and for that reason he is being silenced? The prosecution's argument comes down to if the interpretation supports Al Qaida, which is a stretch to try and prove that. This case is unnecessary and is an example of America's constant paranoia. 

To read the entire article, click here.