Tarek Mehanna: Punishing Muslims for free speech only helps Al Qaeda

Tarek Mehannas political speech was controversial and offensive. But the prosecution did not show that he was willing to actually engage in violence.Terrorists win hearts and minds when the US government prosecutes Muslims in America with little regard for the Constitution.

On April 12 the United States government successfully convicted another young Muslim male who believed he had the right to express his deep disdain for American foreign policy in the Middle East and Asia. Tarek Mehanna, an American-born Bostonian, took his First Amendment rights quite seriously when he vocally condemned his government for killing thousands of Muslims abroad. As a result, he was convicted of conspiring to help Al Qaeda.

While his prosecution may appear to be another success in the nebulous war on terror, it is in fact a victory for terrorists abroad who win hearts and minds when the American government bends over backward to prosecute Muslims in America with little regard for the Constitution.

Without a doubt, Mr. Mehannas political beliefs and speech were controversial if not outright offensive. Indeed the prosecutors highlighted a website run by Mehanna that often posted English language translations of Islamic teachings in favor of self-defense and circulated gruesome jihadi videos.

But what the prosecution was unable to show was Mehannas willingness to actually engage in violence in furtherance of his political beliefs. At numerous junctures during which Mehanna was under surveillance, Mehanna rebuked overtures by government informants and others to join them in a terrorist attack. To the contrary, Mehanna limited his actions to speaking out and writing against US foreign policy as well as translating controversial extremist materials into English.

In addition, Mehanna traveled to Yemen in 2004. He claimed his visit was to study Arabic and Islam. The government alleged he went to join Al Qaeda and later returned home to assist the terrorist organization expand its influence in the US. But both admit that Mehanna never actually planned or attempted to execute a violent terrorist act.

But for the 2010 Supreme Courts flawed decision in Humanitarian Law Project v. Holder (HLP), it is doubtful the prosecution would have stood a chance at a conviction. The ruling in HLP criminalized coordinated advocacy with a designated terrorist group as unlawful material support to terrorism, while independent advocacy remained protected by the First Amendment.

Thus the case came down to whether Mehannas vocal criticism of US military practices in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other Muslim majority countries was coordinated with Al Qaeda operatives. Similarly, when he translated Islamic literature and Al Qaeda propaganda, the government labeled it coordinated advocacy such that he was providing unlawful material support to terrorism.

Ultimately, the case depended on whether the jury believed the governments explanation for Mehannas 2004 trip to Yemen. Had he not taken the trip, perhaps he would never have been convicted of conspiring to aid Al Qaeda, though he likely would still have been prosecuted.

View original post here:
Tarek Mehanna: Punishing Muslims for free speech only helps Al Qaeda