It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
“These convictions are a message to those who aim to travel to take up arms with (the Islamic State) and to those who support them: The FBI and our partners are determined to thwart your efforts,” said Deirdre Fike, assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office, in a statement.
Pal Lengyel-Leahu, Elhuzayel’s attorney, argued that the Islamic State wasn’t designated a terrorist organization at the time of his client’s arrest. The attorney indicated after the verdict that he plans to bring that argument up again on appeal.
“A snap verdict means they really didn’t grapple with the issues as we presented them,” Lengyel-Leahu said of the jurors.
Kate Corrigan, Badawi’s attorney, blamed her client’s legal trouble on Elhuzayel, whom she described as a liar.
“This case, if nothing else, should be a clear signal for our young people not to communicate anything online they couldn’t stand by in a courtroom,” Corrigan added. “If you can’t deliver on what you say, don’t say it.”
originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: onequestion
I would prefer dealing with bombings and shootings over giving up our rights. Freedom is more important to me than security.
I'm with you Metallicus!
originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: onequestion
My biggest problem is that I think we are being manipulated to give up incremental freedom all in the name of 'security'. I know there really are bad people out there that may deserve what they get, but if we give up on our basic principles of liberty then what difference does it make if we are protected from the terrorists?
I would prefer dealing with bombings and shootings over giving up our rights. Freedom is more important to me than security.