[von Wrangell]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4273790.stm

This part is amazing:

Krugel pleaded guilty to conspiracy to violate the civil rights of worshippers at the mosque and to a weapons charge linked to the plot against the congressman.

So a would-be terrorist is just violating the civil rights of worshippers?

And the most important question. If the roles were reversed, would the would-be terrorist get the same treatment?

[Mark Larr]

No, they would not have been treated so harshly.

The American Taliban kid got off with a slap on the wrist instead of what he clearly deserved.

[Millennium]

According to the article, he used a plea bargain: he agreed to plead guilty to a lesser charge, in exchange for the original charge not being pressed. It's not an uncommon tactic. Presumably "if the roles were reversed" the perpetrator would also have this chance, especially if he agreed to finger anyone he was working with.

[MacNStein]

Yeah, they were harsh. Most likely they would have been much easier on a Muslim.