 |
|
Edan
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Why is this a good thing? Call me crazy, but I really don't want international terrorist organizations receiving expert advice and assistance... |
The problem is that the law is vague, meaning that, in this case, it could be used on those wishing to provide "provide support for lawful, nonviolent activities on behalf of Kurdish refugees in Turkey."
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Edan
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Ramo
Err.. wait, what am I thinking? Eden, why do you say that this is the relevant clause being declared unconstitutional? I seem to recall that the Patriot Act has punishments for people who belong to/aid groups Ashcroft considers terrorists. |
How is that any different from a "comprehensive ban on the provision of "material support or resources" to entities that are designated by the United States Government as "foreign terrorist organizations.""
Sounds the same to me (more or less), and just as potentially vague.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ramo
|
 |
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999 time: 23:33
|
|
http://lark.phoblacht.net/actofconscience.html
"It is unlawful for a person in the United States or subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to knowingly provide "material support or resources" to a designated FTO. (The term "material support or resources" is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2339A(b) as "currency or monetary instruments or financial securities, financial services, lodging, training, expert advice or assistance, safehouses, false documentation or identification, communications equipment, facilities, weapons, lethal substances, explosives, personnel, transportation, and other physical assets, except medicine or religious materials.)
Note the "expert advice or assistance" phrase - the same one used in the AP article.
Yeah, it's certainly the Patriot Act.
quote: Sounds the same to me (minus your Ashcroft jab) |
The Justice Dept. IIRC makes the list. Why's it a jab?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Edan
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Ramo
http://lark.phoblacht.net/actofconscience.html
"It is unlawful for a person in the United States or subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to knowingly provide "material support or resources" to a designated FTO. (The term "material support or resources" is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2339A(b) as "currency or monetary instruments or financial securities, financial services, lodging, training, expert advice or assistance, safehouses, false documentation or identification, communications equipment, facilities, weapons, lethal substances, explosives, personnel, transportation, and other physical assets, except medicine or religious materials.)
Note the "expert advice or assistance" phrase - the same one used in the AP article.
Yeah, it's certainly the Patriot Act.
|
Ahem. Fine, instead of
quote:
As part of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214, Congress passed a comprehensive ban on the provision of "material support or resources" to entities that are designated by the United States Government as "foreign terrorist organizations."
|
We'll insert the definition:
quote:
As part of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214, Congress passed a comprehensive ban on the provision of "currency or monetary instruments or financial securities, financial services, lodging, training, expert advice or assistance, safehouses, false documentation or identification, communications equipment, facilities, weapons, lethal substances, explosives, personnel, transportation, and other physical assets, except medicine or religious materials" to entities that are designated by the United States Government as "foreign terrorist organizations."
|
Again, I'm not sure I understand your argument.
quote:
The Justice Dept. IIRC makes the list. Why's it a jab? |
Yeah, but Ashcroft, does not make the list in a vacuum, which was the impression, probably wrongly, that I got. ("Hmm, today I'll declare Burger King to be a terrorist organization" )
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Edan
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Ramo
In any case,
1. The Patriot Act has such a provision.
2. Just about every reputable source is reporting about it, and they're all saying it's the Patriot Act (NYT, Newshour, etc.).
Thus, it's almost certainly the Patriot Act.
Besides, the 9th Circuit had struck down that provision in the 1996 Antiterrorism Act a little while ago (see the thread Dino linked), so this can't be it (the only people who can look at it again are SCOTUS after Ashcroft tries to appeal their decision.). |
You're right, it probably is. But what my point was was that the "unconstitutionality" of it is not inherent to the Patriot Act. The precursor to this law - created before 9/11 - has the exact same problem of vagueness.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999 time: 21:33
|
|
Just so everyone understands what this case is about, I will quote the most pertinent passage from the opinion below:
"Furthermore, Defendants' contradictory arguments on the scope of the prohibition underscore the vagueness of the prohibition. The "expert advice or assistance" Plaintiffs seek to offer includes advocacy and associational activities protected by the First Amendment, which Defendants concede are not protected under the USA PATRIOT Act. Despite this, the USA PATRIOT Act places no limitation on the type of expert advice and assistance which is prohibited and instead bans the provision of all expert advice and assistance regardless of its nature. Thus, like the terms "personnel" and "training," "expert advice or assistance" "could be construed to include unequivocally pure speech and advocacy protected by the First Amendment" or to "encompass First Amendment protected activities." 2003 US App. Lexis 24305 and * 60-61 (9th Cir. December 3, 2003)."
The expert assistance must be to a terrorist organization listed as such by the Secretary of State. It is clear that the court had some significant difficulty with labeling me PKK a terrorist organization. It was labeled a terrorist organization by Madeleine Albright in 1997.
Last edited by Ned on 27-01-2004 at 10:14
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33. Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|