Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 36

Thread: Supreme Court upholds law barring "material support" to terrorist groups

  1. #11
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: Supreme Court upholds law barring "material support" to terrorist groups

    Many thanks, don!

    Quote Originally Posted by Gardener View Post
    Gawd, I wish the papers would stop this idiotic practice of attaching the word "humanitarian" to Jihadist groups.
    Ok, I am only one page into reading the case right now and I can already see that it is exceedingly incorrect to refer to the groups at issue (the Tamil Tigers and the PKK) as "jihadist." You should at least get your slurs straight, Gardener.

  2. #12
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Supreme Court upholds law barring "material support" to terrorist groups

    What counts as "material support"? If it's just running one's mouth, then the SCOTUS is absolutely wrong.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  3. #13
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: Supreme Court upholds law barring "material support" to terrorist groups

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    What counts as "material support"? If it's just running one's mouth, then the SCOTUS is absolutely wrong.
    It isn't just running one's mouth:

    Quote Originally Posted by Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project
    “[T]he term ‘material support or resources’ means any property, tan-
    gible or intangible, or service, including currency or monetary in-
    struments or financial securities, financial services, lodging, training,
    expert advice or assistance, safehouses, false documentation or iden-
    tification, communications equipment, facilities, weapons, lethal sub-
    stances, explosives, personnel (1 or more individuals who may be or
    include oneself), and transportation, except medicine or religious ma-
    terials.”

  4. #14
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Supreme Court upholds law barring "material support" to terrorist groups

    Quote Originally Posted by rathi View Post
    Will this same ruling apply to the government? We have supported various groups currently labeled terrorists today as part of our past cold war policy. I agree that giving money is not the same thing as speech, but I wonder how consistent this ruling is going to be applied.
    I think you are questioning government authority now. Not sure it's in the same league.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  5. #15
    Count Smackula
    rathi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    10-31-15 @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,890

    Re: Supreme Court upholds law barring "material support" to terrorist groups

    I think you are questioning government authority now. Not sure it's in the same league.
    I was more questioning by what standard we determine something to be a terrorist organization and how long that label lasts.

  6. #16
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:01 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,361
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Supreme Court upholds law barring "material support" to terrorist groups

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Agreed. Material support is not the same thing as protected speech.

    From the law in question:

    § 2339A(b)(1)(2)(3):
    (1) the term "material support or resources" means any property, tangible or intangible, or service, including 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 (1 or more individuals who may be or include oneself), and transportation, except medicine or religious materials;

    (2) the term "training" means instruction or teaching designed to impart a specific skill, as opposed to general knowledge; and

    (3) the term "expert advice or assistance" means advice or assistance derived from scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge.


    § 2339B (a)(1):
    Whoever knowingly provides material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization, or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both, and, if the death of any person results, shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life. To violate this paragraph, a person must have knowledge that the organization is a designated terrorist organization…

    The definition of “material support or resources” is clear. Moreover, those who provide such material support or resources “must have knowledge that the organization is a designated terrorist organization.” Furthermore, the statute is quite specific with respect to defining “training” and “expert advice or assistance.” Hence, the Supreme Court found—rightly in my view—that free speech protections were not violated by the statute on account of its being overly vague, as had been asserted by Humanitarian Law Project.
    It sounds like a perfectly reasonable law to me. I got no problem at all with this.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  7. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    04-03-17 @ 12:34 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    241

    Re: Supreme Court upholds law barring "material support" to terrorist groups

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    This is good news.


    FOXNews.com - Supreme Court upholds law barring "material support" to terrorist groups
    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has upheld a federal law that bars "material support" to foreign terrorist organizations, rejecting a free speech challenge from humanitarian aid groups.
    This is an outrage. How dare the SC take away my right to support those who wish to murder me and my family? If I want to pretend I'm a leftist idiot and support islamic fascists who would shoot my gay friends, rape my lady friends for wearing skimpy clothing, behead my artist friends for making pop music or movies, or destroy our way of lives - who is the SC to get in the way of my kids' "I love Hamas today" lemonade stand?

    I mean seriously, what are we going to do on Saturday afternoons, when we'd hoped to be able to raise enough money for our friends in Gaza to buy more rocket fuel, er, I meant fertilizer for their tomato plants?

    Calling CAIR, calling CAIR- hey Mr. Ibrahim Cooper, what are we going to do now? Should we sell cigarrettes like hezbollah, or is copying those infidel shiites now just too radical a suggestion?

  8. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    04-03-17 @ 12:34 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    241

    Re: Supreme Court upholds law barring "material support" to terrorist groups

    Quote Originally Posted by Gardener View Post
    Gawd, I wish the papers would stop this idiotic practice of attaching the word "humanitarian" to Jihadist groups.
    They did already, except when:

    A) anything that involves israel, then the bigger the gun/bomb the terrorist has, the more of a "humanitarian" they are
    B) it involves a boat, like a Gaza-bound flotilla

  9. #19
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: Supreme Court upholds law barring "material support" to terrorist groups

    Quote Originally Posted by joergan View Post
    This is an outrage. How dare the SC take away my right to support those who wish to murder me and my family? If I want to pretend I'm a leftist idiot and support islamic fascists who would shoot my gay friends, rape my lady friends for wearing skimpy clothing, behead my artist friends for making pop music or movies, or destroy our way of lives - who is the SC to get in the way of my kids' "I love Hamas today" lemonade stand?

    I mean seriously, what are we going to do on Saturday afternoons, when we'd hoped to be able to raise enough money for our friends in Gaza to buy more rocket fuel, er, I meant fertilizer for their tomato plants?

    Calling CAIR, calling CAIR- hey Mr. Ibrahim Cooper, what are we going to do now? Should we sell cigarrettes like hezbollah, or is copying those infidel shiites now just too radical a suggestion?
    Not to get in the way of your reactionary diatribe, but this case has nothing to do with Gaza, Hezbollah, or anything of the sort. If you read the case you'll see that the plaintiffs were seeking to provide support to the nonviolent programs of two organizations, that also commit acts of terrorism. These two groups are not Islamic, they are the primarily Hindu group the Tamil Tigers and the communist Kurdish group the PPK. The case is 12 years old (read: prior to 9/11) and has nothing to do with post-9/11 anti-Islamic xenophobia. As much as you might want to politicize it, it is purely a first amendment issue, nothing to do with Palestine or Islam generally. But hey, why let facts get in the way of a good rant?
    Last edited by Guy Incognito; 06-21-10 at 04:37 PM.

  10. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    04-03-17 @ 12:34 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    241

    Re: Supreme Court upholds law barring "material support" to terrorist groups

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    Not to get in the way of your reactionary diatribe, but this case has nothing to do with Gaza, Hezbollah, or anything of the sort. If you read the case you'll see that the plaintiffs were seeking to provide support to the nonviolent programs of two organizations, that also commit acts of terrorism. These two groups are not Islamic, they are the primarily Hindu group the Tamil Tigers and the communist Kurdish group the PPK. The case is 12 years old (read: prior to 9/11) and has nothing to do with post-9/11 anti-Islamic xenophobia. As much as you might want to politicize it, it is purely a first amendment issue, nothing to do with Palestine or Islam generally. But hey, why let facts get in the way of a good rant?
    Neither the TT or PKK are terrorists, both are freedom fighters trying to liberate their homeland.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •