News:

Living proof that any damn fool can make things more complex

Main Menu

Holder vs Humanitarian law and Arar vs Ashcroft both pass in Govt favour

Started by Cain, June 24, 2010, 07:18:31 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Cain

http://ccrjustice.org/holder-v-humanitarian-law-project

The Humanitarian Law Project was advising groups deemed "terrorists" on how to negotiate non-violently with various political agencies, including the UN. In this 6-3 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, the Court ruled that that speech constituted "aiding and abetting" a terrorist organization, as the Court determined that speech was "material support". Therefore, the Executive and/or Congress had the right to prohibit anyone from speaking to any terrorist organization if that speech embodied "material support" to the terrorist organization.

And remember, the Executive can designate individuals or groups as terrorists without any recourse to silly things like facts or trials.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arar_v._Ashcroft

Arar, a dual Canadian-Syrian citizen, was extraordinarly renditioned (read: kidnapped) by US officials.  He was held in solitary confinement in the United States for nearly two weeks, questioned, and denied meaningful access to a lawyer. The US government suspected him of being a member of Al Qaeda and deported him, not to Canada, his current home, but to his native Syria, even though its government is known to use torture. He was cleared of all terrorism charges by the Canadian government.

Arar's attempt to sue then Attorney General Ashcroft was dismissed using State Secret privileges and on unspecified national security grounds.  Subsequent courts have upheld this ruling and the Supreme Court has ignored all petitions to try the case.

Requia ☣

Inflatable dolls are not recognized flotation devices.

Juana

"I dispose of obsolete meat machines.  Not because I hate them (I do) and not because they deserve it (they do), but because they are in the way and those older ones don't meet emissions codes.  They emit too much.  You don't like them and I don't like them, so spare me the hysteria."

Requia ☣

Ok, I read the opinion.  I can agree that the first ammendment isn't necessarily dominant here.  But what about the fact that this was legal advice

Do you have a goddamn excuse for that Roberts?  :argh!:
Inflatable dolls are not recognized flotation devices.

Cramulus

ahgddkihawge'lkhaw'kgeha'oieghagoaihtg'awoeut'aekg/laskgdjdasg HORRORMIRTH heee HEEEEEEEEEE

Doktor Howl

Quote from: Requia ☣ on June 24, 2010, 08:44:14 AM
Ok, I read the opinion.  I can agree that the first ammendment isn't necessarily dominant here.  But what about the fact that this was legal advice

Do you have a goddamn excuse for that Roberts?  :argh!:

Yes.  It is now illegal to give legal advice ("Expert advice") to a terrorist or terrorist organization.  The law in which that was embodied was supposedly intended to keep banking and explosives advice, for example, but wasn't worded that way.  ANY "expert advice" counts.

Oh, yeah, Obama's nominee to SCOTUS avidly supports that law.
Molon Lube

Zyzyx

Typical Greyfaced BS.  :argh!:

Looks like I'll have to advance my self-sufficient bunker plan by a few years now.

Doktor Howl

Quote from: Zyzyx on June 24, 2010, 04:00:09 PM
Typical Greyfaced BS.  :argh!:

Looks like I'll have to advance my self-sufficient bunker plan by a few years now.

And miss all the fun?

Also, google "Ruby Ridge".
Molon Lube

Cain

Elena Kagan is like a legal opinion vaccuum.  In fact, the only thing I can say for sure she believes is in almost unfettered executive power.

Doktor Howl

Quote from: Cain on June 24, 2010, 04:01:12 PM
Elena Kagan is like a legal opinion vaccuum.  In fact, the only thing I can say for sure she believes is in almost unfettered executive power.

I remember reading some spag named Cicero, who bitched about this shit 2060 years ago.   :lulz:
Molon Lube

Cain

And look how he ended up.

At least nowadays he'd have the chance to build an explosive vest, gather some nails and glass, and go down fighting.  This sentence has been defaced for National Security reasons.

Zyzyx

Quote from: Doktor Howl on June 24, 2010, 04:01:11 PM
Quote from: Zyzyx on June 24, 2010, 04:00:09 PM
Typical Greyfaced BS.  :argh!:

Looks like I'll have to advance my self-sufficient bunker plan by a few years now.

And miss all the fun?

Also, google "Ruby Ridge".
Best thing to learn from this is to not associate with wackos like the Aryan Nations. I had someone suggest that my associates and I style ourselves an "out-of-work Private Military Corps", as private "militias" are technically illegal, no?

Doktor Howl

Quote from: Zyzyx on June 24, 2010, 04:09:16 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on June 24, 2010, 04:01:11 PM
Quote from: Zyzyx on June 24, 2010, 04:00:09 PM
Typical Greyfaced BS.  :argh!:

Looks like I'll have to advance my self-sufficient bunker plan by a few years now.

And miss all the fun?

Also, google "Ruby Ridge".
Best thing to learn from this is to not associate with wackos like the Aryan Nations. I had someone suggest that my associates and I style ourselves an "out-of-work Private Military Corps", as private "militias" are technically illegal, no?

Google "Ruby Ridge".
Molon Lube

Zyzyx

Reading the Wiki article now. Sounds like a bunch of "whoopsies" on the part of the government that led to the ruining of a life that just wanted to be left alone.

It makes one wonder: how /does/ one do it right? Because it seems like the feds fucked with this guy until they finally had a chance to shoot him.

Doktor Howl

Quote from: Zyzyx on June 24, 2010, 04:20:17 PM
Reading the Wiki article now. Sounds like a bunch of "whoopsies" on the part of the government that led to the ruining of a life that just wanted to be left alone.

It makes one wonder: how /does/ one do it right? Because it seems like the feds fucked with this guy until they finally had a chance to shoot him.

"Whoopsies".   :lulz:

He went square.  They pounded him into a round hole.

That's usually fatal.
Molon Lube