""Somebody who fixes a fax machine that is owned by a group that may advocate terrorism could be liable,""
So if I'm a WWII historian and have a deep resentment of the Nazi regime, and I run a website with links to authentic Nazi historic documents, I guess I'm a Nazi, right?
If we donate to this guys legal fund, does that also mean we're funding terrorism?
-TD
From: "Major Variola (ret.)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Arrested for webmastering Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 10:06:04 -0700
Computer Student on Trial for Aid to Muslim Web Sites By TIMOTHY EGAN
Published: April 27, 2004
OISE, Idaho, April 23 — Not long after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, a group of Muslim students led by a Saudi Arabian doctoral candidate held a candlelight vigil in the small college town of Moscow, Idaho, and condemned the attacks as an affront to Islam.
Today, that graduate student, Sami Omar al-Hussayen, is on trial in a heavily guarded courtroom here, accused of plotting to aid and to maintain Islamic Web sites that promote jihad.
As a Web master to several Islamic organizations, Mr. Hussayen helped to maintain Internet sites with links to groups that praised suicide bombings in Chechnya and in Israel. But he himself does not hold those views, his lawyers said. His role was like that of a technical editor, they said, arguing that he could not be held criminally liable for what others wrote.
Civil libertarians say the case poses a landmark test of what people can do or whom they can associate with in the age of terror alerts. It is one of the few times anyone has been prosecuted under language in the antiterrorism law known as the USA Patriot Act, which makes it a crime to provide "expert guidance or assistance" to groups deemed terrorist.
"Somebody who fixes a fax machine that is owned by a group that may advocate terrorism could be liable," said David Cole, a Georgetown University law professor who argued against the expert guidance part of the antiterrorism law this year, in a case where it was struck down by a federal judge.
<snip> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/27/national/27BOIS.html?pagewanted=all&;
.......
Compare to the recent law where editing a paper from a nasty nation would be illegal. The IEEE kissed Ashcroft's ass, other periodicals objected more.
------ Of course there are limits in regards to freedom of speech. They are as
follows: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Everything else is, of course, allowed. -Sunder
_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
