Last 5 Weeks
Monthly Archive
The War on Terror
The Legal System
The Criminal Justice System
Immigrants
Higher Education
UNITED STATES V. LYNNE STEWART
![]()
You will need the FREE Adobe Acrobat Reader to view the PDF files.
« Previous Post | Main | Next Post »
The State Department reached a new low in the naming of terrorist organizations this week by adding websites to the list of terrorist organizations. The sites added to the list are Jewish organizations that are supportive of Palestinian causes. In fact, if you pay attention, most organizations on the terrorist list are anti-Israel and not particularly anti-American. Makes you wonder what the "war on terror" is all about.
Under U.S. law, it would be illegal to provide money or other material support to the designated Web sites, the people who run them could be denied U.S. visas and U.S. banks must block their funds. The State Department said it was yet clear how this would work in practice.
But the law may not enable the United States to block access to the Web sites, if only for technical reasons.
The news was published by Reuters News Service and was not widely reported in the U.S. press. That is not a surprise. The government would rather conduct surveillance on you and your computer and arrest you without your being aware that you were visiting a "banned" site. Ignorance of the law is no defense. Take note of the listed websites and frequently check the list for new additions. If you visit any of the visited sites, be prepared to face federal charges for aiding and abetting the organization. A man in Portland, Oregon is going to serve 10 years or more in federal prison for creating a website for a banned organization--before it was banned.
Good luck finding the list online. I found it once yesterday, after looking for an hour, and could not find it today. I am sure Ashcroft wants to know why I want to know. Since telling you about the list could be aiding and abetting terrorism in the distorted way Ashcroft defines the term, watch this space in case I disappear.
Posted by Elaine Cassel at October 17, 2003 7:30 AM
« Supreme Court, Fall 2003: The People - 1; Ashcroft - 0. | Main | Why Boykin Should Stay On Message »