Slashdot Mirror
Saudi Webmaster Acquitted of Terrorism Charges
terrymr writes "Saudi Student Sami Omar Al-Hussayen was found not guilty on charges that he 'rendered techical assistance to terrorists' by acting as the webmaster for an Islamic charity. Said one juror: 'The part that surprised me was when I read the First Amendment instructions. I was surprised to learn that people could say whatever they want... providing it would not cause imminent action.'" You might remember our previous coverage of this story. In addition, the AP (via CNN) has more information as well.
Obviously the right most taken for granted is also the one people understand the least...
Can we possibly force potentially a hundred million people to go repeat 5th grade american history?
"I hope the message is that the First Amendment is important and meaningful in this country, and actions protected by the First Amendment really shouldn't be subject to prosecution," he said. "I think (the prosecution of) this case represented a pushing of the envelope for what will be permissible in the future. I think this case suggests they won't do that in the future - which I think is good for the First Amendment."
Well, it would be nice if that were the outcome of this case, that people would stop trying to push the First Amendment back. But I suspect the opposite will be the case: They will re-double their efforts to find ways to prosecute anyone they don't like. Prosecuters who lose cases don't usually think, "Hmm...guess I was in the wrong." Instead they think, "Hmm...better work harder to get convictions."
In America, the big thing used to be DWB: Driving While Black, where you could be pulled over just for having the wrong skin color. In today's America, there are a few who seem to have the idea of EWI: Existing While Islamic. Well, sorry, but Islam is not the problem here, it is extremism. Extremists are the dangeous ones. But hey, let's forget about that and find ways to trash the Constitution, shall we? ...sigh...
I believe a better title would be:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/06/10/first.amendmentIs this a case designed to test the waters to determine who has responsibility for web content? Did they go after the ISP as well?
Will they retry on the remaining charges? What will happen after he's deported? The whole situation is a little bit scary.
"Do not drill any holes in your cat - it will not like it."
-- Nick Davies
I'll die fighting to let him say what he wants. But, don't let him show up at my any of my favorite bars around Ft. Bragg. Anyone who supports "religious edicts justifying suicide bombings" and invites people to "financially support the militant Palestinian organization Hamas" wouldn't last too long there.
It's unfortunate, but I'm beginning to realize that this is a recurring theme in the human condition. Every generation has a group to hate/fear. Hundreds of years ago it was witches. Our parents' generation feared the communists, and now we have the terrorists.
In each of these cases freedom has always been the first victim. With witches it was the loss of religious freedom. With the communists came the loss of actual freedom for many wrongly imprisoned. Today not only are innocents like Sami Al-Hussayen losing their freedom, but we're all losing a little freedom as we exchange privacy for so-called "protection".
That lunatics aren't limited to the left or right of the political spectrum.
The fact is that the US is one of the more right wing nations. Consequently, even though you think you are left, or central, relative to the rest of the world you are probably quite right wing.
There are 290 million people in the US. There are 6 billion in the world. Thus chances are a significant portion of the world's population is 'left' of you. Conseqently an American will generally view a collection of the world's population, such as the Internet, as being 'left wing'.
As an illustration, I've generally considered slashdot to be somewhere between 'right' and 'centre'. I'm an Australian and consider myself to be 'centre' in Australian politics. I gather the majority of American slashdotters consider slashdot to be 'left'.
do they have to stop the 'approved' torture now?
From the article:
"Al-Hussayen remains in custody on an immigration hold."
That single fact speaks volumes.
You know, every now and then someone comes along and upsets my world view and makes me re-jiggle things until everything fits together again.
It's not very comfortable, but I suppose it's quite healthy to do so.
Thank you.
May we never see th
Indeed. freerepublic.com is so "free" that shortly after I posted there - a very moderate, reasonable comment, incidentally - my message was "Removed by Moderator" and when I next attempt to post a message, I encountered this:
Your posting privilege has been revoked.
Freerepublic.com - where the moderators are too chickshit to allow their flock to engage in conversation which might meaningfully contradict their biases.
Neopets - the best free game on the Int
As a fellow Aussie, I agree. Regardless of what they think they have, the US political scene seems to consist of Right and Further Right.
:-)
Plus the whole Libertarian thing seems really out there.
My own political position? LeftRightOut
When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
conservative forums/blogs
try oxblog.blogspot.com
or www.andrewsullivan.com
or www.realclearpolitics.com
or www.instapundit.com
shooting is not too good for my enemies
Official Public Notice...
Attention non-US-citizens
We know that you have looked to the United States over the years as a benchmark for progress. The innovation and passion of our infant society and government has made great strides in the progression of humankind.
However, please be advised that this progress has now ceased.
Don't waste your time being disappointed with the obvious lack of logic, consistency, lawfulness or compassion of our people. It has all but evaporated.
America has turned into a society of consumers who value materialism over everything else, and as a result, we interpret "truth" according to the tenets which most benefit our quest for validation within our society of consumption.
Not everyone in our country believes in these ideals, but you wouldn't know that from watching American media.
So the energy you would expend to call attention to the numerous double standards of the ideals that we supposedly espouse might be best served, if they were recycled into a campaign to overthrow the political parties that are employing the misguided notion that large corporations and media conglamorates have the masses best interests in mind.
We're talking about pseudomilitiant extremist Christians in America today, aka the "Christian Right", which is more of a cultural group than a religious bloc. And while there's probably some militant Catholics out there somewhere, they probably don't get to be counted as part of the "Christian Right" club. In fact, that particular movement sometimes seems to hate Catholics even almost as much as they hate us homosexuals.
No, clearly not all Christians are in with this crowd. And not all Christians are "turning a blind eye" to things like abortion clinic bombings. But within the Christian community a violent minority does exist. And the number of "Christians" that are turning a blind eye, or even to some degree tacitly approving, to the extremists among them is large enough to be rather scary. And the number of Christians who practice their personal religion in a totally healthy, positive and loving way, yet seem to be totally unconcerned that a nontrivial number of people out there are applying the name "Christian" to a religion based essentially around hate, is much larger.
Basically, if you're trying to protest the painting of all Christians with a wide brush, then yes, you're right, good point. But other than that, I don't see how one Christian minority group disapproving of violent tactics makes the actions of another Christian minority group which does approve of violent tactics any less of a "lynching".
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
(please note I'm not advocating the Soviet system, just an observation)
Of course, 'left' and 'right' are horribly inadequate terms too. This holds true too for the terms 'conservative' and 'liberal', as demonstrated by one of my favorite recent sayings: 'Bush: he's liberal in all the wrong ways!' (sorry, can't recall whom to credit) Reducing political inclination to a single spectrum is a vast and rather ridiculous oversimplification. As another responder pointed out, there is also an orthogonal issue of 'libertarian-authoritarian' tendencies.
A nice site to check out might be The Political Compass, which nicely illustrates the fundamental issue with projecting everything into a single left-right/liberal-conservative axis. Of course, even two axes probably isn't enough, but it's much closer to an accurate representation. Hope it's at least a little bit enlightening.
Information: "I want to be anthropomorphized"
You seem to have lost sight of the fact that being a communist was, is, and should always be legal in this country.
As it wasn't a crime, people should never have been subjected to the threats, investigations, and persecution the government was promoting.
I do not agree with communism. I would not go to a rally. I don't care if the person next to me has or not. The "communists" in Hollywood were just disenfranchised. They weren't Soviet spies.
I would never turn in my neighbor because of something that wasn't, isn't, and shouldn't be a crime.
Leftist?
Someone has a severe chip on their choulder here. This isnt about leftism, its about freedom and consistency.
Back in the eighties when my home town was getting bombed by the I.R.A. I dont remember anyone on US soil being hauled into jail for 18 months on "Terrorist Charges". Why? Because raising money for NorAid wasnt a criminal, terrorist activity. AND NEITHER IS THIS.
Too often Americans forget their recent history books. May I refer you to McCarthyism. Its right there. Between Klan and Prohibition.
Capitalism has nothing to do with it. The majority standing by in their comfortable homes and saying nothing while injustice runs riot is the issue here.
For shame.
I wish at was Friday, but I dont want to wish my life away. So I wish it was last Friday.
I agree with you 100%, btw. I'm getting that out there right away because the next bit is off-the-cuff rambling. :) Maybe it will inspire some thoughts or something.
Of course you wouldn't turn in your neighbor because of something that "wasn't, isn't, and shouldn't" be a crime...but when you add "shouldn't", you are making a personal judgement call. Governments don't like that, they like to believe they are in control. (Managers don't like it either!)
The real question is, when push comes to shove, will you stop/try to stop the rapid dogs of hatred from taking your neighbor away, when they come for him? Will you put your own life/reputation/job/whatever on the line for your friends, or what you feel is the right thing to do?
It's all about personal conviction. I either came off sounding like a true patriot, or a radical terrorist there. Hmm.
(The names of the factions in question, and "what is right" have been deliberately removed as they can apply to pretty much any group of 5 or more people, and pretty much any philosophy).
Where do you people get this stuff??? The OJ case wasn't about nullification.
It would have been nullification if the jurors had declared afterwards "Yeah, he did it, but the laws against First Degree Murder are wrong or were wrongly applied"
Instead, in the after the trial interviews, the jurors said, "We didn't think he did it."
As an aside...they also said that had they seen the evidence that was excluded at trial that they would have voted to convict. That's the bitch of the OJ trial and what most people can't understand: It wasn't that the jury was too stupid or gullible. It was that the prosecution was out manuvered by the all star squad of Cochran, Bailey, Dershiwitz, and Shapiro.
Honestly, there is a great deal of insight in 'commodoresloats' comment.
I've sat in the jury selection pool a couple of times and, almost without exception, the people that go to the final jury box are usually midwest, mom 'n' apple pie, 2.4 children, elk's club types. Anyone who displays *any* objectivity or open-mindedness of opinion, knowledge or interest in the law, or displays any "big picture" concern or opinion is guaranteed a "thank you, you may go now" from the legal counsels. Arguably this can be good or bad, but the primary concern of the defense and prosecution when picking jurors is *predictability* of the jurors' eventual viewpoints and opinions.
----- And all that the Lorax left here in this mess was a small pile of rocks, with one word...UNLESS.