Monday, March 5, 2012

Habeas Corpus and Free Speech Under Attack

"Holder expected to explain rationale for targeting U.S. citizens abroad" by S. Horwitz and P. Finn March 4 2012 Washington Post

[excerpted] Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. on Monday plans to provide the most detailed account to date of the Obama administration’s legal rationale for killing U.S. citizens abroad, as it did in last year’s airstrike against an alleged al-Qaeda operative in Yemen, officials said... Civil libertarians and other critics have been demanding a more thorough and public accounting of the administration’s logic

...Holder plans to argue that the killing of an American terrorist abroad is legal under the 2001 congressional authorization of the use of military force...[anonymous] official also said Holder plans to say that the U.S. right to self-defense is not limited to traditional battlefields as the government pursues terrorists who present an imminent threat...."

Majia Here: The End of Habeas Corpus is the End of Democracy

Our most important liberties--Free Speech and Habeas Corpus--Are Under Attack.

I am re-posting one of my comments from 2010 on free speech under attack

Majia's Blog: Monday, June 21, 2010: bonus: The War on Terror Also Gets to Trump "Free Speech"

From Supreme Court backs use of terrorism law against free speech. by John Burton.World Socialist Website

Majia's summary: John Burton reports on the recent Supreme Court Decision. I had heard several references to the decision on NPR but the stories had not gone into the details and were strangely vague about the implications of the decision. Well here it is, as reported by Burton:

"In the only “terrorism”-related case this term, the Supreme Court on Monday upheld 6-3 a provision of law making it a federal crime to 'knowingly provide material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization,' even if the 'support' consists only of 'expert advice or assistance' for 'lawful, non-violent purposes'—in other words, political speech.

"The US Secretary of State can designate any 'foreign organization' as 'terrorist' based on 'classified information' establishing that it 'engages in terrorist activity' which 'threatens the security of United States nationals or the national security of the United States.'"

"Under this week’s decision, an individual can be sentenced to as much as 15 years imprisonment if found to “support” a designated organization, even if only by means of engaging in discussions with it or speaking on its behalf."



No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.