Three Supreme Justices AGAINST Law Prohibiting Terrorist Funding.

Justice Stephen Breyer, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor (what a surprise) voted against a federal law prohibiting American citizens from providing "material support or resources" to foreign terror groups. Justice Stephen Breyer said he does not dispute the Court’s concerns about protecting the country from the threat of foreign terrorist groups. But he said he was unable to determine how applying the law actually achieves that purpose.
Well, let’s see. You give money to a group that purchases a boat, explosives, and training, to men who get next to US Navy ships, and blow themselves up! Gee, it’s hard to figure that one out. Let’s try something easier. Someone gives money to a group that purchases cell phones and explosives, then plant these next to street and roads, waiting to detonate them when U.S. Marines or Army personnel get close. Does that sound like freedom of speech to you?

liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com...

[edit on 21-6-2010 by Violater1]

Any guesses on which end of the political spectrum these three dissenting judges sit?

That's right. The end of the political spectrum that thinks terrorists are only criminals, and so saying no one can help these so-called "criminals" infringes on someone's free speech rights.

Understand people ... These people have absolutely no interest in protecting or upholding the principles of this nation. Decision after decision, vote after vote, shows that they along with their comrades (carefully chosen word) in the White House and in congress are the true "5th columnists" bent on destroying the U.S. from within.

This one is almost too ridiculous to believe. All three should be impeached and replaced immediately. If they can't even get this one right, they have no business holding public office.

...what the dissenting judges were against is the power of the federal goverment to SOLEY determine who is a terrorist and who is not (thats what it all boils down to) - and - the dissenting judges were absolutely correct to not support the hypocritical war on terror...

...from the article posted in the op...

The case ends 12 years of litigation in which the Humanitarian Law Project had sought to assist the lawful and nonviolent activities of two separatist groups in Turkey and Sri Lanka. Notwithstanding any benevolent activities, the United States government says the groups PKK and LTTE are terrorists groups. The Project claimed the “material support” law infringed on their First Amendment rights to advocate and speak on behalf of the separatist groups. But the Court concluded that it is “wholly foreseeable” any support for these groups would provide them with “information and techniques that it could use as part of a broader strategy to promote terrorism, and to threaten, manipulate, and disrupt.” It set aside the Project’s claims saying its proposals of political advocacy were so broad in scope that they could not prevail on their constitutional claims.

...read the first line of that quote carefully... this is about assisting the LAWFUL and NONVIOLENT activities of groups the federal government has labeled as terrorists... that could come to mean supporting humanitarian groups that help the homeless masses that our fedgov's bs war on terror has created - because - the fedgov does not have to prove that a group has committed or is planning to commit atrocities... it just has to say "its possible" and that is supposed to be accepted as fact or you are a terrorist too...

reply to post by Wyn Hawks


I am with Wyn on this one. After reading the dissenting judges opinion, they were more for protecting individual rights than the 'scare monger OMG the terrorists will get us judges.'

Mahmoud Abbas, also known as Abu Mazen, graduated from the University of Damascus in Syria, and graduated from the Patrice Lumumba University in Moscow, where he earned a Candidate of Sciences degree. In 1961, he was recruited to become a member of Fatah, founded by Yasser Arafat. Abu Daoud, who planned the 1972 Munich Massacre, the hostage-taking of members of the Israeli team at the Munich Olympic Games , wrote that funds for the operation were provided by Abbas. On December 14, 2005, Abbas refused to disarm Palestinian militants and use force against groups that Israel, the United States and the European Union designated as terrorist organizations.
topics.nytimes.com...
en.wikipedia.org...
On January 09, 2005, Abbas became president of the Palestinian Authority and head of the Fatah movement. His quote in 2005,” I renew my commitment to continuing the road he [Arafat] began and for which he made a lot of sacrifices, until the Palestinian flag flies from the walls, minarets and churches of Jerusalem." And in April 27, 2009, “A Jewish state, what is that supposed to mean? You can call yourselves as you like, but I don't accept it and I say so publicly."
Of the 45 current designated foreign terrorist organizations in the world, over half are related to Palestine.
www.state.gov...

Supposedly, on June 9, 2010, Obama announces a $400 Million dollar aid package to Palestine. www.guardian.co.uk...
canadafreepress.com...

[img]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fd3fe883dd3f.jpg[/atsimg] [/img]

But I guess it's OK when the potus does it

[edit on 21-6-2010 by Violater1]

reply to post by Violater1


Whenever you pay income tax your funding "terrorists"!

Originally posted by mopargtx
reply to post by Violater1

 

Whenever you pay income tax your funding "terrorists"!

I'm afraid and sorry that I have to agree with you.
But the skeptics will want proof. So before they rudely flame you, would you kindly provide a source.

I’m against terrorism.
The unnecessary violence and pain it causes, is a crime against humanity.
BTW, the way the potus is sitting gives me a pain in my humanity.

As this member has already started a thread about this subject here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The Political Madness thread is being closed.