Add this Page to Facebook!   Submit to Twitter   Submit to Reddit   Submit to Stumble Upon   Pin It!   Fark It!   Tell A Friend  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite Save As Favorite Get Embed HTML Code View Article Stats
18 comments

Not Shown

The NDAA Is Worse Than We Thought

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 3 of 5 pages)
Related Topic(s): , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 12   Well Said 11   Valuable 11  
View Ratings | Rate It

Headlined to H1 6/16/12
Become a Fan
  (3 fans)

opednews.com

  The Court then asked:   What does "directly supported' mean?

Government: We have not said anything about that in our brief.

Court: What do you think it means?

Government: . . . Your Honor, we had focused so much on the phrase that was challenged by the plaintiffs, "substantial support' that I have not thought through exactly and we have not come to a position on what "direct support' and what that means.

The Court then asked: "Assume you were just an American citizen and you're reading the statute and you wanted to make sure you do not run afoul of it because you are a diligent U.S. citizen wanting to stay on the right side of -1021, and you read the phrase "directly supported'. What does that mean to you?"

Government: Again it has to be taken in the context of armed conflict informed by the laws of war.

Court: That's fine. Tell me what that means?

The Government then returned to the Laws of War and finally stated, "I cannot offer a specific example. I don't have a specific example."

Later Judge Forrester addressed the specific activities in which the plaintiffs had engaged and wished to continue to engage as part of their livelihoods, including gathering information from sources.    The question of the meaning of "associated forces" was central.

"Court: These people have real things they are saying. These are not speculative or hypotheticals. These are people who have actually written articles that we have here. [The Court then held up the articles written by O'Brien and marked as Court Ex. 3.] We are trying to figure out, are these articles going to subject Ms. O'Brien to risk under - 1021? . . . .

Government: Again, I'm not authorized to make specific representations regarding specific people. I'm saying that "associated forces' cannot extend to groups that are not armed groups at all.

Court: So we don't know about the articles, it depends?

Government: Maybe they are an armed group.

With respect to Jonsdottir the Court asked:

I'm asking you as a representative of the United States Government here today, can Ms. Jonsdottir travel to the United States without any concern that she will be captured by her current activities under - 1021?

Government: Again, I can't make representations on specifics. I don't know what she has been up to. I don't know what is going on there.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5

 

Professor of Criminal Justice
Add this Page to Facebook!   Submit to Twitter   Submit to Reddit   Submit to Stumble Upon   Pin It!   Fark It!   Tell A Friend
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
18 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

NDAA by Jana Nestlerode on Saturday, Jun 16, 2012 at 1:24:50 PM
by Jerry Scott on Saturday, Jun 16, 2012 at 7:03:25 PM
NDAA Worse Than Thought by M.I. Lee on Saturday, Jun 16, 2012 at 8:53:00 PM
So, what will the people do? by Deborah Dills on Saturday, Jun 16, 2012 at 10:17:04 PM
treason by Rudy Avizius on Thursday, Jun 28, 2012 at 2:16:33 PM
The Bill of Rights makes US government viable by martin weiss on Sunday, Jun 17, 2012 at 4:10:52 PM
Great article. You may enjoy my explanation of why the by Mark Adams JD/MBA on Sunday, Jun 17, 2012 at 5:31:20 PM
Thanks, Mark. by Jana Nestlerode on Monday, Jun 18, 2012 at 3:44:43 PM
The NDAA Is Worse Than We Thought by Arlen Comfort on Sunday, Jun 17, 2012 at 6:25:28 PM
Sorry, Obama's NDAA smells like fascism by Gustav Wynn on Sunday, Jun 17, 2012 at 8:12:30 PM
Coup d'etat on 9/11 makes the puzzle pieces fit together. by Tom Madison on Sunday, Jun 17, 2012 at 9:23:33 PM
Give me a break by tincansailor on Sunday, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:26:09 PM
by William Tremblay on Sunday, Jun 17, 2012 at 11:42:15 PM
Martial Law IS Here by Laura Stein on Sunday, Jul 1, 2012 at 1:32:47 AM
by Brian Kerry on Monday, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:50:25 AM
Apathy about NDAA by William Tremblay on Wednesday, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:18:58 AM
So what else is new? by Tim Sanders on Thursday, Jun 21, 2012 at 2:57:54 AM
NDAA by Rudy Avizius on Thursday, Jun 28, 2012 at 2:09:07 PM