should journalists be allowed to speak with designated "terror organizations"?

[© tweed]

here's the Official Bad Guys list


this basic first amendment right is under fire.  in 2010, the US Supreme Court in Holder vs. Humanitarian Law project ruled that people can be convicted of "material support for a terrorist group" simply by giving them "aid and assistiance" and "training" through speech.

in the above case the Humanitarian Law Project had spoken with members of US-designated terror groups and urged them to seek peaceful resolution to their conflicts.  the Court ruled this action to be in violation of the PATRIOT Act and commensurate with the First Amendment.

--

earlier this year, in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo shooting, Jeremy Scahill wrote an article in which he anonymously sourced a contact "within al-Qaeda in the Arabian peninsula".  the FBI responded that the act was "disgusting".

personally I believe Scahill and the few journalists like him will be in prison within a decade.  conversation with "terror groups" will be effectively treated like a form of treason: thus forming the perfect brick wall between the US population and those we are supposedly at war "engaged in hostilities" with.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

yes (normal)

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Other.  So long as they act like journalists, yes.  But if they act like press agents for the organizations, no. That said, there would need to be extremely conclusive evidence they were acting as a fellow traveller rather than as merely a naive fool.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Somewhere between Option 1 and Option 2.

[Zioneer]

Other.  So long as they act like journalists, yes.  But if they act like press agents for the organizations, no. That said, there would need to be extremely conclusive evidence they were acting as a fellow traveller rather than as merely a naive fool.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Holder v HLP is a travesty.  How did we get to this point?

[Frodo]

Yes, but they should take care not to follow al-Jazeera's example and effectively serve as their mouthpieces. 

[Goldwater]

Yes, but they should take care not to follow al-Jazeera's example and effectively serve as their mouthpieces. 

[Cory]

yes (normal)

[Likely Voter]

Did you know in 1941 LIFE magazine interviewed Hitler?

I think our Republic can survive the NYT talking to some a-hole in Syria/Iraq/etc

[Middle-aged Europe]

Did you know in 1941 LIFE magazine interviewed Hitler?

I think our Republic can survive the NYT talking to some a-hole in Syria/Iraq/etc

Adolf Hitler was undeniably a very important politican back in 1941. And the United States wasn't at war with Germany at the time this interview was conducted.