BF2S Forums Looks like peacefull negotiation is out of the picture for future wars

Op-Ed, not researched journalistic article wrote:

The UK, unfortunately, has similar laws.

The EU also keeps a list of groups categorised as terrorist.

By Andy Carl
Executive Director, Conciliation Resources

Conciliation Resources is an independent charity working internationally to prevent violent conflict, promote justice and build lasting peace in war-torn societies.

The 36-page majority opinion, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, says that Congress intended to establish a broad prohibition against any assistance to terrorist organizations. To prove a violation, prosecutors must show that the individual providing the help or support knew the receiving group was on the US terror list or was an organization that had engaged in terrorist activities.

Justice Stephen Breyer and two other justices dissented, arguing that the statute’s scope was narrower than the majority had found. The law should apply only when the assistance facilitates an illegal act by a terrorist group, Justice Breyer wrote.

“We are deeply disappointed,” said David Cole, a Georgetown University law professor who argued the case at the high court on behalf of a group of humanitarian workers.

“In the name of fighting terrorism, the court has said that the First Amendment permits Congress to make it a crime to work for peace and human rights,” he said. “That is wrong.”

Others hailed the ruling as an important step forward in the international fight against terrorism.

“One cannot provide ‘humanitarian’ support in the form of training, expert advice or assistance, service, and personnel to a terrorist organization without helping their bottom line and facilitating violence, destruction, and murder,” said Robert Sugarman, national chairman of the Anti-Defamation League.

“There is no such thing as ‘good’ aid to a terrorist group, because all aid is fungible,” said Richard Samp, chief counsel at the Washington Legal Foundation. “When aid is provided for a terrorist group’s humanitarian activities, that frees up resources that the group can then re-allocate to its terrorist activities.”

Others disagree. “Training groups to pursue peaceful resolution of their disputes should be encouraged, not made criminal,” said Sharon Bradford Franklin, senior counsel with the Constitution Center.

“The onus is now on Congress and the Obama administration,” said Shayana Kadidal, senior attorney with the Center for Constitutional Rights. The government must now move “to ensure that humanitarian groups may engage in human rights advocacy, training in nonviolent conflict resolution, and humanitarian assistance in crisis zones without fearing criminal prosecution.”

Dilbert_X wrote:

So much for pragmatism, oh well.

Army chief says talks with Taliban should start soon


The head of the British army believes politicians and military chiefs should talk to members of the Taliban sooner rather than later.

Gen Sir David Richards said that in every counter-insurgency campaign, there was "always a point which you start to negotiate with each other".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/10427983.stm