|> From: measl@mfn.org [mailto:measl@mfn.org] |> Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 10:57 AM |> |> On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Roeland Meyer wrote: |> |> > Personally, I have no problems with |> > US State telling me I can't do business with terrorists. Do you? |> |> Absolutely I do. I would have no problem with the USG placing |> people/countries/whatever on lists that I could use as a |> reference to make |> a *volutary* decision as to whether I wanted to do business |> with them, but to proscribe it is wrong. You are arguing morality in a legal context. Don't you know that those two have *nothing* to do with each other? |> First of all, I may not necessarily agree with the USG on |> all of these |> "entries", secondly, the lists are obviously not compiled in a manner |> designed solely to cut of the "bad guys". For example, we |> have China as a |> "most favored nation". Right there the whole idea of an |> impartial list falls apart... Impartiality was never claimed. |> Aside from the impartiality issue, I do not believe that the |> USG has a constitutional right to forbid me from engaging any |> person/place/thing in an otherwise lawful transaction. In that, you are dangerously wrong. Go ahead and sell a Sun e10K, with SSH source, into China. Let me know when they let you out of jail (never). Try to ftp ssh sources into Libya, but before you do, let me know where to send the flowers. Try to do *any* business with Iraq, tell me how large NSA goons come these days. This is not freedom of speech issue, it is a economic embargo issue. The Federal government has the constitutional right to control foreign trade. That's black letter law. That is, trade between US citizens and other countries. Just what do you think NAFTA was all about, piddeling in the Rio Grande? Try importing a shipful of cocaine. Try selling a case of 9mm <any make> hand guns, outside the country. -- IANAL = I Am Not A Lawyer. Before taking legal action based on anything I say or write, you are strongly encouraged to seek the advice of an attorney.