Hacker News Reader

>converted his friend Reza Niknejad to a radicalized form of Islam

Honestly asking: Is that any different than spreading any other idea or creed?

Seems like the only proper defense we have as a society is to teach children thinking skills so they aren't easily swayed by poor ideas. Otherwise we encroach on others' freedom of expression.

Converting friends to radicalized Islam is not and should not be a crime. It's the whole pattern of facts that makes this person's intent and effect clear. Feeding ISIS actual people is material support in the clearest, truest sense.

> Feeding ISIS actual people is material support in the clearest, truest sense.

To be honest, I have no idea what "material support" means. Google defines it as "In American law, providing material support for terrorism is a crime". Could you shed some light on this unholy circular reference?

Of course the actual law defines "material support":

    the term “material support or
    resources” means any property, tangible
    or intangible, or service, including
    currency or monetary instruments or
    financial securities, financial
    services, lodging, training, expert
    advice or assistance, safehouses, false
    documentation or identification,
    communications equipment, facilities,
    weapons, lethal substances, explosives,
    personnel (1 or more individuals who
    may be or include oneself), and
    transportation, except medicine or
    religious materials;

This is not a very fuzzy definition.

The "Relevant Conduct Provision" of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines allows uncharged but related criminal conduct to be used to determine your sentencing at a standard of the preponderance of the evidence. That means that if you're charged with a bunch of stuff and you plead guilty to one count, all the rest can be used to determine your sentence at a significantly lower standard of evidence.

So while the government didn't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that his tweets about funding were material support, those tweets could be used to increase his sentence for the Reza Niknejad thing.

That's true, and it's disquieting that telling ISIS it needs a better website and asking people to help build it could affect a felony sentence.

But you can also look at it the other way around. We're in part disquieted by the Twitter stuff because we (sensibly) believe mere opinions and their expression shouldn't be criminally actionable. But here we have very concrete evidence that these were not mere opinions, but in fact a concerted effort to assist ISIS in a meaningful way.

> But there's a pretty cut-and-dried case against Ali Shukri Amin even without the Twitter drama. This isn't a teenager sentenced for a few tweets.

Absurd. What crime did he commit? "Radicalizing" someone is not a crime. Putting two people in contact is not a crime. Driving someone to the airport is not a crime. Relaying messages to someone's family is not a crime.

"Radicalizing" someone isn't a crime and shouldn't be.

Actively getting a random person to join a terrorist organization and then fly overseas to fight for it is a crime; it's the crime of "Providing material support to terrorists" (18 USC 2339A), which (sensibly) includes "personnel" in its definition of "material support".

As usual in Message Board Law, we're here being asked to fall into the trap of considering each of this person's actions independently, ignoring the greater (and in this case crystal clear) pattern of their intent and the outcome of their plan. "Putting two people in contact is not a crime". Sheesh.

He didn't force his friend to join ISIS.

His friend is the one providing "personnel" to ISIS, by joining the organization, if that's in fact what happened.

He was actively, intentionally, assisting his friend in helping a terrorist organization. (At least that is what he claims to have done.)

Moving a finger is not a crime. Driving a car is not a crime. Closing a door is not a crime.

(Firing a pistol, running over sb., incarcerating a hostage)