Desertrat
Dec 9, 2004, 08:46 PM
From the Seattle Times:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002112639_diss08.html
"In an apparent reversal of decades of U.S. practice, recent federal Office of Foreign Assets Control regulations bar American companies from publishing works by dissident writers in countries under sanction unless they first obtain U.S. government approval.
The restriction, condemned by critics as a violation of the First Amendment, means that books and other works banned by some totalitarian regimes cannot be published freely in the United States."
and
"Officials from the U.S. Treasury Department, which oversees OFAC, declined comment on the lawsuit, but spokeswoman Molly Millerwise described the sanctions as "a very important part of our overall national security."
"These are countries that pose serious threats to the United States, to our economy and security and our well-being around the globe," Millerwise said, adding that publishers can still bring dissident writers to American readers as long as they first apply for a license.
"The licensing is a very important part of the sanctions policy because it allows people to engage with these countries," Millerwise said. "Anyone is free to apply to OFAC for a license."
Critics say they shouldn't have to."
Add the Desertrat to the list of critics.
What strikes me as totally irrational in this spokesperson's blather is that somehow writings by one opposed to a regime on our Bad Guy list could somehow be harmful to OUR national security. Seems to me these writings would be harmful to the Bad Guys' national security.
Boy, could I find it easy to mispronounce that acronym!
The only heartening part in the article is the list of those entering into the court suit. However, after the SCOTUS decision about First Amendment infringement in the Campaign Finance Reform law, I'm not particularly optimistic...
'Rat
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002112639_diss08.html
"In an apparent reversal of decades of U.S. practice, recent federal Office of Foreign Assets Control regulations bar American companies from publishing works by dissident writers in countries under sanction unless they first obtain U.S. government approval.
The restriction, condemned by critics as a violation of the First Amendment, means that books and other works banned by some totalitarian regimes cannot be published freely in the United States."
and
"Officials from the U.S. Treasury Department, which oversees OFAC, declined comment on the lawsuit, but spokeswoman Molly Millerwise described the sanctions as "a very important part of our overall national security."
"These are countries that pose serious threats to the United States, to our economy and security and our well-being around the globe," Millerwise said, adding that publishers can still bring dissident writers to American readers as long as they first apply for a license.
"The licensing is a very important part of the sanctions policy because it allows people to engage with these countries," Millerwise said. "Anyone is free to apply to OFAC for a license."
Critics say they shouldn't have to."
Add the Desertrat to the list of critics.
What strikes me as totally irrational in this spokesperson's blather is that somehow writings by one opposed to a regime on our Bad Guy list could somehow be harmful to OUR national security. Seems to me these writings would be harmful to the Bad Guys' national security.
Boy, could I find it easy to mispronounce that acronym!
The only heartening part in the article is the list of those entering into the court suit. However, after the SCOTUS decision about First Amendment infringement in the Campaign Finance Reform law, I'm not particularly optimistic...
'Rat
