It gets worse, I am afraid. Look at Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project.
It's protected speech if you blog saying "Terrorist organizations should adopt non-violent methods of resistance instead of blowing up cafes. Here's how it might work as an overall strategy, using Hamas as an example...."
However if you print this out and mail it to Hamas, that's not protected, and may be offering expert assistance to a foreign terrorist organization....
Apparently the First Amendment no longer protects the question of who you talk to.
It's kinda funny this was downvoted since both Citizens united and HLP both drew this funny line at "who you talk to or with." It's a line I don't understand the justification for and it seems dangerous to me, but it is what we are stuck with.
