Judge strikes down part of Patriot Act

[Dr. A ♥ O 203]

So let me get this straight. They cannot tap calls or search and seize property. Maybe someone can enlighten me then on exactly how the authorities are supposed to prevent terror attacks.

In the words of Art Bell "You can't prevent them."

Somewhere somebody in the world is waiting with bated breath for their enemy plotting and planning. You're right it's always going to be going on but that is no reason to tear the fabric of our constitution as if we are the ones under attack.

Edited September 6, 2007 by OlivianWaleed

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Maye you should speak to people who are involved in law enforcement. They have about a million rules, laws, processes and forms to fill out while the criminals are free to do as they please. Common sense would suggest we should free them from the BS and allow them to actually do their job.

Sure, but that doesn't change the fact that law enforcement agencies have to operate within the law.

Moreover, given what happened to the guy in the London Underground shortly after 7/11, I'd say that's more important than ever. You can't shoot a guy 7 times in the head and call it a 'mistake'.

ACLU and being unconstitutional are just about the two dumbest things I have ever heard of. Maybe if we are attacked I can use the US court system against the terrorists. Apparently the judges double up as special forces. I am also sure the ACLU and it's heroic members will take up arms and fight for this nation, not!!

PS Before anyone thinks that this whole war on terror is made up by the GWB admin and war mongers, keep in mind one thing; Humans have been at war 97% of our history..

Should we tear up the constitution then?

No but clearly lynch mobs like the ACLU are more interested in their own agenda than protecting lives or the citizens of this country. Hence why the do all of their dirty work behind the closed doors of the courts.

here's one reason the aclu goes after high profile cases:

One of the cases the bill’s supporters cite as an example of the current problem is from January 2004, when the ACLU received $950,000 in a settlement with the city of San Diego. Although the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled the Boy Scouts could refuse to admit homosexual troop members and troop leaders, the ACLU still was able to succeed in its claim the city was showing favoritism to a religious organization by leasing the Scouts land for $1 a year.

link

from wikipedia:

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is the common name for an American organization consiting of two separate entities. The ACLU Foundation is a non-profit that focuses on litigation and communication efforts, whereas the American Civil Liberties Union focuses on legislative lobbying and does not have non-profit status.[1]

Funding

"...18% came from court awarded attorney fees.."

also:

The ACLU has received court awarded fees in numerous church-state cases. The Georgia chapter was awarded $150,000 in fees after suing a county demanding the removal of a Ten Commandments display from its courthouse;[24] a second Ten Commandments case in the State, in a different county, led to a $74,462 judgment.[25] Meanwhile, the State of Tennessee was required to pay $50,000, the State of Alabama $175,000, and the State of Kentucky $121,500, in similar Ten Commandments cases.

link

There is of course such a thing as context. In this specific context what is so disagreeable about their position?

Is that along the same context where the ACLU is defending child molester's freedom of speech?????

Given the use of the bolded word - its stupid to even ask that really isn't it?

[Heracles 417]

There is of course such a thing as context. In this specific context what is so disagreeable about their position?

why not read the links and see if you can find out?

They are such a pathetic organization that they take away from a county and it's people, by means of court payouts, and then use that money to spread their rubbish. The ALCU would die in Australia where the government gives millions to various religions and their community based projects.

Edited September 6, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[mawilson 2,133]

ACLU rocks!

[Dr. A ♥ O 203]

Yeah, and idiot banks (*cough* Amsouth/Regions *cough*) LOVE to cite it as a reason for requiring identification up the ying yang for legally admitted aliens...!

Speaking of idiot banks my Mom came screaming out of "The Bank of America" the other weekend. I quote her, "What kind of *bleeping* fascist state do we live in when the Bank is no requiring your Driver's License number to deposit money into somebodies account."

My 82 year old Grandma for the first time in her life is asking me, "How do I get a passport?" When I ask her why she wants one because I know her medical conditions make it difficult for her to travel she says, "Because I see the way this country is going and they're going to be having check points at every major road asking to see our papers soon and I want to be able to move around my city with some ease."

MY GRANDMA of all people!!!

When does it stop?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

ACLU and being unconstitutional are just about the two dumbest things I have ever heard of. Maybe if we are attacked I can use the US court system against the terrorists. Apparently the judges double up as special forces. I am also sure the ACLU and it's heroic members will take up arms and fight for this nation, not!!

PS Before anyone thinks that this whole war on terror is made up by the GWB admin and war mongers, keep in mind one thing; Humans have been at war 97% of our history..

Should we tear up the constitution then?

No but clearly lynch mobs like the ACLU are more interested in their own agenda than protecting lives or the citizens of this country. Hence why the do all of their dirty work behind the closed doors of the courts.

here's one reason the aclu goes after high profile cases:

One of the cases the bill’s supporters cite as an example of the current problem is from January 2004, when the ACLU received $950,000 in a settlement with the city of San Diego. Although the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled the Boy Scouts could refuse to admit homosexual troop members and troop leaders, the ACLU still was able to succeed in its claim the city was showing favoritism to a religious organization by leasing the Scouts land for $1 a year.

link

from wikipedia:

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is the common name for an American organization consiting of two separate entities. The ACLU Foundation is a non-profit that focuses on litigation and communication efforts, whereas the American Civil Liberties Union focuses on legislative lobbying and does not have non-profit status.[1]

Funding

"...18% came from court awarded attorney fees.."

also:

The ACLU has received court awarded fees in numerous church-state cases. The Georgia chapter was awarded $150,000 in fees after suing a county demanding the removal of a Ten Commandments display from its courthouse;[24] a second Ten Commandments case in the State, in a different county, led to a $74,462 judgment.[25] Meanwhile, the State of Tennessee was required to pay $50,000, the State of Alabama $175,000, and the State of Kentucky $121,500, in similar Ten Commandments cases.

link

There is of course such a thing as context. In this specific context what is so disagreeable about their position?

why not read the links and see if you can find out?

Innuendo about the organisations agenda doesn't make their legal stance 'wrong'. After all... who is it that makes the final decision - is it the ACLU or the judge?

[pedroh 21]

...Kid's of today are so f*cked up...

I always thought you where a moron and you just proved it..

Well they're your words aren't they?

Personally I thought that the suggestion that the court warrant system is responsible for the 'low crime rate' (in sarcastic quotations) was rather idiotic, but I held my tongue

Maye you should speak to people who are involved in law enforcement. They have about a million rules, laws, processes and forms to fill out while the criminals are free to do as they please. Common sense would suggest we should free them from the BS and allow them to actually do their job.

here's one reason the aclu goes after high profile cases:

One of the cases the bill’s supporters cite as an example of the current problem is from January 2004, when the ACLU received $950,000 in a settlement with the city of San Diego. Although the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled the Boy Scouts could refuse to admit homosexual troop members and troop leaders, the ACLU still was able to succeed in its claim the city was showing favoritism to a religious organization by leasing the Scouts land for $1 a year.

link

from wikipedia:

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is the common name for an American organization consiting of two separate entities. The ACLU Foundation is a non-profit that focuses on litigation and communication efforts, whereas the American Civil Liberties Union focuses on legislative lobbying and does not have non-profit status.[1]

Funding

"...18% came from court awarded attorney fees.."

also:

The ACLU has received court awarded fees in numerous church-state cases. The Georgia chapter was awarded $150,000 in fees after suing a county demanding the removal of a Ten Commandments display from its courthouse;[24] a second Ten Commandments case in the State, in a different county, led to a $74,462 judgment.[25] Meanwhile, the State of Tennessee was required to pay $50,000, the State of Alabama $175,000, and the State of Kentucky $121,500, in similar Ten Commandments cases.

link

There is of course such a thing as context. In this specific context what is so disagreeable about their position?

Is that along the same context where the ACLU is defending child molester's 'rights' to freedom of speech and expression?????

Do you want a police state? that has the power to know what are you doing, who are you talking to, without them telling you?

[GaryC 7]

ACLU rocks!

ACLU defends child-molester group

Asks judge to throw out lawsuit against NAMBLA for 10-year-old's murder

Posted: December 13, 2000

1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Julie Foster

© 2000 WorldNetDaily.com

The American Civil Liberties Union has asked a judge to dismiss what it calls an "unconstitutional" lawsuit against a national pedophile organization being sued in a wrongful death case after two of the group's members brutally raped and murdered a 10-year-old boy.

The $200 million civil lawsuit, which charges the North American Man-Boy Love Association with wrongful death, was originally filed in Massachusetts Federal District Court on May 16.

As reported in WorldNetDaily, Salvatore Sicari and Charles Jaynes picked up fifth-grader Jeffrey Curley and took the boy to the Boston Public Library where Jaynes accessed NAMBLA's website. Later, the men attempted to sexually assault Curley, but the boy fought back. Attempting to restrain him, Jaynes gagged the 10-year-old with a gasoline-soaked rag, eventually killing him. The men put Jeffrey's body in a tub with concrete and threw it in a river.

According to Curley family attorney Larry Frisoli, Jaynes kept a diary in which he wrote that he turned to NAMBLA's website in order to gain psychological comfort for what he was about to do. The killer had been stalking Curley prior to the boy's murder and possessed various materials from the clandestine group.

The ACLU argues that the newsletters and other NAMBLA materials in Jaynes' possession, which contain ''photographs of boys of various ages and nude drawings of boys,'' are protected speech under the Constitution. The material does not ''urge, promote, advocate or even condone torture, mutilation or murder,'' ACLU attorneys wrote. ''Examination of the materials that have been identified by the plaintiffs will show that they simply do not advocate violation of the law,'' the dismissal motion states. ''But even if that were the case, speech is not deprived of the protection of the First Amendment simply because it advocates an unlawful act."

Both killers are now serving life sentences. The family filed the lawsuit against NAMBLA and the Internet service provider that hosted its site, arguing their son might still be alive were it not for the group and its website.

But the ACLU believes NAMBLA is being unconstitutionally ''sued for their ideas.'' According to court documents from the ACLU, the case raises ''profoundly important questions under the First Amendment,'' because NAMBLA is not being sued for making any particular statements, but simply for creating an ''environment'' that encourages sexual abuse.

''What they don't like is what NAMBLA stands for,'' said John Reinstein, legal director of the Massachusetts chapter of the ACLU. ''They don't like their ideas or the notion that someone else would have accepted them,'' he told the Boston Globe.

The Curleys won a $328 million wrongful death case against their son's killers earlier this year, but since both men are penniless, Frisoli called it largely a moral victory. WND reported in July that Frisoli was preparing a class-action lawsuit against NAMBLA. If NAMBLA loses the class-action suit, individuals and parents of children who were involved in sexual relationships with members will be able to collect damages.

According to Frisoli, NAMBLA has anywhere from 300 to 1,300 members, depending on which time period is selected for the lawsuit, translating to thousands of children that would constitute the class in the suit.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=18029

[Ban Hammer 13,656]

ACLU and being unconstitutional are just about the two dumbest things I have ever heard of. Maybe if we are attacked I can use the US court system against the terrorists. Apparently the judges double up as special forces. I am also sure the ACLU and it's heroic members will take up arms and fight for this nation, not!!

PS Before anyone thinks that this whole war on terror is made up by the GWB admin and war mongers, keep in mind one thing; Humans have been at war 97% of our history..

Should we tear up the constitution then?

No but clearly lynch mobs like the ACLU are more interested in their own agenda than protecting lives or the citizens of this country. Hence why the do all of their dirty work behind the closed doors of the courts.

here's one reason the aclu goes after high profile cases:

One of the cases the bill’s supporters cite as an example of the current problem is from January 2004, when the ACLU received $950,000 in a settlement with the city of San Diego. Although the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled the Boy Scouts could refuse to admit homosexual troop members and troop leaders, the ACLU still was able to succeed in its claim the city was showing favoritism to a religious organization by leasing the Scouts land for $1 a year.

link

from wikipedia:

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is the common name for an American organization consiting of two separate entities. The ACLU Foundation is a non-profit that focuses on litigation and communication efforts, whereas the American Civil Liberties Union focuses on legislative lobbying and does not have non-profit status.[1]

Funding

"...18% came from court awarded attorney fees.."

also:

The ACLU has received court awarded fees in numerous church-state cases. The Georgia chapter was awarded $150,000 in fees after suing a county demanding the removal of a Ten Commandments display from its courthouse;[24] a second Ten Commandments case in the State, in a different county, led to a $74,462 judgment.[25] Meanwhile, the State of Tennessee was required to pay $50,000, the State of Alabama $175,000, and the State of Kentucky $121,500, in similar Ten Commandments cases.

link

There is of course such a thing as context. In this specific context what is so disagreeable about their position?

why not read the links and see if you can find out?

Innuendo about the organisations agenda doesn't make their legal stance 'wrong'. After all... who is it that makes the final decision - is it the ACLU or the judge?

if you can't figure out that it's all about the money when it comes to the aclu, i can't help you.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

if you can't figure out that it's all about the money when it comes to the aclu, i can't help you.

I think you misread - what I said:

Innuendo about the organisations agenda doesn't make their legal stance 'wrong'. After all... who is it that makes the final decision - is it the ACLU or the judge?

Who rules on the case - the ACLU or the judge?

[almaty 19]

ACLU rocks!

i agree.,..bless them....anything, that steps on personal freedom suxs....

[Dr. A ♥ O 203]

Another good point I read was the militarization of our police since he who must not be named came into office. When is this much scary politics of government ever good?

You can't get pulled over now without 6-7 police cars showing up even for minor traffic violations. They way they are handeling things is that we're all terrorists guilty until proven innocent. Obviously the checks and balances are out of balance. It's unreasonable to believe we as a nation can stop terrorism in the world. Since when did we become world police?

Also I agree with the data mining comments.

[Heracles 417]

if you can't figure out that it's all about the money when it comes to the aclu, i can't help you.

That is ridiculous. Only republicans are about money.. The ACLU is here to protect people's rights!! Hey don't worry about your life as long as child molesters have their rights protected.

What is worse, a child molester having their rights violated or a cross up in a county office? Just look at all of the Nobel prizes the ACLU has won.

Edited September 6, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[mawilson 2,133]

Child molesters have the same rights as you and me.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Child molesters have the same rights as you and me.

The horror!

Where's the outrage!?

I always wanted to use that slogan in a sentence