Why do I love George Bush? - Page 4

Undertoad · 10-26-2005, 01:31 PM

Not. And by the way, if they were merely deported for visa violations or overstays, that will not count.

10-26-2005, 06:26 PM

More information than you ever wanted to wade through is available on ACLU's site. The problem UT, is that these were CLOSED hearings. No one and I mean NO ONE was allowed to know what was going on. These people were held without have access to legal counsel; many times even their own families didn't know what had happened to them, and many were subject to the most brutal and inhumane treatment possible. And these people were NOT terrorists.

Undertoad · 10-26-2005, 07:28 PM

Not good enough, right? I know you know what you need for a cite.

An indicriminate number treated to closed-door hearings in which there was brutal treatment ought to generate at least one link clearly explaining what happened, if someone has a story or case. I went through the information and all I could find in numbers was 700 deportees in the month post-9/11. Boo fucking hoo. Knowing how weak the visa system was at the time, and the sort of people permitted in and forgotten about, I would have hoped that number would be higher.

10-26-2005, 08:00 PM

Oh, come on, UT! You are an intelligent man. I didn't think I'd have to spoonfeed you. There is more information than you can shake a stick at just by clicking on the links in the site I gave above. Should keep you busy the rest of the evening reading it all. Here's the legal brief

Undertoad · 10-26-2005, 08:04 PM

Nice try, but after the strike is called you can stop swinging.

10-26-2005, 08:17 PM

Well, if you're too lazy to read, I can't help you out. I read or glanced over 4 or 5 of their supporting legal documents and press releases. This is the one that impressed me the most. But if you want to call the game on account of rain, that's fine by me. I have a legal matter myself that's coming up in the morning that I need to prepare for, anyhow. :p

Happy Monkey · 10-26-2005, 08:24 PM

Several of the documents ( just picked a few at random) mention hundreds of detainees in New Jersey alone.

Undertoad · 10-26-2005, 08:44 PM

Troublesome, but unrelated; they were detained before the Patriot Act was even passed.

In fact one could make an argument that the Patriot Act relieves the conditions that might require such broad brush behavior by the authorities.

Another swing perhaps?

10-26-2005, 08:50 PM

OK, here's the exact page that gave the 3,000 - 5,000 number. Sorry that I didn't point you directly to it before. There's a lot of stuff on that site and I'm pretty tired at the moment. Now I really AM going to go do my own legal preparations.

Happy Monkey · 10-27-2005, 09:50 AM

That too...

10-27-2005, 10:41 AM

They certainly defend rights in general, but no one has the right to harm a child. Details, please.

wolf · 10-27-2005, 10:55 AM

The story.

ACLU's statement where they say "defending child molesters doesn't mean we support child molesting."

10-27-2005, 11:16 AM

Hmmmm... Yeah, so they are not actually defending child molester's per se. I think they bring up a very good point in their statement about each individual being accountable for his own actions. A person can't push responsibility off on Hostess Cup-cakes or the deranged writings of someone else and say "the devil made me do it."

I have a difficult time with the legitimacy of child porn in writing or pictures, however I do understand the slippery slope problem. Its not an easy question, but the ACLU was not defending people's right to molest children, Wolf.

Happy Monkey · 10-27-2005, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolf

ACLU's statement where they say "defending child molesters doesn't mean we support child molesting."

Which is so obvious, it shouldn't need to be repeated for every case they take. But the fact that it shouldn't need to be repeated doesn't mean it doesn't need to be repeated.

Someone does X.
The government does Y, in response to X.

If the ACLU believes that Y is wrong, they take the case. X is irrelevant.

mrnoodle · 11-01-2005, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

If the ACLU believes that Y is wrong, they take the case. X is irrelevant.

Which makes them amoral scum, IMHO. And it's not whether they believe Y is wrong, it's whether they believe that fighting Y will help maintain or increase their funding from fringe groups -- their only source of power, by the way.

The ACLU began nobly, answering real problems and fighting real injustice. Once their mission was accomplished (i.e., blacks have attained their rightful equality in the eyes of the law), they didn't want to let go of their lobbying power. So now, they'll jump into bed with anyone, no matter how repugnant, to keep their jobs and maintain the illusion of relevancy.

Screw em.

View Poll Results: I love Junior because:
I enjoy how life in the US is just like life in the Twilight Zone these days	8	30.77%
I'm a kid who blows up frogs, myself	3	11.54%
I adore watching darkies drown on the evening news	1	3.85%
He's put the terror back in the word "terrorism!"	9	34.62%
It's about time someone got rid of that stupid bill of rights!	8	30.77%
I love my country, but I love my SUV more!	1	3.85%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 26. You may not vote on this poll

10-26-2005, 08:00 PM	#4
marichiko Guest Posts: n/a	Oh, come on, UT! You are an intelligent man. I didn't think I'd have to spoonfeed you. There is more information than you can shake a stick at just by clicking on the links in the site I gave above. Should keep you busy the rest of the evening reading it all. Here's the legal brief Last edited by marichiko; 10-26-2005 at 08:05 PM.

10-26-2005, 08:24 PM	#7
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	Several of the documents ( just picked a few at random) mention hundreds of detainees in New Jersey alone. __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

10-27-2005, 09:50 AM	#10
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	That too... __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

10-27-2005, 10:55 AM	#12
wolf lobber of scimitars Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phila Burbs Posts: 20,774	The story. ACLU's statement where they say "defending child molesters doesn't mean we support child molesting." __________________ wolf eht htiw og "Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception." --G. Edward Griffin The Creature from Jekyll Island High Priestess of the Church of the Whale Penis

10-26-2005, 01:31 PM	#1
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Not. And by the way, if they were merely deported for visa violations or overstays, that will not count.

10-26-2005, 06:26 PM	#2
marichiko Guest Posts: n/a	More information than you ever wanted to wade through is available on ACLU's site. The problem UT, is that these were CLOSED hearings. No one and I mean NO ONE was allowed to know what was going on. These people were held without have access to legal counsel; many times even their own families didn't know what had happened to them, and many were subject to the most brutal and inhumane treatment possible. And these people were NOT terrorists.

10-26-2005, 07:28 PM	#3
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Not good enough, right? I know you know what you need for a cite. An indicriminate number treated to closed-door hearings in which there was brutal treatment ought to generate at least one link clearly explaining what happened, if someone has a story or case. I went through the information and all I could find in numbers was 700 deportees in the month post-9/11. Boo fucking hoo. Knowing how weak the visa system was at the time, and the sort of people permitted in and forgotten about, I would have hoped that number would be higher.

10-26-2005, 08:04 PM	#5
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Nice try, but after the strike is called you can stop swinging.

10-26-2005, 08:17 PM	#6
marichiko Guest Posts: n/a	Well, if you're too lazy to read, I can't help you out. I read or glanced over 4 or 5 of their supporting legal documents and press releases. This is the one that impressed me the most. But if you want to call the game on account of rain, that's fine by me. I have a legal matter myself that's coming up in the morning that I need to prepare for, anyhow. :p

10-26-2005, 08:44 PM	#8
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Troublesome, but unrelated; they were detained before the Patriot Act was even passed. In fact one could make an argument that the Patriot Act relieves the conditions that might require such broad brush behavior by the authorities. Another swing perhaps?

10-26-2005, 08:50 PM	#9
marichiko Guest Posts: n/a	OK, here's the exact page that gave the 3,000 - 5,000 number. Sorry that I didn't point you directly to it before. There's a lot of stuff on that site and I'm pretty tired at the moment. Now I really AM going to go do my own legal preparations.

10-27-2005, 10:41 AM	#11
marichiko Guest Posts: n/a	They certainly defend rights in general, but no one has the right to harm a child. Details, please.

10-27-2005, 11:16 AM	#13
marichiko Guest Posts: n/a	Hmmmm... Yeah, so they are not actually defending child molester's per se. I think they bring up a very good point in their statement about each individual being accountable for his own actions. A person can't push responsibility off on Hostess Cup-cakes or the deranged writings of someone else and say "the devil made me do it." I have a difficult time with the legitimacy of child porn in writing or pictures, however I do understand the slippery slope problem. Its not an easy question, but the ACLU was not defending people's right to molest children, Wolf.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)