Why do I love George Bush? - Page 4

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.

wolf · 10-27-2005, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marichiko

Is the ACLU a moonbat outfit?

Yes.

The few shreds of credibility they retained fluttered away in the wind generated by their defense of the child molesters.

10-27-2005, 02:02 AM

They defended child molesters?!? Really? What was THAT all about? YUCK! I can't believe the ACLU would do that. Tell me more about the case.

xoxoxoBruce · 10-27-2005, 02:37 AM

Quote:

Khaled Albitar, Khaled, Naeem, Khurram, Khaled K. Abu-Shabayek, Husain Raza, Sadek Awaed, Sadwar Yamen, Benamar Benatta, Anser Mehmood.......

Look at those names.......they must be guilty.

Happy Monkey · 10-27-2005, 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marichiko

They defended child molesters?!?

They defend rights. Other parts of society are most likely to let rights slide in the case of scum like child molesters, but if you let them slide in one place, that becomes precedent.

When the ACLU takes a case, it's not about the individual, but the point of law.

xoxoxoBruce · 10-27-2005, 09:29 AM

Quote:

They defend rights. Other parts of society are most likely to let rights slide in the case of scum like child molesters, but if you let them slide in one place, that becomes precedent.

They defend rights. Other parts of society are most likely to let rights slide in the case of scum like child molesters, but if you let them slide in one place, that becomes our President.

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.

bargalunan · 10-31-2005, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Look at those names.......they must be guilty.

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

They defend rights. Other parts of society are most likely to let rights slide in the case of scum like child molesters, but if you let them slide in one place, that becomes our President.

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, 08:24 PM	#47
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	#55
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	#57
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, 08:17 PM	#46
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	#48
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	#49
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, 02:02 AM	#51
marichiko Guest Posts: n/a	They defended child molesters?!? Really? What was THAT all about? YUCK! I can't believe the ACLU would do that. Tell me more about the case.

10-27-2005, 10:41 AM	#56
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	#58
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)