Public Enemy #1, The ACLU

Public Enemy #1, The ACLU

The American Civil Liberties Union is at war with the United States of America. On their own website they claim to be “our nations guardian of liberty.” They go on to say, “our job is to conserve America’s original civic values – the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.”

If you are an illegal alien trying to get a drivers license or welfare benefits, a local deviant attempting to view internet pornography at a public library, a Muslim radical hell-bent on the mass murder of U.S. citizens, an American left-wing radical calling for the violent overthrow of the U.S. government, a supporter of racial discrimination (AKA “Affirmative Action”), or a child molesting member of the North American Man/Boy Love Association you can count on the support of the ACLU. They “got your back”! Allow me to elaborate.

In February of 2005 U.S. Representative Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.) co- sponsored H.R. 418, the REAL ID Act. Along with the construction of a border fence between San Diego and Mexico, the bill calls for federalizing rules for obtaining drivers licenses. It requires states to demand proof of legal residence before issuing a drivers license. By limiting access to licenses, illegal aliens will have a more difficult time defrauding the state and federal welfare system or voting in U.S. elections. The horror of it all!

H.R. 418 also makes it far more difficult for terrorists to get a license due to information sharing agreements between the U.S., Canada and Mexico that are built into the bill. The September 11th terrorists had more than thirty drivers licenses between them, which they routinely used in preparation for the attacks on Washington and New York.

The ACLU has started a letter writing campaign to stop H.R. 418 calling it “anti-immigrant.” They claim that nation-wide drivers license standards and information sharing between states violates the “rights” of illegal aliens (“undocumented workers”) and terrorist suspects (“Muslim victims of American imperialism”).

Just what rights do illegals and terrorists have? They also claim that the new license will be used as a national ID card against U.S. citizens. That’s a problem that can be addressed separately in committee or by the amendment process.

The ACLU’s timing is suspect though. When Democrats or the U.N. call for gun registration lists, the ACLU is NOWHERE to be found! No surprise. They don’t believe in the right of individuals to keep and bear arms. The only people who bring their weapons in for “registration” (eventual confiscation) are law-abiding citizens. The ACLU doesn’t seem to have any time for them. I guess it depends on what “list” you appear.

They’re being blatantly dishonest when they say that H.R. 418 is anti-immigrant. The bill is intended to stop illegal aliens and terrorist suspects only! Rep. Sensenbrenner and Rep. Delay have repeatedly called for streamlining the legal immigration process at our borders. Securing our borders and shutting down illegal immigration and access to the American “system” is step one in winning the war on terrorism. The ACLU will probably fight this all the way to the Supreme Court.

“I don’t believe in anarchistic violence, but in directed violence. That would be violence directed at the institutions which perpetuate capitalism, racism and sexism, and the people who are the appointed guardians of those institutions, and accompanied by popular support.”

Lynn Stewart said this in an interview with the New York Times in 1995. Ms. Stewart is a lawyer and a self described radical leftist/revolutionary, and if you removed the words “racism” and “sexism” from her previous statement, and substituted “Zionism” and “Christianity”, Osama Bin Laden could have said the exact same thing. She is associated with the Center for Constitution Rights. They are a radical left-wing group of lawyers committed to anti-American causes.

According to David Horowitz (himself a former Communist and former leader of the “New Left” movement), their agenda is to dismantle the Constitution in a revolutionary future, but also to use it in the present as a radical weapon to weaken the American state.

This goes far in explaining why liberals see 1st Amendment issues in submerging crucifixes in jars of urine and throwing “AIDS” tainted blood on audiences. While at the same time, they couldn’t seem to find their voice to oppose the McCain-Feingold act, which limited political free speech. But I digress. Back to Lynn Stewart.

The mastermind and “religious” leader behind the 1993 World Trade Center bombing was the “blind sheikh” Omar Abdel Rahman. In his book “Unholy Alliance”, David Horowitz tells us that Stewart’s fellow radicals William Kunstler and Ramsey Clark (President Carter’s Attorney General) convinced Lynn Stewart to represent the “blind sheikh.”

He made no mention of how much arm twisting was involved. She was later convicted of aiding and abetting a terrorist by smuggling messages between Mr. Rahman and his terrorist followers in Egypt. I don’t want to know how... The ACLU immediately issued press releases in her defense, calling her a “persecuted civil libertarian.” To this day the ACLU continues to call Lynn Stewart’s conviction a “troubling precedent.” I suppose, to the ACLU there is no such thing as treason!

“Extraordinary Rendition” is a policy started by the Clinton administration (and continued by the Bush Administration) where we round up terrorists and those suspected of terrorism and sends them to another country (i.e. Egypt) for questioning.

Cofer Block, former U.S. coordinator for counter-terrorism said in 2003 that with more than 3000 al-Qaida terrorists in prison in over 100 countries, countless attacks were stopped. I wonder how those countries got the information to stop those attacks? Do you think the terrorists gave up the useful intelligence after losing a friendly game of rock-paper-scissors? George Tenet, former CIA director, admitted to the rendition of at least 70 terrorists. Countries like Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have no moral objections to torture, and retrieve a treasure trove of useful information from these terrorists.

In America we weigh our moral objections to this practice against the possibility of mass murder inflicted by these monsters on an American city! The rendition policy is far from perfect, but given the circumstances it’s the only responsible choice to make. The ACLU of course, vehemently opposes this “outsourcing of torture.”

On March 1st they filed a lawsuit in Illinois against Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld on behalf of four Iraqis and four Afghans. The ACLU calls them “victims of torture” in U.S. run facilities like Abu Ghraib. Were these bad guys forced at gunpoint to watch Lindie England “perform”? If so, maybe the ACLU is on to something!

It’s possible that our “rendition policy” and the Abu Ghraib “offense of Muslim manhood policy” have saved tens of thousands of American lives. Thankfully we will never know. Maybe these policies enable us to “connect the dots.” Do you remember that insipid little refrain being pompously spouted with regularity by Richard Ben-Veniste and Jamie (she built the Intel wall to protect the Clintons) Gorelick? Well, we are now “connecting the dots.”

The ACLU also supports and defends the rights of the “dirty bomber” Jose Padilla. Talk show host Neal Boortz calls him “Osama Bin Lopez.” A convert to Islam, Senor Padilla received al-Qaida training in Pakistan on how to wire dirty bombs. This is a combination of traditional high explosives and highly radioactive material. U.S. authorities were convinced he intented to build one of these bombs when he was arrested on May 8, 2002 at O’Hare airport in Chicago. Properly utilized, these radiological bombs can cause a staggering number of deaths! Attorney General John Ashcroft arrested him and held him indefinitely as an enemy combatant.

Do you care to venture a guess about the ACLU’s response? They were far more concerned that Mr. Padilla’s “due process rights” were being violated. They continue to insist that because he’s an American citizen he has rights that other terrorists do not. Novel reasoning, coming from the ACLU.

On their own website the ACLU airs New York Times editorials calling for the release of all Guantanamo Bay, Cuba detainees saying, “they were illegally detained and tortured.” These bad guys were caught on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan wearing their pajamas, which is not a national military uniform last I checked. Therefore the Geneva Convention does not apply to them!

The ACLU is actively pursuing the “case” of these terrorist detainees at Guantanamo Bay.
Freedom-loving Cubans are routinely shot by Fidel Castro’s henchmen as they attempt to swim to the freedom of the U.S. military base at Gitmo. The ACLU’s murderous Muslim “clients” are dying to kill Americans, while nearby Cubans are dying to become Americans. I’ll bet the irony is lost on the ACLU and their “Uncle Fidel.”

Right now the ACLU is hard at work helping radical Islamists everywhere beat the American legal system. In their myopic anti-American zeal, the ACLU and the far left fail to see the big picture.

If radical Islam succeeds in destroying America, the ACLU and their atheistic fellow travelers will be the first group lined up and shot! Or beheaded, as radical Muslim preferences would have it. They’d be followed quickly by all “non-essential” Jews and Christians (and the LPGA). If the ACLU were a touch more prescient you think they would occasionally support the American system that actually allows their particular form of sedition.

No such luck! In the 1960’s and early 70’s people of conscience everywhere fought hard to end racial and sexual discrimination in hiring practices. It was an essential feature of the overall civil rights movement. In the immortal words of Reverend Martin Luther King Jr., “we should not be judged by the color of our skin, but by the content of our character.” Who can possibly improve on that?

In that spirit, a black man named Ward Connerly, founder and chairman of the American Civil Rights Institute, spearheaded the California Civil Rights Initiative (Proposition 209) in 1996.
Prop. 209 prohibited all state universities, government institutions and private institutions that received government grants from considering race, sex or ethnicity for admission purposes or hiring. The voters of California overwhelmingly approved it.

Doesn’t this sound like the epitome of fairness?

Not to the ACLU. They immediately attacked Prop. 209 and filed suit against it on behalf of the bills opponents. Mark Rosenbaum, legal director of the ACLU of Southern California, said that Prop. 209 “does not just move minorities and women to the back of the bus, it boots them off altogether.” WHAT?!

The ACLU and its comrades actively support a system of racial and sexual discrimination against white and Asian men. This policy is euphemistically called “Affirmative Action.” To this day they continue to fight Prop. 209 and fight for racial and sexual discrimination (Affirmative Action) whenever it rears its ugly head. So much for their claim to be a champion of civil rights. In recent years there has been an uproar concerning the availability of hard-core pornography on the Internet at the public libraries! We’re not talking about bare-breasted African or South American tribeswoman in the National Geographic here!

In an attempt to limit children’s exposure (pardon the pun) to public library porno, citizens groups and congress have installed porn-blocking software in many localities around the U.S.
In 2003 the ACLU filed suit against the installation of porn blocking software on behalf of some librarians (no kidding) and a Rhode Island based health information website which was blocked. The ACLU claimed that the installation of porn blocking software denied citizens (children included) access to some “men’s health” websites and raised “serious 1st Amendment issues.”

How dare those citizens block access to the Robert Mapplethorpe “bullwhip diaries.”!

The Supreme Court ruled against the ACLU and found that the blocking software should stay in place on the condition that the filters are de-activated for any lawful adult user who asks. Are the Rhode Island peep-show owners going to picket outside the libraries protesting the loss of business? Do Rhode Islanders now have to pass a law that states that all adult porn viewers at public libraries must keep both hands above the keyboard at all times?

The ACLU would probably fight that based on freedom of “expression.” One thing’s for sure. Thanks to the ACLU, children are no longer safe in some libraries. By supporting children’s “1st Amendment rights” to view Internet porn, the ACLU has progressed from being merely anti-American, to viscously anti-social.

Of all the outrages committed by the ACLU, this one takes the cake. They are now defending the North American Man/Boy Love Association. On the NAMBLA website, they call themselves a political, civil rights and educational organization, helping to educate society about the positive and beneficial nature of man/boy love.

Before I vomit, let me explain who they really are. They’re homosexual child molesters. This is an organization of homosexual men who meet to share information and new techniques on the best way to rape young boys! The English language is inadequate to describe the abject horror of this behavior. It would require adjectives that have yet to be invented. For now, your gut feeling will have to suffice.

On October 1, 1997 Charles Jaynes, 25, and Salvatore Sicari, 24, molested and murdered 10 year old Jeffrey Curley of Cambridge, Massachusetts. After these animals were convicted, the boys’ family sued NAMBLA. They claimed that NAMBLA and it’s website incited the molestation and murder of the boy. Mr. Jaynes reportedly viewed the NAMBLA website just before killing the boy. He also had NAMBLA publications in his possession. Enter the ACLU.

John Roberts, executive director of the Massachusetts ACLU says, “for us, it’s a fundamental First Amendment case, it has to do with communications on a website, and material that does not promote any kind of criminal behavior whatsoever.”

Oh really? Even in the liberal cesspool of moral relativism known as Ted Kennedy’s Massachusetts, promoting child rape is against the law!

The boy’s parents wanted access to NAMBLA membership lists, which the ACLU is trying to block. If the ACLU sends some staffers over to New York, there’s a Senator who would gladly lend them a few paper shredders to take care of those pesky membership lists. Even more outrageous, the ACLU will act as a surrogate for NAMBLA, allowing its members to defend themselves in court while remaining anonymous! Just in case you weren’t mad enough already.

The Curleys were awarded $328 million by a superior court jury in a civil suit against Jaynes and Sicari. No telling how they will collect.

In medieval times the radicals and child molesters defended by the ACLU would probably be impaled on stakes outside the city walls or end up swinging outside the city gates. How we deal with them today will determine a great deal about the future of our country.

By defending the “rights” of illegal aliens, communist radicals, “affirmative action” racists and Muslim radicals intending mass murder, the ACLU only exposes itself as anti-American. Highly unpatriotic if you will. By fighting hard to allow children access to Internet pornography, and defending a group of homosexual rapists of boys (NAMBLA), the ACLU descends into the murky abyss of inhumanity. This is the most explicit example of the degree to which the ACLU is at war with our country.

To ancient Hebrews (and some modern Jews) the worst possible fate that could befall a person was to die before accepting God. Their soul would be relegated to the valley of Gei Hinnom to be without God’s presence. To later Christians, hell-fire and eternal damnation was the worst possible outcome.

They never met the ACLU!