ACLU In The News

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU Still On A Torture Kick

It seems to me the pinheads at the ACLU aren’t happy unless they are slinging mud at the United States. To them, we are the ultimate enemy in the world. We are even the enemy of, get this, us.

In their latest Press Release, the ACLU is again bashing the United States military by pushing the torture issue. Keep in mind, it was the ACLU and certain mainstream print media that got a federal judge (big surprise) to order the military to release the remainder of the Abu Ghraib photos.

    NEW YORK -The American Civil Liberties Union today released a detailed report on the failure of the U.S. abroad and at home to comply with the treaty against torture. The report was filed with the U. N. Committee Against Torture, which will review U. S. compliance with the Convention Against Torture in early May.

    “America’s image was tarnished not just by the Abu Ghraib photographs but by the failure to hold high level officials accountable for the abuse that happened on their watch,” said Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU. “It’s been two years — too little and too late when it comes to accountability. When our leaders allow torture and are not held accountable for illegal abuses, all of America suffers.”

Umm, didn’t someone resembling me write a thread on the 26th on this very topic? Let’s revisit it, shall we?

    The Army has conducted more than 600 criminal investigations resulting in charges against 251 soldiers who went before courts-martial or faced administrative punishment. It says three courts-martial remain, plus a smattering of administrative cases of which 174 have already been concluded.” SOURCE

Ok the United States Army conducted over 600 criminal investigations. Of those, 251 soldiers have been charged. But these were cases of mistreatment, not torture.

Since when does the UN have any teeth? For the love of Mike, the UN can’t even get Iran to comply with the IAEA and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The UN is an impotent non-entity. The concept of the UN was novel at the time of its inception, but at this point it is little more than a white elephant taking up space in New York. It is nothing more than a collection of diplomats that come to our country, violate our laws under the shield of diplomatic immunity, and suck up our oxygen. They need to be kicked to the curb.

The Washington Times piece where I got that quote on the Army investigations from outlines in detail the extent that the US Army has gone to be sure that mistreatment of our detainees does not happen. Military leaders in this nation are all in agreement that torture does not work. So why in the world would they engage in a practice that would be counter productive? The fact is they wouldn’t.

I don’t trust any report out of the UN anyway. Take a look at the Darfur situation. The UN is a corrupt organization where you can basically buy an the answer you want out of them. I wonder how much the ACLU paid old corrupt Kofi for this report? Because we all know that moron is for sale.

And as for Anthony Romero… Take a look at what I said a few days ago about that idiot.

    These peace-nicks have no comprehension what actual torture is. Perhaps the military should invite Anthony Romero and William Schulz to experience actual torture techniques. There are a couple of schools which teach our special ops people how to resist torture. Perhaps they could educate Mr. Romero and Mr. Schulz as to what exactly torture is. Because it seems that in the minds of the ACLU, Amnesty International, and other groups, just being locked up is torture. SOURCE

I meant it then and I mean it now. These anti-American organizations take a rumor, issue a press release calling it fact, then send legions of lawyers to these poor mistreated terrorists and attempt to get them Constitutional rights.

    According to the ACLU report, violations of the torture treaty are not limited to actions by military personnel overseas in the “war on terror,” but in fact are all too common here at home. In a stark example of the horrific conditions of confinement that persist in prisons throughout the country, more than 1,000 prisoners were abandoned and left in their cells for days without food, water or ventilation when Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans in August 2005. Abusive conditions of confinement also persist in so-called Supermax prisons: prison rape and sexual assault are daily occurrences, and the use of Tasers and restraint devices have endangered numerous detainees and prisoners held domestically. SOURCE

Ok, let me get this straight, the ACLU is calling the failings of the authorities in Louisiana during hurricane Katrina a federal government failing that is deserving of being called torture? Am I reading that right? Or how about prison rapes? Most people in Supermax prisons have murdered and raped. And the last time that I checked, in all of our Supermax prisons, inmates are locked down 23 out of 24 hours. So how is it that there is prison rape happening in a Supermax?

These people actually believe the crap that they write and say don’t they. They live in a fantasy world that could only be dreamed up by a liberal. Because there is no logic in their thinking. None at all.

The ACLU considers the use of Tasers as torture because the criminal is incapacitated and arrested. Their citing of deaths caused by Tasers are inaccurate. It has been stated that most of those deaths occurred to individuals who were long term drug users that had developed an undiagnosed heart difficulty. So what would the ACLU rather police do? Shoot their precious innocent until proven guilty perps? That has happened already directly because of the ACLU.

A man in California charged police with a carving knife. The police department suspended use of Tasers based on the ACLU report linking deaths to the device. Officers were forced to shoot the mentally ill man because they had no non-lethal means to subdue him.

If it were up to the ACLU there would be no prison rapes or violence because there would be no prisons. They don’t believe that anyone can stand in the way of a person’s right to commit a crime. Prosecution itself is torture to these pinheads.

[Soldier4Christ]

One Nation, Under The ACLU


I thought it would be interesting and informative to illustrate what our Nation might be like if it caved into all of the radical ideals of the ACLU. It ended up quite scary, and if we were to follow the law of consequence to its end, I’m certain I have only scratched the surface.

On October 27, 1787, Alexander Hamilton predicted that a “dangerous ambition” would one day tyrannize the gangling young American Republic, all the while lurking “behind the specious mask of zeal for the rights of the people.” It could almost be said that Hamilton had a prophecy of the ACLU.

Our nation would be quite a scary and dangerous place if it were left in the hands of the ACLU. Creating an accurate picture of what our nation would be like is complicated by the inconsistencies in the ACLU’s philosophy, but one can conclude that it would definitely be a much more dangerous society to live in.

To begin with, if our nation were under the ACLU’s ideas, national sovereignty would be no more. Our constitution would become obsolete and superceded by International law. This would completely undermine national security, which the ACLU are constantly at odds with.

    For instance, the ACLU filed a formal complaint with the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention against the United States, stating that the United States violated international law when it detained 765 Arab Americans and Muslims for security reasons after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on our nation. Eventually, 478 were deported. ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero said, “With today’s action, we are sending a strong message of solidarity to advocates in other countries who have decried the impact of U.S. policies on the human rights of their citizens. We are filing this complaint before the United Nations to ensure that U.S. policies and practices reflect not just domestic constitutional standards, but accepted international human rights principles regarding liberty and its deprivations.”Source

Since the 5th amendment is pretty much already gone under judicial tyranny, one of the first things you can kiss goodbye is the 2nd amendment. The U.N. are already pushing for international gun control laws, and you can bet the ACLU won’t fight against that.

    ACLU POLICY “The ACLU agrees with the Supreme Court’s long-standing interpretation of the Second Amendment [as set forth in the 1939 case, U.S. v. Miller] that the individual’s right to bear arms applies only to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia. Except for lawful police and military purposes, the possession of weapons by individuals is not constitutionally protected. Therefore, there is no constitutional impediment to the regulation of firearms.” –Policy #47

Without any means to protect ourselves, lets take a look at crime in the world of the ACLU. To begin with, many of our current crimes would no longer be considered so. They don’t belive in zoning laws, and do believe in fully legalalized, and unregulated prostitution. So there wouldn’t be any law that could keep a prostitution house from being a certain distance from your neighborhood, your Church, or your child’s preschool. This is especially disturbing when they think child pornography distribution and possession should be legal. So, in the ACLU world, we would probably find it much like Amsterdam, child prostitution rampant. Under the ACLU, All drugs would be legal, and Capitol Punishment would completely be abolished.

The 10th amendment would be gone, rendering all states rights to the international community. We would become a welfare state, with our taxes being used to redistribute wealth around the world, as long as the U.N. didn’t pocket it in scandals.

Freedom of religion would be eliminated. Churches would lose their tax exempt status, completely pushed out of the public sphere, and forced to comply with international laws that compromise their core values.

    In spring 2003, a group from the United Nations Human Rights Commission, of which former ACLU officials Paul Hoffman and John Shattuck are a part, met and discussed a resolution to add “sexual orientation” to the UNHRC’s discrimination list. Homosexual activists at the meeting called for a “showdown with religion,” clearly intending to use international law to silence religious speech that does not affirm homosexual behavior. Source

What a scary and dangerous place this would be if it were given over to the ACLU’s vision for America. In no way would it resemble what our founding father’s intended. For the sake of our children, and their children’s future, Americans can not sit idly by and allow the ACLU’s radical agenda to continue. Help us expose the ACLU’s radical agenda for the subversive danger it is. Get involved. Donate and support organizations like the Alliance Defense Fund and the ACLJ that are out there fighting the ACLU’s agenda. Contact your representatives and Senators and tell them to support Constitution Restoration Act that would put an end to the use of foreign law in our courts. Tell them to support the The Public Expression of Religion Act which would put a stop to taxpayer funding of the ACLU in establishment clause case. Sign Our Petition To Stop Taxpayer Funding Of The ACLU. Pray that America wakes up before its too late.

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU to challenge Taylors Falls sex-offender ordinance


TAYLORS FALLS, Minn. - The board of the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota has voted unanimously to challenge a new Taylors Falls ordinance restricting where sex offenders can live.

Director Chuck Samuelson says the restrictions basically prohibit any Level Three sex offender from living in the town. Level Three is a category assigned to the sex offenders who are considered most likely to reoffend.

He says the ordinance also prohibits sex offenders from living within a certain distance of schools, parks, churches and day care facilities.

He says the restrictions could prevent sex offenders from registered with authorities.

The A-C-L-U will write a letter to Taylors Falls officials asking them to rescind the law. It'll also contact the state public defender's office to see whether any Minnesota sex offender was forced to move to a different town because of the new ordinance.

An increasing number of towns and states are creating laws that restrict the living choices of sex offenders.

[Soldier4Christ]

Truth about roommate outrages Akron student
University placed informant on campus


Akron -- University of Akron student Jay Williams wondered why his new roommate could spend so much time working as a roofer and visiting with his two young children but no time in classes.

And he was upset because Richard Harris smoked in the two-bedroom apartment and used Williams' flatware and plates during the four months they lived to gether in 2004.

Today, Wil liams is outraged, not only with his roommate but also with university officials: The man sharing Williams' living quarters was an undercover drug informant with a criminal record. While the two lived together, Harris was being paid $50 by investigators every time he made a drug sale.

Williams, 25, who will receive a law degree in May, said he was at risk of being arrested for selling drugs if Harris planted any in his unlocked bedroom. Or, he said, he could have been injured if he had associated with Harris.

"He had access to my room and, with his convictions, I think he would have done anything to get $50," Williams said. "The university offered nothing except an apology."

The university violated Williams' constitutional rights, said Jeffrey Gamso, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio.

"Informants are effectively undercover cops but do not have police training," he said. "When you insert them into a college atmosphere, it is particularly troubling. You want to think of school as a place where people are safe. It is supposed to be like home."

If an informant living in a dorm goes through a roommate's items, it would be a warrantless search, he said.

"The program is so troubling and so fraught with the danger of doing things wrong that you think there has to be a really serious need for this before we start playing these kinds of games," he said.

"I'm ignorant of any drug problem at the University of Akron, but I would be kind of surprised as to the extremes that would require this kind of thing."

[Soldier4Christ]

FBI didn't try to prevent '04 convention protests

FBI interviews of protesters before and during the 2004 political conventions were carried out for "legitimate law-enforcement purposes" and not to prevent people from demonstrating, the Justice Department's inspector general reported.

In a 37-page report, Inspector General Glenn Fine said the FBI was checking out 17 protester-related threats of disruption at the Democratic and Republican conventions when it conducted interviews, carried out physical surveillance and searched for protesters' names in FBI databases. The FBI tracked down 60 people in nine states, and 41 consented to interviews, the report released Friday said.

"Our review did not substantiate the allegations that the FBI improperly targeted protesters for interviews in an effort to chill the exercise of their 1st Amendment rights," Fine wrote. "We concluded that the FBI's interviews of potential convention protesters and others that we reviewed were conducted for legitimate law-enforcement purposes."

FBI spokesman John Miller said the bureau knew its dealings with protesters would be a sensitive subject.

"The report shows the FBI conducted its investigations properly," Miller said. "They went into this with their eyes open, saying this can be brittle territory and it's important to be mindful of the regulations and do it carefully."

The American Civil Liberties Union has accused the FBI of using the threat of terrorism as a pretext to intimidate protesters and dissuade them from gathering at the national party conventions. The group, which has sued the FBI for records, says that through Freedom of Information Act requests it has turned up evidence of political intimidation on other occasions not related to the conventions.

"We are still quite concerned with an overall pattern, with the targeting of peaceful groups, based primarily on their rights of association and free speech," said Ann Beeson of the ACLU.

The report did not say whether state or local police who were not working with the FBI did anything to the protesters.

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU Files Lawsuit Challenging Funeral Protest Bill


The American Civil Liberties Union filed a federal lawsuit Monday, challenging a new Kentucky law that limits protests at funerals.

The law is an an attempt to prevent disruptions at military funerals. The law was aimed at members of the Westboro Baptist Church Cult, who have toured the country protesting military funerals with signs saying such things as, “God Hates Fags”, and “Thank God For Dead Soldiers.” Members of the cult believe the soldiers’ deaths are a sign of God punishing America for tolerating homosexuality.

I believe the First Amendment protects people’s right to peacefully assemble. I find it odd that the ACLU are not protecting the right of those who wish to mourn the fallen to assemble without being harassed by lunatic cultists.

Kentucky should have seen the challenge coming. Similar legislation was opposed by the ACLU in Louisiana and Tennessee.

However, in this case it doesn’t seem to be the cultists that the ACLU are worried about. They claim that it could lead to an innocent bystander being targeted.

    Lili S. Lutgens, an attorney for the ACLU in Louisville, said a portion of the law is overly broad in the limitations it places on freedom of speech and on freedom of expression.

    “The language is so broad that two people holding a conversation on a sidewalk, if there’s a funeral going on the funeral home, then they’d be in violation,” Lutgens said. “Somebody who was whistling as they walked down the sidewalk, if a funeral was in earshot, then they would also be in violation.”

Yeah right! How ridiculous of an argument can you come up with?

Once again the ACLU are blind to good common sense and decency in favor of some absolutist view on free speech. The laws being presented are not infringing upon their right to expression. They can go 500 to 1,000 feet away and protest all they want. What this legislation is attempting to do is no different than laws that protect political figures from protesters with reasonable buffer zones. It is also odd that the ACLU have fought on the opposite side when those being protested against were abortion clinics. However it isn’t suprising, as we see more and more everyday, that the ACLU are selective in what kind of messages they protect as free speech, and which ones they either ignore or downright fight against.

[Soldier4Christ]

U.S. Supreme Court asked to rule on Tennessee's "Choose Life" license plates


The American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee today asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take up Tennessee’s “Choose Life” license plate.

The ACLU is asking the high court to review a lower court’s decision that said Tennessee would be within its rights to issue the specialty plate. The ACLU says the “Choose Life” plate violates the free speech rights of some Tennessee residents.

Production of the plate, which was approved by the state legislature in 2003, has been halted until the legal battle concludes.

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU Sues Kentucky for Restricting Funeral Protests
By Susan Jones


(CNSNews.com) - The American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky filed a federal lawsuit Monday, challenging Kentucky's new restrictions on protests at military funerals.

The bills, singed into law on March 27, are aimed at members of Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kan., whose protests at the funerals of fallen U.S. servicemen have prompted a national outcry.

The Westboro group says God is punishing American troops in Iraq for defending a nation of homosexual sinners. The group carries banners reading, "God Hates Fags," and "Thank God for Dead Soldiers."

Kentucky law now restricts protests within 300 feet of funerals, wakes, memorial services, and burials. It also forbids the use of bullhorns in such protests.

But the ACLU said the legislation also prohibits "non-disruptive, non-disorderly speech" as well as visual displays.

"The ACLU lawsuit recognizes that Kentucky has an interest in showing respect and compassion for those who have died in military service and for their families, but argues that sections of these laws go too far in prohibiting peaceful protests," said a posting on the ACLU-Kentucky website.

The ACLU said it filed the lawsuit on behalf of Bart McQueary, a Kentucky man who has protested with the Westboro group three times over the last few years.

"Mr. McQueary clearly has the right to express his message in a non-disruptive manner, even if others disagree with him," said Lili Lutgens, a staff attorney for ACLU of Kentucky. "That's what the First Amendment is all about."

McQueary, fearing prosecution, is unable to express his opinion, Lutgens said.

The new laws are so broad, according to the ACLU brief, that they could make it a crime to whistle while walking down the street within earshot of a funeral; or to stop for a conversation on a public sidewalk near a funeral home or church while a funeral service is in progress.

The laws may even prevent groups like the Patriot Guard Riders, a group of pro-military bikers, from being close enough to support the families of soldiers who have died in Iraq during military funeral protests.

"The Commonwealth simply cannot prohibit free expression because it doesn't like certain activities, nor can it suppress the speech of groups or individuals because it doesn't like the message," Lutgens said. "The First Amendment applies to all of us."

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU Alleges Inadequate Care For Women Prisoners At Taycheedah
Suit Names Governor, Correctional Officials



MILWAUKEE -- An American Civil Liberties Union attorney said on Tuesday the state has a legal obligation to provide humane treatment for inmates at Taycheedah Correctional Institution.

A class-action federal lawsuit filed on behalf of Taycheedah's female inmates said that the medical, mental and dental care is grossly deficient and has caused physical and mental suffering.

At a news conference on Tuesday in Milwaukee, ACLU attorney Gouri Bhat said that the women at Taycheedah are in prison to pay their debt to society, not to be subjected to untreated disease and premature death.

Taycheedah is the largest women's prison in Wisconsin. It houses 700 maximum- and medium-security prisoners.

The 49-page lawsuit names Gov. Jim Doyle, top corrections officials and various medical professionals who work in the prison system.

It also alleges the prison failed to provide mental health services comparable to those for male prisoners in Wisconsin.

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU: Silent majority must speak up


While reading the Telegraph this morning, everything was about the same with the news (all bad of course) but then it suddenly got worse. I noticed the that the great gang which is known as the ACLU was at it again .

They were mad because some counties in Virginia had Christians talking to people in jail about God, heaven forbid. The ACLU would have preferred that the people in jail were being told about how great porno or drugs were.

It seems to me that people who are in jail are on the wrong path and I'm sure if more of God had been in their lives, they would not have been in jail in the first place.

I saw on the computer today that in Stigler, Okla., that the ACLU is mad because the 10 commandments are posted on the lawn of the county seat, even though public funds weren't used to put the commandments there.

Why don't our elected officials do more than give us lip service and put these people out of business? I'm sure that people who believe in God would support such a move.

I can't see how any real Christian could support such organization. Maybe if all the Christians let the elected officials know that they have had enough of the ACLU, and that their job was on the line if they didn't do something soon.

Well maybe they would see the light and do something about that group. At any rate the Christians better start doing something soon. The next thing will be maybe all these church buildings offend them.

The so-called silent majority needs to be heard. After all one woman in Texas stopped prayer in schools. I know we all remember that, so wake up folks. Better do or say something. If Christians don't start saying some thing about the so-called people who say that they are looking out for our rights, things will get worse.

[Soldier4Christ]

Fighting For The Judicial Branch


One of the biggest threats America faces in today’s times are those that come from activist judges creating laws from the bench. Its been a nasty fight, and I think we ended up with some well qualified judges put on the Supreme Court that will work towards upholding the Constitution instead of re-writing it. Hopefully the new make up will cripple much of the efforts of the ACLU to rip up and re-write our founding documents. But the fight isn’t over. Filling the seats of the Circuit courts is important too, lets not let our guard down.

Ronald A. Cass has written an excellent piece on this issue today at Real Clear Politics.

    After the high-profile confirmations of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Sam Alito, judicial nominations went into limbo. Today, we’ll see the opening gambits on when and whether that will end.

    The reason the confirmation process came to a standstill is simple: Senate Democrats don’t want additional conservatives on the bench and hope to stall votes long enough to keep them off until Democrats can reach the Holy Grail of a Senate majority. That could be a very long time coming, though Democrats always are hopeful that their day is at hand.

    It’s less clear why Republicans let the nominations wallow in political purgatory. Perhaps, the politicians were simply reading the tea leaves of public opinion. While filling open seats on federal circuit courts is important, it doesn’t get the attention that Supreme Court nominations do.

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU sues towns, state over security information


NEWARK — Former state Attorney General Peter C. Harvey lied to a judge when he blocked efforts by civil libertarians to explore potential abuse of homeland security, the American Civil Liberties Union said Thursday as it announced lawsuits against Harvey and five municipalities.

"The attorney general, Peter Harvey, hid the information," said the ACLU's legal director, Ed Barocas.

The ACLU is suing Harvey and the municipalities of Linden, Middletown, Newark, Wayne and West New York. Barocas said the suit accuses Harvey of wrongly denying that he had advised communities to prevent disclosing how they decided who in their midst might be a threat to homeland security.

The ACLU contends municipalities could receive federal grants if they identify at least 15 threats within each community. It worried that a community might overstate who or what was a threat, so as not to miss out on the federal funds available, Barocas said.

That accusation is being disputed by government officials.

Deborah Jacobs, executive director of the ACLU of New Jersey, said the organization wants information about how police determine who's a threat. Jacobs and Barocas said Thursday they feared some groups may be labeled merely for exercising free speech or for opposing Bush administration policies.

"We all want the police to protect us from the real criminals and terrorists," Jacobs said in a recent interview.

The ACLU began its legal effort two years ago. But it dropped a suit against Harvey after the then-attorney general said he never told communities to stay mum on the data sought by the ACLU.

On Thursday, the ACLU unveiled an April 2004 memo from Deputy Attorney General E. Robbie Miller to New Jersey's 21 county prosecutors. It gave reasons for withholding the ACLU-sought data.

In a September 2005 letter the ACLU gave to the judge handling the case, Harvey wrote "there is no written directive." Harvey, now a partner in a New York law firm, did not return telephone calls Thursday seeking comment.

[Soldier4Christ]

NAACP and ACLU question Jackson mayor's tactics


JACKSON, Miss. - The Jackson NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union are questioning whether Mayor Frank Melton is breaking laws while on crime sweeps.

Attorney General Jim Hood said he is looking into allegations that Melton is infringing upon people's rights. Hinds County District Attorney Faye Peterson said she has handed over court documents and video of police raids to the attorney general for his investigation.

Since taking office 10 months ago, Melton has led searches of cars and homes without warrants, carried guns on police raids and placed potential witnesses in protective custody, Peterson said. Melton says he is a certified police officer, but Peterson says Melton's crimefighting tactics have gone too far.

Jackson NAACP President Gus McCoy agrees with Peterson.

"Police can do the job because they have been trained. Melton has not," McCoy said. "While I applaud his crime-fighting efforts, his tactics - they come into question."

The mayor said instead of criticizing him, the NAACP should join him in giving financial assistance to needy families in Jackson.

"My position is if the NAACP wants to help me, why don't they help me pay for these kids' funerals or pay for these kids to go to school," Melton said.

McCoy said the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People only wants the mayor to uphold the same laws that civilians are expected to abide by.

Nsombi Lambright, executive director of the Mississippi ACLU, said the crime sweeps seem to target low-income areas where people are not informed about their rights.

"It's our position that he's going into the same neighborhood over and over again. That's racial profiling," she said.

Melton said police go where the crime is and he will continue to participate in crime sweeps.

City law says it is unlawful to impersonate a police officer. On crime sweeps, Melton has worn a bullet-resistant vest with "Police" printed on it and carried a badge that says "Mayor."

Melton also carries a concealed handgun but doesn't have a permit on file, according to state records.

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU: We Were For Free Speech Before We Were Against It


Jeez, these guys are starting to sound like John Kerry! First the ACLU came out to endorse it, then we got hopeful as they backtracked. Now, after studying how to get around it…they are saying it is likely the bill is Constitutional.

    The American Civil Liberties Union has concluded after a legal review that a New York congresswoman’s proposal to regulate advertising by anti-abortion counseling centers is likely constitutional, officials with the civil liberties organization said yesterday.

Talk about flip flopping! Rep. Carolyn Maloney, a New York Democrat, introduced March 30 the Stop Deceptive Advertising for Women’s Services Act (SDAWS), which calls on the Federal Trade Commission to bar pro-life organizations from advertising in ways that she deems “deceptive”. The law only targeted pro-life organizations, and seemed to give a pass on abortion centers with deceptive names like Planned Parenthood. What seems to bother her is that a pro-life organization calling itself something like a “Crisis Pregnancy Center.” NARAL Pro-choice America and the National Abortion Federation, are behind it. The ACLU also endorsed it, and that actually came as a shock to many free speech defenders. It even divided the house at the ACLU.

They later had second thoughts.

    After an outcry from free speech advocates, the American Civil Liberties Union is reconsidering its endorsement of proposed legislation calling for federal regulation of advertising by anti-abortion counseling centers.

Of course now, it seems they have found a happy medium. It isn’t suprising that an organization that hails abortion as its top priority, putting the defense of the First Amendment third on the list, would think an amendment like this is constitutional. After all, they have a long history of being selective in defending free speech, especially when it comes to pro-lifers. In the ACLU’s eyes, restricting speech of an ideology they disagree with is constitutional, but defending psycho hate cults to protest at military funerals is protecting free speech.

But…I have to give the ACLU credit. At least they are confused and debating amongst themselves on this one. We can’t say the same thing for Planned Parenthood. Apparently, they feel so threatened by these “crisis pregnancy centers” that they are out spreading lies.

    PP is circulating the story of a girl who walked into a Crisis Pregnancy Center (a clinic to help women through a difficult pregnancy) instead of the Planned Parenthood Clinic (a chop-shop for unborn babies) in the same parking lot. According to pro-abortion blog I’mNotSorry.net, the CPC then harassed the woman and called the police, claiming that a minor was being forced into an abortion against her will, and then harassed her at school and urged her classmates to harass her not to go through with it.

    Which sounded a little funny and vague to John at Generations for Life, who wondered how pro-life activists can just show up at a school and start lobbying and harassing people these days. It didn’t make sense to him, so he fact-checked them something wicked. He narrowed it down to the only place in Indiana where a CPC shares a parking lot with a Planned Parenthood clinic, and…

    Didn’t happen. No police report. No lawsuit. Na. Da.

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU sues over denial of security information

NEWARK

Former state Attorney General Peter C. Harvey lied to a judge when he blocked efforts by libertarians to explore potential abuse of homeland security, the American Civil Liberties Union said Thursday as it announced suits against Harvey and five municipalities.

"The attorney general, Peter Harvey, hid the information," said the ACLU's legal director, Ed Barocas.

The ACLU is suing Harvey and the municipalities of Linden, West New York, Newark, Wayne and Middletown. Barocas said the suit accuses Harvey of wrongly denying that he had advised communities to prevent disclosing how they decided who in their midst might be a threat to homeland security.

The ACLU contends municipalities could receive federal grants if they identify at least 15 threats within each community. It worried a community may overstate who or what was a "threat" so as not to miss a chance to catch some federal funds, said Barocas, though that characterization is disputed by government officials.

Deborah Jacobs, executive director of the ACLU of New Jersey, said the ACLU wants information about how police determine who's a threat. Jacobs and Barocas said Thursday they feared some groups may be labeled merely for exercising free speech or for opposing Bush administration policies.

"We all want the police to protect us from the real criminals and terrorists," Jacobs said in a recent interview.

"Sadly," Barocas said previously, "we know that the federal government has recently spied on or targeted organizations, such as the Quakers and pro-peace groups, not because they pose a threat, rather due to their political beliefs."

The ACLU first began its legal effort two years ago. It dropped the suit against Harvey after the then-attorney general said he never told communities to stay mum on the data sought by the ACLU.

Thursday, the ACLU unveiled an April 2004 memo from Deputy Attorney General E. Robbie Miller to New Jersey's 21 county prosecutors. The missive gave reasons for withholding the ACLU-sought data.

In a September 2005 letter presented by the ACLU to the judge handling the case, Harvey wrote "there is no written directive." Harvey, now a partner in a New York law firm, did not return phone calls Thursday seeking comment.

David Wald, a spokesman for new state Attorney General Zulima Farber, said the data sought by the ACLU is exempt from the state's Open Public Records Act.

A spokesman for the New Jersey office of the federal Department of Homeland Security, Mark Short, said the underpinning of the ACLU suit, whether Homeland Security asked municipalities to identify threats in order to receive grants, was a hollow cause.

"They have been making these claims. They are woefully misinformed," Short said last week.