sounds like the ACLU has a good case. i don't put anything past this administration, but i will be truely surprised and dismayed if the judge doesn't throw out the subpeona.
Nanci - that's the kind of "fear logic" that this administration wants you to buy into. The ACLU protects all people, regardless of their political leanings. The people who criticize this organization may find themselves in a situation where they need them someday - abuse of power can come from all corners of the political spectrum. I feel much safer knowing that there is a group watching out for our rights and keeping the government accountable.
Once upon a time the ACLU was a good organization protecting the rights and freedoms of ordinary Americans. Now, they go wherever the biggest fees are to be had and they attack on esoteric issues that damage a lot of people and help few. if you feel safer because of the work of the current incarnation of the ACLU, it is all over. I am going out to work on our bomb shelter.
The ACLU ties to protect "politically correct" rights, not all rights. They pick and choose what parts of the Bill of Rights that they like, not caring about some parts. When the NRA filed suit to prevent the ATF and FBI from turning the Brady Law background checks into underground gun registration, the ACLU filed briefs in SUPPORT of keeping background check records indefinitely. When students filed suit to have the ability to use classrooms in a school after hours for bible study, citing the fact that other religious groups used public school classrooms for meetings, the ACLU was no where to be found. We have the ACLU's word that the documents in question should not be classified, we're given very little information, really. According to the ACLU, there are no laws concerning the release of classified documents, but there ARE. The documents could be part of an investigation into the leak of classified documents. Because the ACLU tells us it's ok, then it must be, right? This is about the victory of the liberal agenda, not about rights. When the Clinton Administration ran a program to use a keyword search on ALL e mails, where was the ACLU? They said NOTHING, as this was a liberal president running things.
I'd have to know the particulars about the cases you cite, Mark, to comment on them, but I do know that your generalization of the ACLU as "politically correct" is wrong. They have stood up for many groups/causes that would not be considered either "liberal" or "politically correct", just a matter of civil rights. And I don't think they have the manpower or funding to get involved with every single case that comes up. BTW, have you donated to them lately?
The ACLU article states they are human rights advocates, AND is actively engaged in ongoing public advocacy." Civil Rights issue? NO. Our rights to read classified documents? NO.
if the document is so "unremarkable" why are they fighting so hard to keep it? it is interesting that the the subpoena refers to the Espionage Act. The ACLU has found"The FBI has identified 1,173 pages related to the ACLU, 7-18-05
You forgot the glowing reports about how the ACLU rushed to Rush's defense! (Of course, you would then have to tie it into the "privacy of medical records". They had to make sure abortion clinic records were kept 'SAFE from prying eyes". Like those that might be interested in how many underage girls were being transported in for abortions - with no knowledge of their parents, or from out of state!
Cheryl, I wouldn't donate to these lying sons of bitches if I had no choice at all.
Look at THIS from the ACLU's web site:
In the waning days of the "lame duck" Congress, some are trying to rush through legislation that would pardon the president and authorize more warrantless spying (ignore that it's pattern analysis on phone NUMBERS at first, not "spying" by any stretch of the imagination) on Americans than has ever been approved in US history. The terrible Cheney-Specter proposal has morphed into an even worse proposal by outgoing Senator Frist and the White House (S. 3931) that would ratify the president's claim of inherent, exclusive power to set government spies loose on your phone calls and emails at will (we know Bill Clinton did the same thing almost a decade ago, but we won't say that), without any individualized warrant or independent check.
Want more? How about FELONS voting from PRISON? We want to let people who have PROVEN they have no respect for the law PICK THE LAWMAKERS. And of course, we can't require that anyone prove who they are to vote. Dear God, that would stop illegal aliens or resident aliens from voting, can't have that, the Democrats NEED them and those dead people who vote every year, like in Chicago, have to have them, too.
Let's not forget the ACLU's position on secret documents. The public's right to know trumps EVERYTHING else, apparently. Good thing this was not the rule in 1944, or the invasion of Normandy would have been a disaster, tens of thousands of dead, in the name of "freedom of information."
The level of misinformation on some subjects it truly BREATHTAKING. THIS you would support, I suppose. Well, you have that right, I should know, my blood and the blood of people like me PAID for it. But DON'T ask me to support it.
"In legal papers, the ACLU said that while release of the document might be "mildly embarrassing" to the government, the ACLU's possession of it is legal and its release could in no way threaten national security. To the contrary, the ACLU said, the designation of the generally unremarkable document as "Secret" "appears to be a striking, yet typical, example of overclassification."
We're not talking about national security info here. I suppose you're o.k. with the administration leaking it's own classified info on CIA agents' identities if it serves their purposes? The strength of the ACLU is that it isn't partisan. Someday, you may be in a position where your rights are being taken away and you'll be glad that such a group exists.
I suppose you're o.k. with the administration leaking it's own classified info on CIA agents' identities if it serves their purposes?
You mean the CIA agent whose husband had ties to a company that was seeing sanctions lifted and the no-fly zones stopped when he attended a 'business' meeting in Saudi Arabia?
You mean the CIA agent that was "outed" by Aldridge Ames, the notorious Soviet Spy and was stationed in such a "top secret office" in Boston, that she used THAT address to make a donation to Al Gore's campaign.
You mean the CIA agent that couldn't even protect her own 'cover' CIA 101?
The thing that strikes me again and again when I read what modern conservatives write on gather is the inchoate but deep-seated fear their articles and comments express. It's rather baffling, and very sad.
Please provide details below to help Gather review this content. If it is found to be inappropriate and in violation of the Gather Terms of Service, action will be taken.
Please select the part of the post you are reporting.
Please select why you are reporting this content.
Please enter a description.
You have successfully submitted a report for this post.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 21
Let's just keep helping the terrorists by providing classified documents to the general public.
if the document is so "unremarkable" why are they fighting so hard to keep it? it is interesting that the the subpoena refers to the Espionage Act. The ACLU has found"The FBI has identified 1,173 pages related to the ACLU, 7-18-05
You forgot the glowing reports about how the ACLU rushed to Rush's defense!
(Of course, you would then have to tie it into the "privacy of medical records". They had to make sure abortion clinic records were kept 'SAFE from prying eyes". Like those that might be interested in how many underage girls were being transported in for abortions - with no knowledge of their parents, or from out of state!
SUPPORT THIS SITE:
STOP THE ACLU.com!!!
(I just love that radical American, Nanci B. And I hope I can grow up to be as wise as Brian (MoM) A.)!
Look at THIS from the ACLU's web site:
In the waning days of the "lame duck" Congress, some are trying to rush through legislation that would pardon the president and authorize more warrantless spying (ignore that it's pattern analysis on phone NUMBERS at first, not "spying" by any stretch of the imagination) on Americans than has ever been approved in US history. The terrible Cheney-Specter proposal has morphed into an even worse proposal by outgoing Senator Frist and the White House (S. 3931) that would ratify the president's claim of inherent, exclusive power to set government spies loose on your phone calls and emails at will (we know Bill Clinton did the same thing almost a decade ago, but we won't say that), without any individualized warrant or independent check.
Want more? How about FELONS voting from PRISON? We want to let people who have PROVEN they have no respect for the law PICK THE LAWMAKERS. And of course, we can't require that anyone prove who they are to vote. Dear God, that would stop illegal aliens or resident aliens from voting, can't have that, the Democrats NEED them and those dead people who vote every year, like in Chicago, have to have them, too.
Let's not forget the ACLU's position on secret documents. The public's right to know trumps EVERYTHING else, apparently. Good thing this was not the rule in 1944, or the invasion of Normandy would have been a disaster, tens of thousands of dead, in the name of "freedom of information."
The level of misinformation on some subjects it truly BREATHTAKING. THIS you would support, I suppose. Well, you have that right, I should know, my blood and the blood of people like me PAID for it. But DON'T ask me to support it.
"In legal papers, the ACLU said that while release of the document might be "mildly embarrassing" to the government, the ACLU's possession of it is legal and its release could in no way threaten national security. To the contrary, the ACLU said, the designation of the generally unremarkable document as "Secret" "appears to be a striking, yet typical, example of overclassification."
We're not talking about national security info here. I suppose you're o.k. with the administration leaking it's own classified info on CIA agents' identities if it serves their purposes? The strength of the ACLU is that it isn't partisan. Someday, you may be in a position where your rights are being taken away and you'll be glad that such a group exists.
I suppose you're o.k. with the administration leaking it's own classified info on CIA agents' identities if it serves their purposes?
You mean the CIA agent whose husband had ties to a company that was seeing sanctions lifted and the no-fly zones stopped when he attended a 'business' meeting in Saudi Arabia?
You mean the CIA agent that was "outed" by Aldridge Ames, the notorious Soviet Spy and was stationed in such a "top secret office" in Boston, that she used THAT address to make a donation to Al Gore's campaign.
You mean the CIA agent that couldn't even protect her own 'cover' CIA 101?
ROTHFLMAO!!!