Unsurprising
UPDATE: The man spoken of in this article is the same man who is resposible for the Virginia courts banning the use of internet filtering programs in public libraries which was supposed to protect children from porn and prevent perverts from using public libraries to access all kinds of porn, including child porn. Is it any wonder he wanted to make sure people had a place to go were they could anonymously access any perverted material their hearts may desire?
The former President of the Virginia chapter of the ACLU was arrested earlier on child pornography charges. U.S. authorities, in cooperation with international authorities confiscated this man’s computer which contained numerous videos of pre-pubescent girls being forcibly raped. Reports state that the abuse was severe, and that the girls were crying and screaming as they were raped.
This guy is sick, and I don’t mean that in the ACLU “he needs help” kind of sick, I mean sick as in “He and everyone who can be linked to this atrocity need to be done away with.” The rapists and the purveyors of this atrocity need to be hunted down and killed. All of the sick bastards who buy this filth need to go away forever and be glad they are not killed too. I’m thinking a small deserted island far away from humanity would be appropriate.
It was only a matter of time before a leader in the ACLU was busted on something like this. Thinking people could see it coming.
The ACLU has a long history of defending the so-called “rights” of degenerates of all stripes. They came to the rescue when women wanted the right to do illegal drugs while pregnant. They secured the right for hate groups to parade their hate in the streets for all to see. They are trying to create special rights for foreign terrorists under the Geneva Convention, which, I might add, expressly excludes terrorists and people like them. They defend the sickest pornography. They are even defending the North American Man-Boy Love association’s (NAMBLA) “right” to publish and distribute instructional materials on how to kidnap and rape children.
With a history like this it is unsurprising that the ACLU has attracted degenerates like this guy to work for them. With degenerates who acquire and use kiddie rape porn in positions of leadership in the ACLU it is unsurprising that the organization as a whole is willing to defend this crime against humanity.
There are people, especially the ACLU and its supporters who will claim that he is the exception, and he probably is. Most supporters of the ACLU are simply deceived or ignorant, not criminals. However, the link to personal behavior and chosen causes is one that is long-established. Now that there is proof of at least one leader in the ACLU, one who presumably supports all of the ACLU’s causes, I think it is time for a closer look at the leadership of that organization.
What I am suggesting is Bill Clinton style inquest. Since it is apparently okay for a liberal President to investigate and harass organizations he does not like or considers in opposition to him, then it equally okay for a more conservative President to do the same thing when an organization with the ACLU’s history starts having its leaders come up as pedophiles. Speaking as the devil’s advocate, the ACLU cannot afford to have corruption within the organization, so they should welcome a thorough investigation, complete with federal warrants into the lives of its leaders to ensure that they are not complicit with, or even participating in illegal activity. Air out the dirty laundry and eliminate the crooks. Those who remain are free to continue with their legal activities.
Naturally, the ACLU itself will oppose such an action, which I will choose to interpret as proof that the leaders and lawyers of that organization are, in fact, crooks or enabling crooks.
I don’t know if the ACLU attracts degenerates because it defends them, or if it defends degenerates because it is run by them, but I suspect that it is the latter based on who founded the ACLU and the stated goals of that organization to push America toward Soviet style communism. The claim that is not the goal anymore, but from what I see it is still actively working for that goal and many other equally disgusting goals as well.
Please visit the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) for an organization that is really doing what the ACLU pretends to do at http://www.aclj.org/ .
Also be sure to visit the excellent site Stop the ACLU at http://www.stoptheaclu.com/ for an excellent expository site about the ACLU’s abuse of America and defense of criminal activity.
The former President of the Virginia chapter of the ACLU was arrested earlier on child pornography charges. U.S. authorities, in cooperation with international authorities confiscated this man’s computer which contained numerous videos of pre-pubescent girls being forcibly raped. Reports state that the abuse was severe, and that the girls were crying and screaming as they were raped.
This guy is sick, and I don’t mean that in the ACLU “he needs help” kind of sick, I mean sick as in “He and everyone who can be linked to this atrocity need to be done away with.” The rapists and the purveyors of this atrocity need to be hunted down and killed. All of the sick bastards who buy this filth need to go away forever and be glad they are not killed too. I’m thinking a small deserted island far away from humanity would be appropriate.
It was only a matter of time before a leader in the ACLU was busted on something like this. Thinking people could see it coming.
The ACLU has a long history of defending the so-called “rights” of degenerates of all stripes. They came to the rescue when women wanted the right to do illegal drugs while pregnant. They secured the right for hate groups to parade their hate in the streets for all to see. They are trying to create special rights for foreign terrorists under the Geneva Convention, which, I might add, expressly excludes terrorists and people like them. They defend the sickest pornography. They are even defending the North American Man-Boy Love association’s (NAMBLA) “right” to publish and distribute instructional materials on how to kidnap and rape children.
With a history like this it is unsurprising that the ACLU has attracted degenerates like this guy to work for them. With degenerates who acquire and use kiddie rape porn in positions of leadership in the ACLU it is unsurprising that the organization as a whole is willing to defend this crime against humanity.
There are people, especially the ACLU and its supporters who will claim that he is the exception, and he probably is. Most supporters of the ACLU are simply deceived or ignorant, not criminals. However, the link to personal behavior and chosen causes is one that is long-established. Now that there is proof of at least one leader in the ACLU, one who presumably supports all of the ACLU’s causes, I think it is time for a closer look at the leadership of that organization.
What I am suggesting is Bill Clinton style inquest. Since it is apparently okay for a liberal President to investigate and harass organizations he does not like or considers in opposition to him, then it equally okay for a more conservative President to do the same thing when an organization with the ACLU’s history starts having its leaders come up as pedophiles. Speaking as the devil’s advocate, the ACLU cannot afford to have corruption within the organization, so they should welcome a thorough investigation, complete with federal warrants into the lives of its leaders to ensure that they are not complicit with, or even participating in illegal activity. Air out the dirty laundry and eliminate the crooks. Those who remain are free to continue with their legal activities.
Naturally, the ACLU itself will oppose such an action, which I will choose to interpret as proof that the leaders and lawyers of that organization are, in fact, crooks or enabling crooks.
I don’t know if the ACLU attracts degenerates because it defends them, or if it defends degenerates because it is run by them, but I suspect that it is the latter based on who founded the ACLU and the stated goals of that organization to push America toward Soviet style communism. The claim that is not the goal anymore, but from what I see it is still actively working for that goal and many other equally disgusting goals as well.
Please visit the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) for an organization that is really doing what the ACLU pretends to do at http://www.aclj.org/ .
Also be sure to visit the excellent site Stop the ACLU at http://www.stoptheaclu.com/ for an excellent expository site about the ACLU’s abuse of America and defense of criminal activity.
posted by Daniel Levesque at
12:40 AM
19 Comments:
"It was only a matter of time before a leader in the ACLU was busted on something like this."
"It was only a matter of time until a leader in the Republican Party was busted on this sort of perversion. The Republicans attract authoritarian, 'do-what-I-say' sorts of monsters..."
"It was only a matter of time until more preachers were busted on child abuse charges. Religion attracts the sick and ill. We ought to kill them all."
It was only a matter of time til one of these conservative bloggers was busted on this sort of sick stuff. Conservative bloggers attract the most perverted scum of all...
....
Stupid generalizations are just that.
By
Dan Trabue, at 4:02 AM
Dan T,
Tell you what, find evidence that supports your 3 stupid generalizations, real evidence, not stuff anyone with even a small amount of information can destroy.
For example "The Republicans attract authoritarian, 'do-what-I-say' sorts of monsters..."
is in error. Authoritarian means more regulation and more government interference. Even if you include the Patriot act (which I fully support) the vast bulk of authoritarian measures taken by our government has been taken by Democrats. So if one were to make a "stupid generalization" one would be more accurate to say "Democrats attract authoritarian, 'do-what-I-say' sorts of monsters".
And "Religion attracts the sick and ill. We ought to kill them all." is exactly the kind of assinine hatew speech the ACLU has been seeking to protect. Of course, if you can provide actual evidence that this is actually true plese do so. My experience has been that the vast majority of people come out of being sick when they enter religion, and the facts support it.
And the final is pure conjecture wioth no evidence one way or the other.
What you are failing to grasp is that people and organizations support various acts for a reason. The ACLU is in favor of child rape manuals, child pornography, and expanding the rights andfreedoms of child molestors. The proof is that they have taken up the case in favor of NAMBLA which does all of these evil acts. They have taken the cause of hate groups like the Neo-Nazis, which proves that the ACLU favors hate speech and divisiveness. The ACLU favors drug use because it has taken up the cause of making busting users more difficult even if they are hurting other people. The list could go on for a very long time. I can think of no other grou pin Amerca that has taken up the standard for so many ill-begotten causes as the ACLU. Since it protects the criminal, the sick, and the perverted, it shoul dbe no suprise to anyone that the criminal, sick, and perverted would want to aid in that cause.
Think I'm full of crap?
Try this.
Christians support Christianity.
Muslims Support Islam.
Jews support Juadism.
Drinkers support alcohol.
Smokers support tobbacco.
Convicts support criminal right in prison.
Rapists support rape.
Murderers support murder.
Pornographers support porn.
The ACLU supports every sick cause it has taken up in defense.
Some people who do not engage in these groups and activities support them for inexplicable reasons. But everyone who is actively engaged in these groups and activities supports them. Therefore, the place to find them is among their support structure.
Is that logic simple enough to penetrate your clouded mind?
By
Daniel Levesque, at 8:33 AM
Apparently, the morality-challenged occur wherever and however, Rep Foley (R-Florida), Ted Haggard, Jimmy Swaggart and too
many catholic priests to count, not sure about bloggers, but the i-net certainly has its share. I suppose they will occur in the ACLU, as well as Jay Sekuelow's
little fiefdom which protects religious rights...
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1130499506270 ...outlines the
underside of the ACLJ.
By
BB-Idaho, at 11:05 AM
The worst you can come up with on the ACLJ is that the chief counsel makes tons of money? Somehow I find that far less obscene than pedopiles, communists, drug legalizers, criminal enablers, hate group enablers, etc. Of course, the socialist left definitely sees making lots of money as a far greater evil than all of these other evils combined, otherwise they would be forced to rescind their support of so many liberal groups.
By the way, you should check out how much money the national director for the ACLU makes. Check who you support before yu criticize those whom you oppose. Criticizing one group for making lots of money while ignoring the fact that the other makes as much or more is simply hyppocritical.
Also, the examples you pointed out in Christianity have a major difference from the known examples in the ACLU. Christianity condemns the acts of these men, but the ACLU has a history of protecting the ciminal behavior its members have engaged in. To point out individuals who have done wrong when there is no institutional support for their activity is a false argument.
By
Daniel Levesque, at 12:17 PM
If we start listing convictions in the national republican and democratic parties - or places where they were forced out of office due to malfeasance, criminal conduct and sexual assaults/misconduct - we'd see a list that includes both sides but is predominantly republican.
Does that mean Republicans are corrupt in toto? No.
It is ridiculous to paint a whole group based upon the actions of one man. You provide some evidence that there is a culture of corruption in the ACLU any deeper than what is in the Republican Party and I'll be glad to research those other groups.
My point wasn't that the Republicans or Christians are corrupt (I AM a Christian, after all) but rather it is stone-cold stupid and plain wrong (diabolically so) to point to one example and stereotype the rest of the group based upon that one person.
Do you want to get in a pissing contest comparing convictions of Republicans and ACLU employees? That'd be a contest you'd lose, I'm guessing.
(For the record, I'm not even necessarily defending the aclu, which I don't have much information on. I'm just critiquing the stereotyping method you were using.)
By
Dan Trabue, at 1:09 PM
"The ACLU supports every sick cause it has taken up in defense."
Do you include Christianity in that list? You ARE aware that they have defended Christian civil liberties as well as non-Christian?
By
Dan Trabue, at 1:11 PM
"If we start listing convictions in the national republican and democratic parties - or places where they were forced out of office due to malfeasance, criminal conduct and sexual assaults/misconduct - we'd see a list that includes both sides but is predominantly republican"
Wrong again. This is more proof that you are simply being spoon-fed my the MSM and are not looking any deeper into the issues. The balance of corruption in governemnt is Democrat by a wide margin. It's one reason that America has historically favored Republican Presidents, and why the Democrats were swept out of office in 1992. The 2006 election was primarily about the perception that the war is being mismanaged. Expect the Republicans to win back a lot of lost ground in 2008 and 2010, probably regaining the majority in both houses. If you have been paying attention at all you might have noticed that there are already grumblings about the Democrats hoodwinking the American people in the places where they made gains in 2006. 2 months in the new Congress and they are already pissing off. That took the Republicans, what, 14 years and a war? Do try to study the facts before you make claims so I dont have to call you ignorant.
"It is ridiculous to paint a whole group based upon the actions of one man. You provide some evidence that there is a culture of corruption in the ACLU any deeper than what is in the Republican Party and I'll be glad to research those other groups."
The evidence in in what the ACLU supports. It supports criminal conduct, so I call them criminals. Having such a prominent member of the ACLU outed as a pedophileis only additional proof, not THE proof. But it provides some legal basis for investigating the ACLU deeper.
"Do you want to get in a pissing contest comparing convictions of Republicans and ACLU employees? That'd be a contest you'd lose, I'm guessing."
Probably not, but since members of the ACLU are not under consant scrutiny in their personal lives the way that politicians are the apparent balance may be in your favor on the surface, unless of course, you blame every member of the ACLU for defending NAMBLA's right to publish handbooks on stalking, kidnapping, and raping young children. Then THE ACLU wins on that issue alone even if if you compare it to every Republican AND Democrat in all of American history. ANd again, the Democrats have engaged in many times the corruption than Republicans have. The difference is that conservatives vote crooks out of office while liberals keep putting the crooks back in office.
Want Proof?
Which party is the one to reelect the only murderer, convicted child rapist, and impeached judge in U.S. history to Congress? HINT: It is not the Republicans. Name the only President ever accused of rape by a credible source. Out of the last 5 Republican pressidents and the last 5 Democrat Presidents, name the ones who are known to have cheated on thier wives while in office and what their paty affiliation is. After answering that question, examine the standing of these people among liberals and conservatives. Of the last 2 Presidents to face impeachent for criminal activity, which party did the one who had the decency to retire belong to, and which one forced America to endure multiple scandals?
Yes, Liberals really don't seem to care if they vote for criminals and amoral narccisists. Conservatives, on the other hand, do.
"Do you include Christianity in that list? You ARE aware that they have defended Christian civil liberties as well as non-Christian?"
Do try to actually pay attention to what is being said. I said "The ACLU supports every sick cause it has taken up in defense." NOT "Every cause the ACLU has taken up is sick." I do hope you are able to understand the incredible difference in what is being communicated, although, by virtue of the fact that you had to ask such an incredibly stupid question that you do not.
As for your critique of my stereotyping, I am not sterotyping at all. Sterotyping would be to claim that all members and supporters of the ACLU are pedophiles based on this one man. My assertion is that the ACLU attracts people like him because it is the only major organization that offers them legal sanctuary. I specifically pointed out that not all members of the ACLU are ciminals or perverts, and only wish to have the leadership examined and the records investigated to clean out the ones who have made themselves at home in that organization. But if you had read past the first paragraph you would have known this already.
By
Daniel Levesque, at 5:18 PM
"ANd again, the Democrats have engaged in many times the corruption than Republicans have."
Want to compare the conviction rates for the last two respective administrations?
Clinton/Gore had what? 3 convictions?
Reagan/Bush had what is the number? 42 (working from memory)?
But by all means, go with your gut. You're probably right, despite the lack of evidence, the Dems are probably more corrupt. We can know because...um, your gut, right?
You don't mind though, do you, if we go with the evidence and not your best guesses and hunches?
By
Dan Trabue, at 5:52 PM
"But by all means, go with your gut. You're probably right, despite the lack of evidence, the Dems are probably more corrupt. We can know because...um, your gut, right?"
Wrong again. Do try to actually look up stuff before you start making silly claims. You would come across as less ignorant.
I take the fact that you cannot name the criminals I have mentioned in my question to you in the last response that you really are as ignorant and propaganda filled as you sound. Heck, you didn;t even try to name their political affiliation. Apparently you don't know what Presidents are famous for cheating their wives either, and that's just huge.
Oh yeah, when you actually get the convictions straight, try taking a look at the investigations and which ones were squashed by political pressure. That is the TRUE measure of party corruption. When a party seeks to protect criminals rather than throw the book at them it is institutionally corrupt. Whenthat same party even ignores legal convictions and keeps ,I dunno . .. say, a child rapist out of prison so he can chair Congressional committes then you have more than just corruption, you have institutionalized ciminality.
next retarded, uniformed falsehood please!
By
Daniel Levesque, at 1:14 PM
"next retarded, uniformed falsehood please..."
If you're going to resort to childish name-calling, try to at least get your spelling and grammar right before calling another's position retarded or "uniformed."
By
Dan Trabue, at 8:30 AM
And we get to the criticizizing of missed keystrokes. It's always the false and the irrelevant with liberals, isn't it?
And if you don;t want what you say blasted, try saying something true.
By
Daniel Levesque, at 9:06 AM
OK, at your suggestion, I checked out the ACLU salaries at
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm/bay/search.summary/orgid/3247.htm ..As near as I can tell, the execs make about 25-35% as the
head of the ACLJ. As far as being 'hypocritical' or offering 'false argument, neither was intended. Simply pointing out that no matter what the organization, its views or it's make-up, there exists the potential for immoral persons.
By
BB-Idaho, at 12:30 PM
And you believe that making gobs of money is immoral?
By
Daniel Levesque, at 2:34 PM
"making gobs of money is immoral?"
Course not, I do it al the time, although in the case of Britney
Spears.....
By
BB-Idaho, at 3:10 PM
"if you don;t want what you say blasted, try saying something true."
You want Truth?
How's this:
"Thou shalt not bear false witness."
~God
or:
"If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong; Then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days; And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother; Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you."
~God
By
Dan Trabue, at 4:45 AM
"And you believe that making gobs of money is immoral?"
And while this wasn't directed at me, my answer would be, "Generally, yes." Depending upon how it's made, most means of making gobs of money would be in my mind, immoral.
But that's another topic.
Maybe I'll deal with that soon on my blog.
By
Dan Trabue, at 5:09 AM
Dan T,
"Thou shalt not bear false witness."
Excellent. You should put this into practice yourself soometime rather than trying to use it as a club to silence the truth.
By
Daniel Levesque, at 9:10 PM
Against whom have I borne false witness, praytell?
I'm suggesting that, by painting the ACLU as a refuge for degenerates, you have borne false witness against an organization. Where, according to you, "Most supporters of the ACLU are simply deceived or ignorant, not criminals."
When you say things like, "I don’t know if the ACLU attracts degenerates because it defends them, or if it defends degenerates because it is run by them" you are making the case that the ACLU attracts degenerates or is run by them. Both are a false witness. A lie, if you will, unless you have evidence to the contrary.
We have no reason whatsoever to believe that this is anything but a problem with one person who used to be associated with the ACLU. You are making the case that we do have reason.
That's a bearing of false witness. I'm not trying to silence you, I'm holding you accountable for spreading malicious rumors. And that's a good thing to hold one another accountable.
Feel free to tell me where I've borne false witness. Or, is that just another baseless claim (ie, another bearing of false witness) for your own political posturing?
By
Dan Trabue, at 5:24 AM
Dan T,
"Against whom have I borne false witness, praytell?"
Try this one:
"Reagan/Bush had what is the number? 42"
The exact number was 29, not 42. You also besmirched the Clinton Administration by saying there were 3 convictions when there was only 1.
I calle dyou ingnorant in these matters and your false arguments prove my point. YOu also ducked the issue at hand by ignoring the 0 convictions, though that numbeer may change to 1 from within the Bush administration, which means you are using misleading arguments by comparing government prior to Republican Control of Congress and the reforms that the Republican party enacted to current standards. You also ducked the issue by refusing to compare Congress to Congress, which is the honest comparison to use, and the one I was using the whole time.
And then you have the hyppocrisy to accuse me of bearing false witness against you when I pointed out you were presenting false information.
So get off you pretend high moral horse and start using the truth when you present your arguments. Also, sticking to the point would be a vast improvement as well.
"you are making the case that the ACLU attracts degenerates or is run by them. Both are a false witness. A lie, if you will, unless you have evidence to the contrary."
Proof: The ACLU is defending the rights of pedophiles to publish manuals on how to kidnap, rape, and murder children. It is also suing for the right for pedophiles to go to children's parks.
Proof: A high ranking member of teh ACLU is now under criminal prosecution for pedophilia.
Proof: Using cocaine is a crime, and it iadds another crime if taken while pregnant.
Proof: The ACLU sued for the right of pregant women to use cocaine without having said illegal drug use given to the cops.
Proof is throughout the history of teh ACLU. They have taken up the cause of criminals and degenerates for their entire history. At least one high ranking member is now outeas one of those degenerates. Proof is what this whole article is about. You of course, can't understand that because you appear to have difficulty with basic logical processes.
"We have no reason whatsoever to believe that this is anything but a problem with one person who used to be associated with the ACLU."
Incorrect. Since the ACLU has taken up the cause of pedophiles, and at least one high ranking member of the ACLU has been revealed as a pedophile, then there is cause for honest concern. This is what I have pointed out. What is this man's, and other men like him role in moving the ACLU toward taking up a position in defense of one of the worst groups of people in history? It is very possible that it is men like this pedophile who moved the organization as a whole in such a vile direction. It is also possible that scum like this man have infiltrated the ACLU in order to use it as a vehicle to push a foul agenda because they see the potential to use an organization that has a history as ignoble as the ACLU's to their advantage. I already said this in far more concise terms, but you apparently are unable to grasp it unless I spell it out in excuciating detail.
The problem is not what I say, it is that you appear to lack the intellectual capacity to understand the plain English I am using. The you bear false witness against me by accusing me of lying. Which is more proff of your own bearing of false witness.
Like I said, you do not have the moral high ground here. I highly reccomend more honesty in your arguments.
Something you may want to consider:
Why do you think I have not done what my contemporaries have almost all done and banned you from commenting on this blog?
I'll answer that right now. Your arguments are so full of innaccuracies, logical fallacies, ignorance, and false ritcheousness that you serve as a tool for others to see the folly of modern liberalism. When you tell a lie then use Bible verses as a way of accusing me of lying when I am telling the truth you expose the hyppocrisy of liberalism in a way I could never hope to do on my own. When I talk about liberals people are rightly skeptical that what I present may be tainted by personal views and beliefs. Ittakes someone like you to validate what I say.
By
Daniel Levesque, at 3:43 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home