third world county

This in from Jay at Stop the ACLU

---

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU Convincing liberals that the ACLU is leading us down a dangerous path is about as productive as talking to a rock. Perhaps this is because I mostly deal with far left liberals who share the same insane views and have the same radical agenda as the ACLU. Anyone who believes that the ACLU is there to purely defend the Constitution is naive at best. Surely there are some moderate liberals out there that can concede that the organization is in need of reform. A balanced society can not survive resting in the fringe. A Nation only concerned with security will drift toward a police state, and one that follows the absolutist views of liberty like the ACLU will drift toward anarchy. The ACLU proudly display a banner that states, Keep America Safe and Free, but any honest person will admit that the ACLU have done nothing for the safety of America. As a matter of fact, all evidence leads to quite the opposite. The ACLU are always ready to put the security of America at risk in the pursuit of its absolutist views of liberty. Many of the ACLU’s former leaders have noticed the irresponsible shifting of the ACLU away from true civil liberty protection into a much more dangerous agenda. For example take the words of this former Executive Director of the ACLU

The right to express unpopular opinions, advocate despised ideas and display graphic images is something the ACLU has steadfastly defended for all of its nearly 80-year history. But the ACLU, a group for which I proudly worked as executive director of the Florida and Utah affiliates for more than 10 years, has developed a blind spot when it comes to defending anti-abortion protesters. The organization that once defended the right of a neo-Nazi group to demonstrate in heavily Jewish Skokie, Ill., now cheers a Portland, Ore., jury that charged a group of anti-abortion activists with $107 million in damages for expressing their views. Gushed the ACLU’s press release: “We view the jury’s verdict as a clarion call to remove violence and the threat of violence from the political debate over abortion.” Were the anti-abortion activists on trial accused of violence? No. Did they threaten violence? Not as the ACLU or Supreme Court usually defines it, when in the context of a call for social change. The activists posted a Web site dripping with animated blood and titled “The Nuremberg Files,” after the German city where the Nazis were tried for their crimes. Comparing abortion to Nazi atrocities, the site collected dossiers on abortion doctors, whom they called “baby butchers.” … This is ugly, scary stuff. But it is no worse than neo-Nazi calls for the annihilation of the Jewish people, or a college student posting his rape fantasies about a fellow coed on the Web, both of which the ACLU has defended in the past. None of the anti-abortion group’s intimidating writings explicitly threatened violence. Still, the ACLU of Oregon refused to support the defendants’ First Amendment claims. Instead, it submitted a friend-of-the-court brief taking no one’s side but arguing that speech constitutes a physical threat only when the speaker intends his statement to be taken as one. …Before anti-abortion zealots started getting sued, the ACLU had much more tolerance for menacing speech. Few of the 20th century’s great social movements were entirely peaceable. The labor, civil-rights, antiwar, environmental and black-power movements were an amalgam of violence, civil disobedience and highly charged rhetoric. But to gag fiery speakers who call for harm to the establishment because others in the movement pursue their political goals with fists, guns or bombs would do terrible damage to strong, emotive pleas tot social change. It is something neither the ACLU nor, thankfully, the courts have countenanced in the past. That’s why in 1969 the ACLU helped defend a Ku Klux Klan member who had called for violence against the president, Congress and the Supreme Court. At the ACLU’s urging, the Supreme Court ruled that speech advocating violence was constitutionally protected unless it incited imminent lawless action and was likely to produce such action. This case was later used to defend the speech of black militants. The ACLU also applauded a 1982 Supreme Court decision that found that speeches promising violent reprisals were protected by the First Amendment. During the civil-rights movement, a leader of the NAACP called for “breaking the necks” of blacks who violated a boycott of white-owned businesses in Mississippi, and published a list of those who did. Some of the boycott violators were beaten. The court ruled that despite the atmosphere of fear, all the speeches and lists were part of a debate on a public issue that needed to be “uninhibited, robust, and wide-open.”

I would argue that the Constitution doesn’t protect all of these extreme positions of the ACLU, but that isn’t the point he is trying to make. The issue is the ACLU’s curious commitment to “uninhibited, robust, and wide-open” free speech when it involves things such as virtual child pornography, but not when it involves a something like a boss making racially offensive statements. Unfortunately, there are some people who are so hypnotized by the ACLU’s absolutist views and of the ACLU’s campaign for pedophilia and child pornography that they are prepared to defend an organization that has become a shadow of its former self–a group that lets its idealistic and skewed understanding of the establishment clause trump freedom of religion and freedom of speech.

Stop the ACLU had the opportunity last year of interviewing a former ACLU lawyer. He was concerned with much of the same things.

The ACLU played a helpful role in the civil rights movement defending these people, and I can’t turn my back on that. I have to give credit where credit is due.” “But….that being said, what they have done in the past is completely eviscerated by what they do in the present. The ACLU has become a fanatical anti-faith Taliban of American religious secularism.” “The ACLU is involved in the secular cleansing of our history. This is not just a fight about free exercise, but about the protection of our American history. The ACLU want to deny America the knowledge of their Christian heritage.”

It seems that the many of the ACLU’s greatest critics came from their very ranks. The division within the ACLU will continue as long as the ACLU continues on the irresponsible, hypocritical path it is on. America needs a civil liberties union, sadly the ACLU isn’t doing that job. If the ACLU succeeds in the dangerous direction it is steering America, they will ironically be putting in jeopardy the very liberty they claim to protect. This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com or Gribbit at GribbitR@gmail.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 115 blogs already on-board.

---

See other posts on this topic at Stop the ACLU, the original third world county, and other blogs participating in the Stop the ACLU blogburst.

This guy almost had me. First paragraph I saw on his blog:

If you have i.e you will have noticed the formatting problems, i`ve been trying to sort this but no success so far (if you can figure out the problem all advice welcome Calvin dot Jones at gmail dot com). Alternatively to get away from this problem, get yourself a decent browser like Firefox or Opera!

But then I read his other posts and saw he was hawking the same old envirocultist dogma about impending doom from a new ice age (’70s enviro-cultist)/global warming (90s enviro-cultist) in the new cant of “climate change.”

How hard is it for these folks to actually look at just the historical record and see that, even through the course of recorded history, the rule for climate has been change—in more extreme amounts than we currently know. Seems this guy, among others, wants to play the part of King Canute instead of actually seeking to understand the underlying causes of climate change (the only constant about climate).

“Nope. Having none of that, thank you,” says the enviro-cultist. “Just give me my pet theories, ‘backed up’ by computer models that cannot ‘post-dict’ previous known data. Using these fake data, we can beat up developed countries in our real goal: the total annihilation of Western Civilization.”

Or so it seems to this observer who simply looks for the unstated consequences of enviro-cultists’ desired outcomes.

Does man contribute to climate change (remember: as recently as last year the buzzword phrase was “global warming” from these enviro-cultist bet-hedgers)? Maybe, even probably. To what degree and in what ways?

No one knows. Seriously. Enviro-cultist arguments are all smoke, mirrors and computer models that cannot take 1900 data and “predict” 1950 climate.

Until we know how and how much mankind affects climate, taking actions prescribed by enviro-cultists is stupid.

Continuing to post here instead of the original third world county, since Blogger is still down for its “30-minute” maintenance event that started 13+ hours ago…)

Communism, socialism, liberalism, pragmatism, utilitarianism and yes, even conservatism all inevitably wreck themselves upon the rock of Unintended Consequences, and their brightest ideals become “wasms.”

The reason why the highest ideals and practical decisions of human wisdom inevitably fail is because we can only guess at their outcomes. Pragmatism is perhaps the most glaring failure, because future events inevitably prove that our pragmatic choices depended upon making choices to create a future we cannot predict.

Better simply “…to do justice, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with [our] God.”

Ah, but being just is hard when the world abhors justice. Being merciful is difficult even when we embrace justice (and impossible without justice). And humility is impossible for those who reject both justice and true mercy.

Posted here instead of the “other” third world county because Blogger’s “half hour” of downtime has extended to three and a half hours and counting…

Noted at TMH’s Bacon Bits’ open post.

Note the 0PEN P0ST info below.

Just a quickie:

Anyone remember this show from the 60s? Frustrating piece of work… always thought Tantalus had it easy compared to Number Six. Ah, well, at least it was my second memorable exposure to Patrick McGoohan (have “Secret Agent Man” stuck in my head now. Arrrr!).

Spyware of the 1960s. A different thing to spyware today… Ah, well…

Yeh, this is an open post. Check the OTA link below for more information about Open Posts, if the concept’s new to you. Otherwise, links away! Oh, and once you’ve linked to this post, trackback to it so I don’t have to go hunting down your brilliant prose, ‘K?

See for more linkfests, as well as the Open Trackback Alliance

And see Diane’s Stuff for the latest leaks… Meanwhile, while (like the double “while”? Well there’s a third) you’re at TMH’s Bacon Bits looking over the latest linkfest tbs there, check out the Bacon Bits listed below, as well…

You don’t need to speak/understand Japanese to get the technique (although I have to wonder if the demonstrator isn’t reciting a dirty Japanese limerick while showing how to fold a t-shirt… )

How to fold a t-shirt (for the “folding-impaired”)

PSa at The Conservative Cat where Ferdy is waging unending war on spammers…

Just checked out a PC Magazine article featuring the Apple iMac PC with the Intel dual core. “Setting the Intel chipset free!” is the silly Mac commercial airing, now.

*yawn*

Let’s see… ~$1,800 for a decently configured INTEL computer running the Mac OS X…

Or

~$1,200 for a similarly configured (or slightly better–and including a 20″ LCD screen as the Apple iMac PC does) regular ole ordinary PC running Windows XP. LESS if one wanted to use Linux.

Sorry, Apple. Macophilic Macultists will get a buzz on. Everyone who understands that the extra $600 is just money wasted on a name (and an OS that is still the most rigid, frigid, controlling lil piece of eye-candy out there) will find better uses for the extra cash. Heck, the pics at the PC Mag article show it shipping with the assinine Apple one-button mouse with two awkward “side buttons”! Only a masochist could love the thing…

But you can count on it: there are plenty of pervs out there who will go ape wasting $$ on an imitation PC.

One inexplicably stupid comment made by the PCMag writer was this paragraph:

Aside from cooler cases, another benefit of running dual-core on Mac OS X over Windows is that in a Windows environment, you must run security software (such as antivirus, antispyware, and a firewall). Though dual-core processing helps speed up general performance even with such software running in the background, you are still diverting processor cycles. With Mac OS X, such security software is not necessary, so you’re getting more processing power dedicated to apps you’re actively using.

Yeh, right. Pull the other one. “…such security software is not necessary…” At the very least every knowledgeable Mac user/guru (you know: the ones who actually know how the OS woks) I know of recommends at the very least having a decent firewall—software and/or hardware. And sales of Mac-only anti-virus software haven’t slacked off all that much despite the claims that all the virus writers are targeting Windows and simply leaving macs alone. What? Just because your neighborhood has never been hit by burglers you decide locking yuour door is unecessary? Let me know where you live. I’d be glad to hock your Mac. (Really funny thing? While checking on Mac security products, I saw a Mac Security site that had been hacked. It’s front page was “owned” by the hacker who had taken it down. *LOL* Saved a screen shot for future laughs.)

Then there’s the “diverting processor cycles” comment above. Silly ass. The price comparison I made above was between the iMac Intel PC clone in the article with a 2.0 Ghz INTEL processor and a brand-name PC using a 2.8 Ghz processor—the only brand-name Wintel computer I could find spec’ed down enough for a comparison. Computing cycles to burn, baby. (And isn’t it interesting that Apple’s starting with a processor that’s about 1.5 Ghz behind the curve for most other current Intel machines? Their code’s not all that svelte.)

Gee. Want the advantages of a more secure, robust OS (but one that’s genuinely flexible) AND really hot hardware, you could buy an off-the-shelf regular old PC (with the latest, not the next-next-next latest, as with the iMac PC clone) hardware, pop a Mandriva CD set in, boot and have a really slick Linux comp. Loads more stable and secure than either a Windows or Apple OS. And have money left to burn, as opposed to the over-priced iMac PC clone.

Yeh, but it has the really cool look, right?

Uh-huh. And NO expansion slots. Wanna add peripheral components? Fine, snake a buncha USB wiring and clutter your desktop with boxes and other junk. with the PC I spec’ced above, lotsa that kinda thing can go inside a slick-looking box, with 5 PCI slots available.

Nah. The iMac in its current reincarnation as a PC clone is the same old, same old Apple ploy: eye candy at excessive prices. Funny that to get a favorable price comparison to the iMac, the writer of the PCMag article had to compare the iMac “pony” to a Sony Vaio “dressage competitive thoroughbred” with a faster processor, full media computer capabilities, a 50% larger hard drive, all-wireless remote keyboard/mouse/remote control, etc. All among the many things the Vaio cited comes with which are lacking in the Apple PC clone.

*feh* That was a review? A puff piece written by someone who expected only subliterates to read it.

[Let me be clear: the Mac OS is fine... for Great Aunt Tilly. After all, since it is the ultimate "training wheels" OS, it does prevent people from easily messing about in its innards and doing wild things to screw it up. Which also means it is inordinately difficult to get anything done any way EXCEPT "the Mac way". Amusing—and true—story. Was once part of a small office where each of us used our own computers at work. Right. Very small office. I had a coworker—a devoted Macrophile who had run the all-Mac computer lab in college—who was constantly coming to me and asking to borrow the use of my computer to do things he was unable to do with his Mac. Yeh, largely the result of being the only Macuser in the office and needing to manipulate PC files, a task never quite as easy as Apple claims. He also continually complained that my PC was too hard to use because it didn't do things the way he was used to... on his Mac. Each time, I'd show him how to do things: "See? Just push this little button on the CDROM drive. You don't have to drag the CD to the trash bin... " "Your CDROM drive has a button?!?!? Amazing!" etc. *sigh* Inflexible, almost unteachable. Mac user. Needed his "training wheels" OS. Never "got" it that I liked doing some things at a command line (still do). Windows ain't all that great, but at least it's not like using a computer while wearing a straightjacket.]

“Gore to publish book on global warming” (What? Another one? Get with it, Al. The catchphrase for au courant enviro-wackos is “climate change”)

Deadly freeze claims more lives in Eastern Europe (The atypical cold weather in Europe this winter is reported to be featured in Algore’s book’s arhythmia section as proof of global warming… along with…)

“Skating flamingos, swollen elephant ears in frosty German zoos” *brrrr* More of that damnedable global warming at work.

Here’s a roundup for ya:

It Is About Time We Were Politically Incorrect Part II from All Things Beautiful. Preach it Alexandra. (And don’t miss It Is About Time We Were Politically Incorrect Part I.) Regarding the intolerance of the left for religion (as long as that religion espouses Judeo-Christian principles) in America,

And, as I recall, the Founders wrote a great deal about the fact that if America ever ceased to be a religious society, freedom, and the republican ideal, would fail, because the citizenry would lack the moral virtue to keep it all going.

Yeh, I touched on that comment by John Adams in my guest post over at Bloggin’ Outloud, Teach Your Children Well. Jerry Pournelle referred to the truth of that sentimentrecently as well:

I know of absolutely no argument for assuming human equality other than religious postulates, as Jefferson did in the Declaration. War on religion is a war on the underlying assumptions of American political life. Why the same group that insists on equality of outcomes in all matters also insists on undermining the religous basis of American politics is an interesting question. Hypocrisy or double dyed villainy?

Dafydd ab Hugh notes the temblor in Canadian politics: Canadian Vote a 7.2 On the Political Richter Scale. He closes his post with this piece of black humor:

Let’s keep our fingers crossed that the Liberals don’t simply dig in their heels and try to prevent any legislation at all from occurring, as the Democrats are doing here. It would be decent to give Harper at least one chance to make good.

Riiiiight… like that’s going to happen in my lifetime: the faux liberals of the 21st century actually acting decently? Not. Going. To. Happen.

Data-Mining, the FISA Court, and Wartime from TMH’s Bacon Bits:

[Michael] Chertoff, formerly a federal judge and head of the Justice Department’s criminal division, explains in fairly clear terms the National Security Agency’s “warrantless eavesdropping” and the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) court’s place in all of this…

Read it. And while you’re there, load the main page and read Williewonkaville: Rebuild or Reload? and other great posts by the Bacon Bits crew.

If you missed my pointer to the Carnival of the Recipes #75, head on over to Christine’s Morning Coffee and Afternoon Tea so you can add a few things to your grocery list.

“That seismic disturbance is George Westinghouse spinning…” in his grave. (h.t. “Jim” – email posted at Chaos Manor Musings. You can find my own brief comments about Jesse Jackson Jr.’s-call him JCube-proposed “Education Amendment” to the Constitution at the same link… as well as some interesting Dr. Who brews news.

University students offered B-minus to stay away. Diploma-mill-style, a Canadian lecturer offered a B minus grade to students who would bring him a tuition reciept and then not come to class. While I can think of a couple of classes in my undergrad years where that would have enhanced my educational experience (classes where the droning of a stupid, stupid prof were guaranteed to lower students’ IQs by a couple of points *sigh*), being open about the fact that colleges and universities are becoming little more than certification stops for illiterate high school grads (and full employment for academia nuts) may not be the best way to insure the downgrading of education continues.

At least it was in Canada. This time.

Hit up Keep the Coffee Coming for some Bob Dylan, The Tokens (“…Lion Sleeps…” yeh, the memories) and Billie Holiday. Let kat know you dropped by. drop her a note in comments and just say “Hi” wouldya?

iHillary has a great photoshop spoof to accompany his repost/commentary of a WSJ article in his post, Plantation Madness. A must-see to go along with the WSJ article… (BTW, you’re one mean blogger, dude. Love it.) While you’re there, steal his Alito graphic featuring democrappic attackers with an image of Joe McCarthy in the background…

Winds of Change notes the effect of killing terrorist leaders. (Hint: it’s a good thing.)

Dan Riehl’s mini-fisk of Cindy Sheehan’s “matriotism” is just exactly as much attention as the twit should get. Thanks, Dan. Especially for sparing us by quoting only as much of the twit as necessary to have done with her.

Woody’s own comment on his “Bin Laden’s Real Message” post in reply to a moonbat’s spouting of lying memes about the war on Islamic jihadists really deserves to be brought onto his front page. it closes with,

The fact that Bin Laden talked about a truce is evidence enough of the weakened state of Al Quaeda. How did that happen? UN Envoys? NO… US Cowboys.

Correctamundo, Woody. Read the rest of his comment at the link.

And, from the People’s Cube:

Bin laden’s New tape Narrated from the Astral

heh

Douglas Kern, writing at Tech Central Station, succinctly sums up the feelings I have been unable (or unwilling to let loose and… ) articulate about a recent ruling by a Vermont judge in the case of the serial rape of a child… If you have strong stomach, read, “What the Monster Learned.”

Kidnap “victims” for hire.

And still reading The Founders Constitution. (Navigating the book[s] online is not all that straightforward, but worth your time, IMO.)

Well, I didn’t get 95 theses, and I’m nowhere near Wittenberg, so I’ll just tack this to the door over at Adam’s Blog and Historymike’s Musings

Yep. Link here and trackback: it’s an Open Post.

Normally, Tuesday is a “Free John Kerry’s 180″ day, and, really, today’s no exception.

But today is a very different kind of “Free Jean Fraud sKerry’s 180″ day. Today, I’m asking both of my readers *heh* to finish this thought:

“Jean Fraud sKerry’s lies and obfuscations in pursuance of avoiding the release of the records he has repeatedly promised to release is like NOT emptying a weeks’-long overfull cat litter box, because… ”

Answers in comments or a trackedback post, please.

Dumping this litterbox at

Here’s a bonus crosspost from Heidi at Euphoric Reality

---

Last week, those of us who keep an eye on border issues noticed that several mainstream media sources had featured articles about the regular Mexican military incursions over our borders and into our country. This is nothing new, as the Border Patrol has documented hundreds of such illegal incursions by an armed Mexican military over the past decade, and our government has done nothing to curb these incursions. In fact, it seems our government has looked the other way. While I’m relieved that this information is getting out into the mainstream, I have little confidence that our governement will actually do its job and secure our borders.

Some confrontations between the Mexican military troops and our own Border Patrol agents have become violent as Mexican soldiers have fired their weapons at the Border Patrol. It’s a mystery why our government refuses to acknowledge these hostile invasions. They surely know about it, and the Mexican Embassy in Washington D.C. has gone so far as to publicly deny that the Mexican soldiers are hostile, but rather there to “patrol for illegal border jumpers”. Contrary to that public statement, however, most of the Mexican military troops on the border are moonlighting as security escorts for drug smuggling gangs the coyotes who are running large groups of illegals across the border.

T.J. Bonner, a 27-year Border Patrol veteran who heads the National Border Patrol Council [said], “Intrusions by the Mexican military to protect drug loads happen all the time and represent a significant threat to the agents. “Why else would they be in the area, firing at federal agents in the United States? There is no other explanation,” said Mr. Bonner, whose organization represents all 10,000 of the nonsupervisory Border Patrol agents.

He also challenged reports that Mexican military units had crossed mistakenly into the United States, saying, “Every country’s military has a [global positioning system] nowadays, including the Mexicans. “If the border is so poorly marked, why don’t the thousands of Border Patrol agents working 24/7 along it ever seem to get lost, and none of us have been issued a GPS,” he said.
[...]
Attacks on Border Patrol agents in the past few years have been attributed to current or former Mexican military personnel. U.S. law-enforcement officials have long thought that current and former Mexican soldiers are being paid to protect drug shipments bound for the United States.

Several agents said the attacks have escalated in the past two years as U.S. security efforts on the border have increased — including the July shooting of two agents in an ambush near Nogales, Ariz., by assailants in black commando-type clothing, who fired more than 50 rounds. Authorities said the gunmen used military-style cover-and-concealment tactics to escape back into Mexico. No one has been arrested.

Without any federal commitment to secure our borders, the Minutemen, a volunteer citizen’s group, has performed an invaluable civic service in patrolling our borders to document and verify the location of illegal border crossers. They, too, have encountered Mexican soldiers on the WRONG side of the border. The video clip below comes directly from the Arizona Minutemen who told the Mexican soldiers, when confronted, they were there as “media” to document the border situation. It is incredibly important to note that there is no reason why American citizens should EVER be required to justify their lawful activities on American soil to a FOREIGN military presence. That is anathema to our rights as American citizens!

(SCOTTSDALE, AZ) January 20, 2006 – The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps (“MCDC”) announced the release today of video footage of an incursion by a unit of the Mexican army across the U.S. border in Arizona.

Chris Simcox and a group of Civil Defense Corps volunteers encountered a squad of approximately eight armed Mexican soldiers about 500 yards inside American territory. The Mexican soldiers started running back through the brush to Mexico when they realized they had been spotted.

The video shows a uniformed Mexican soldier climbing through a barbed wire fence on American soil to return to the Mexican side of the border as he races to catch up with the other Mexican soldiers who had also climbed back through the fence as they retreated back into their country.

A group of armed Mexican soldiers then returned to the barbed wire fence (on American soil) and confronted Simcox and the volunteers. A discussion in Spanish ensued, with the agitated soldier ‘in charge’ saying the Americans had no business being there.

Simcox and the volunteers did not budge. The Mexican soldiers left and drove off. Judging from earlier activity observed at the ranch that morning, Simcox is of the belief that a trafficking operation had been disrupted by the volunteers.

The footage, filmed in 2004, was sent to then Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge. His office did not respond. The video has remained in the Minuteman video archive and is being released in response to recent news reports that over 200 cross-border incursions by the Mexican army have been documented since 1996.

---

This has been a production of the Guard the Borders Blogburst. It was started by Euphoric Reality, and serves to keep immigration issues in the forefront of our minds as we’re going about our daily lives and continuing to fight the war on terror. If you are concerned with the trend of illegal immigration facing our country, join our blogburst! Just send an email with your blog name and url to euphoricrealitynet at gmail dot com.

Blogs already on board: