ACLU Off Their Rocker - What Else Is New?

Posted on January 29, 2006

Cross-posted from ACLU Watch

The LA Times (That pillar of the unbiased objectivity) is reporting:

U.S. forces in at least two cases have detained wives of suspected insurgents in Iraq in an attempt to pressure the men into surrendering, documents obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union confirm.

“This is not an acceptable tactic,” ACLU lawyer Amrit Singh said Friday.

In one instance, members of a military task force seized a mother of three young children “in order to leverage” her husband’s surrender, according to an account by a civilian Defense Intelligence Agency officer.

In the other, an e-mail exchange includes a U.S. military officer asking, “Have you tacked a note on the door and challenged him to come get his wife?”

Paul Boyce, an Army spokesman at the Pentagon, said: “It’s very hard, obviously, from some of these documents to determine what, if anything, actually happened….

“When you see an individual e-mail note, it’s oftentimes very confusing to figure out how that particular case fits into an overall, larger puzzle.”

In Baghdad, Lt. Col. Barry Johnson said that only Iraqis who pose an “imperative threat” are held in long-term U.S.-run detention facilities.

The documents are among hundreds the Pentagon has released periodically under court order to meet an ACLU request under the Freedom of Information Act.

Now I will never claim that I am an expert on the legalities on this subject. But I do know that we are engaged in a new kind of war. Traditional thinking needs to be tossed out of the window and we should be concentrating on prosecuting this war to a successful conclusion.

If I am not mistaken, the ACLU is the organization which wants the US to have policies which are reactive and not proactive. We should treat attacks on our nation as criminal acts not warfare. Well using this type of thinking, if we were looking for murderers, wouldn’t we question at length the family and friends of the suspected murderers? Wouldn’t we monitor phone calls originating from the home as well as those coming in? Wouldn’t we follow family members and friends to see who they are having contact with? Wouldn’t we then follow up by following those people as well? If need be wouldn’t we also detain a family member of someone we suspected in a crime who may not be a willing participant? Wouldn’t we put these family members in protective custody?

The ACLU is opposed to the United States protecting itself. Why? Because they are at the heart of the movement of globalization. A world dominated and ruled by lawyers. Having international courts deciding everything from how to heat a home in Krakow Poland to controlling smog in Los Angeles California.

The American Civil Liberties Union wishes to remove any programs designed to protect the national identity of the United States. The ACLU wishes to destroy the United States as we know it. They want a single world government where all peoples are guaranteed a home, work, food, and all the other basic necessities of life. They envision a world where no religion exist. Because religion is an obstacle to world wide Communism.

Here is the complete truth people. Now pay attention, you may be quizzed on it later. We are at war. In war people die. In war bad things happen to good people. In war property gets destroyed. In war actions must be implemented which would never be permitted unless we were at war. So it is time for these snot nosed fantasy land liberals to get their heads out of their proverbial rumps and start thinking about the people who need to be protected. That would be the people of the United States. The people who were brutally attacked without warning.

We are engaged with an enemy who has no problem with killing their own people. They kill women and children because it is easy for them. They kill women and children who have no dog in the fight because they know lining up opposite us on an open battlefield would result in their deaths.

They started this fight. They flew 3 airplanes into 3 buildings killing over 3,000 innocent, non-combatants. So if we ruffle a few feathers by holding a couple of wives of insurgents for questioning in an attempt to locate their terrorist husbands, I don’t rightly care.

On an off remark, it makes me wonder if ABC’s Bob Woodruff used this technique to capture the ones that blew him up today. The one incident of an email hold no evidential water, and the other incident, the woman was released after two days. I’m not understanding what the ACLU’s problem is. Even if we would have imprisoned the wives of the insurgents permanently, what would be the problem? If you are aiding and abetting a terrorist, it doesn’t matter what sex you are, or how many children you have.

I see how the left spin it now. We have one incident of a woman being questioned for two days and released, absolutely no evidence of abuse, and one email, again providing no evidence, and the left and even a few who claim conservatism jump onto the Geneva Conventions violations.

» Filed Under ACLU, News, War On Terror


Trackback URL

Comments

6 Responses to “ACLU Off Their Rocker - What Else Is New?”

  1. DeltaFox on January 29th, 2006 5:24 pm

    The ACLU aka American Communist Lawyers Union, is the communist front for the NWO.

    They want your money to spend on lawsuits so they can put your life at risk.

    Vat a deal!!!!

  2. Carl on January 29th, 2006 5:41 pm

    So how many real, not legal, wars have the ACLU fought and won?

  3. Peter Bella on January 29th, 2006 7:55 pm

    I have said this before here, and I will repeat it as long as we are engaged in the war on terror. Fighting terrorists is unconventional warfare. It requires unconventional methods. We have to do whatever it takes to win, capture or kill these people. It may not be moral, humane, or ethical. So what. War is not moral, hemane, or ethical, however, at times it is unavoidable. The object of the game is to win, not lose, not fight for a draw, but to win and win at all costs.

    If the ACLU is so concerned, maybe they should go there. patrol the streets of Iraq and look for victims. Maybe we will get lucky and they will get blown up.

    On another note, if the ACLU now wants to defend non combantants in a war zone, maybe they should change their name to the Iraqi Civil Lunatics Union or the International Civil Lunatics Union.

  4. Pappy on January 29th, 2006 11:13 pm

    Next week’s cartoon should be of an aclu lawyer with doorman shoulder pads acting at the commander in chief of the terrorist army. They sure dont know any thing about warfare.

  5. apostle on January 30th, 2006 5:58 am

    I’m posting about the ACLU on my website. Any Christians interested in prophecy hop over and check it out.

  6. Bill from Dover on January 30th, 2006 7:45 am

    I”m suprised they’re not picking up children. Much easier that way.