Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Gawkr)   ACLU sues State of Georgia on behalf of the Ku Klux Klan. ...wait, what?   (gaw.kr ) divider line 147
    More: Interesting, Ku Klux Klan, ACLU, legal precedent, United States federal courts  
•       •       •

6586 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Sep 2012 at 2:48 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



147 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-14 02:03:19 AM  
24.media.tumblr.com

That's not good.....
 
2012-09-14 02:06:55 AM  
I can't read the article, but I'm pretty sure the ACLU has helped out the KKK numerous times before. Any time someone tries to shut down one of their marches, the ACLU is there. That's part of the reason why they're cool.
 
2012-09-14 02:16:17 AM  
There's a reason why the ACLU doesn't give a fark who you are or what you represent.
 
2012-09-14 02:51:01 AM  
How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?
 
2012-09-14 02:53:46 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?


If the government cracks down on someone's 1st amendment rights to produce and publish such a movie the ACLU will be there.
 
2012-09-14 02:55:06 AM  
Once again the libtards at the unAmerican Commie Libtard Union blindly support whatever crazy ass left wing cause they can find.
 
2012-09-14 02:58:03 AM  
Do what Missouri did.

Let them adopt the highway, and then rename it after a black civil rights icon like Rosa Parks.
They'll likely abandon their duties in maintaining the road, and then you can kick them out of the program.
 
2012-09-14 02:58:29 AM  
ACLU may be crazy at times, but I'd rather have crazy than servile bootlickers.
 
2012-09-14 02:58:51 AM  

Relatively Obscure: There's a reason why the ACLU doesn't give a fark who you are or what you represent.


Yup. By fighting these fights for scum like the KKK, the ALCU protects the rights of the rest of us.

Also, after reading the comments in TFA, Georgia should do what Missouri did when the KKK won the right to participate in 'Adopt-A-Highway' there: rename the stretch of road to something they'd be disgusted by. Missouri named the highway assigned to the KKK funds 'Rosa Parks Highway'; I'm sure Georgia could find a suitable name to troll with.
 
2012-09-14 02:59:18 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?


Has a government agency done something to that douchebag? I must have missed it.
 
2012-09-14 03:00:29 AM  

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: ACLU may be crazy at times, but I'd rather have crazy than servile bootlickers.


For example...
 
2012-09-14 03:01:00 AM  

0Icky0: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: ACLU may be crazy at times, but I'd rather have crazy than servile bootlickers.

For example...


Defending Rush Limbaugh...
 
2012-09-14 03:03:02 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?


The government hasn't done anything yet. They are trying to find out the identity of the guy who actually made the movie; since the government's right to spy on any of us at any time has already been established, I suppose they can't be stopped from finding out who he is.
 
2012-09-14 03:03:08 AM  

GhostFish: Do what Missouri did.

Let them adopt the highway, and then rename it after a black civil rights icon like Rosa Parks.
They'll likely abandon their duties in maintaining the road, and then you can kick them out of the program.


I reached for the like button. Habit. Smarted and funnied at the same time.
 
2012-09-14 03:04:08 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?


You want the ACLU to make inflammatory movies denigrating Islam?
 
2012-09-14 03:04:42 AM  

pciszek: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

The government hasn't done anything yet. They are trying to find out the identity of the guy who actually made the movie; since the government's right to spy on any of us at any time has already been established, I suppose they can't be stopped from finding out who he is.


Pretty sure the AP already figured out it was Sirhan Sir...oops, nakoula basseley nakoula.
 
2012-09-14 03:04:58 AM  

one small post for man: Once again the libtards at the unAmerican Commie Libtard Union blindly support whatever crazy ass left wing cause they can find.


guess when you get so far right you end up left again
 
2012-09-14 03:09:26 AM  

pciszek: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

The government hasn't done anything yet. They are trying to find out the identity of the guy who actually made the movie; since the government's right to spy on any of us at any time has already been established, I suppose they can't be stopped from finding out who he is.


They found him - he's a career criminal, convicted of bank fraud, and on probation which he may have violated. So far, there is nothing the government is doing to him, so nothing for the ACLU to do.
 
2012-09-14 03:09:45 AM  

Sabyen91: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

Has a government agency done something to that douchebag? I must have missed it.


They revealed his name. Which is fine by me; the douchebag knew his film was inflammatory, and was gonna piss radical Muslims off, but that's not worth getting in trouble over. What IS worth getting in trouble over is misleading the actors as to the nature of the film, then "helpfully" editing the movie to make it more inflammatory, thus putting THOSE actors' lives in danger, while safely hiding behind a pseudonym like the pussy all bigots like that are.

Personally, I'm fine with just letting his real name be publicly known. Let him live the rest of his miserable, hateful life with the constant fear of retribution that, due to his living in America, will probably never come.
 
2012-09-14 03:11:01 AM  

jso2897: pciszek: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

The government hasn't done anything yet. They are trying to find out the identity of the guy who actually made the movie; since the government's right to spy on any of us at any time has already been established, I suppose they can't be stopped from finding out who he is.

They found him - he's a career criminal, convicted of bank fraud, and on probation which he may have violated. So far, there is nothing the government is doing to him, so nothing for the ACLU to do.


I have no doubt he violated parole considering he was supposed to not use a computer for five years after his release (in 2010).
 
2012-09-14 03:11:47 AM  

LordJiro: Sabyen91: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

Has a government agency done something to that douchebag? I must have missed it.

They revealed his name. Which is fine by me; the douchebag knew his film was inflammatory, and was gonna piss radical Muslims off, but that's not worth getting in trouble over. What IS worth getting in trouble over is misleading the actors as to the nature of the film, then "helpfully" editing the movie to make it more inflammatory, thus putting THOSE actors' lives in danger, while safely hiding behind a pseudonym like the pussy all bigots like that are.

Personally, I'm fine with just letting his real name be publicly known. Let him live the rest of his miserable, hateful life with the constant fear of retribution that, due to his living in America, will probably never come.


I mean something that would violate his 1st amendment rights.
 
2012-09-14 03:12:09 AM  
Not the first time subby

It's almost as if they really do believe in freedom of speech
 
2012-09-14 03:12:10 AM  

Sabyen91: jso2897: pciszek: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

The government hasn't done anything yet. They are trying to find out the identity of the guy who actually made the movie; since the government's right to spy on any of us at any time has already been established, I suppose they can't be stopped from finding out who he is.

They found him - he's a career criminal, convicted of bank fraud, and on probation which he may have violated. So far, there is nothing the government is doing to him, so nothing for the ACLU to do.

I have no doubt he violated parole considering he was supposed to not use a computer for five years after his release (in 2010).


So he's a criminal dipshiat as well as a bigoted dipshiat. Oh, and a cowardly dipshiat.
 
2012-09-14 03:12:22 AM  

LordJiro: Sabyen91: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

Has a government agency done something to that douchebag? I must have missed it.

They revealed his name. Which is fine by me; the douchebag knew his film was inflammatory, and was gonna piss radical Muslims off, but that's not worth getting in trouble over. What IS worth getting in trouble over is misleading the actors as to the nature of the film, then "helpfully" editing the movie to make it more inflammatory, thus putting THOSE actors' lives in danger, while safely hiding behind a pseudonym like the pussy all bigots like that are.

Personally, I'm fine with just letting his real name be publicly known. Let him live the rest of his miserable, hateful life with the constant fear of retribution that, due to his living in America, will probably never come.


Also, it was the AP that revealed his name.
 
2012-09-14 03:13:44 AM  

Confabulat: I can't read the article, but I'm pretty sure the ACLU has helped out the KKK numerous times before. Any time someone tries to shut down one of their marches, the ACLU is there. That's part of the reason why they're cool.


ACLU...american civil liberties union. Probably the ONLY true protector of the rights we are supposed to be enjoying as Americans.
I hate kkk ideals, hate racism...i hate gay bashers...hell, I hate mean of all kinds.
However, if we have to have that shiat at least we have an entity ensuring that right to be stupid.
No I'm not being sarcastic.

With that being said...kkk, and all other racist/hate groups...just don't try forcing your crap on me.
 
2012-09-14 03:13:50 AM  

LordJiro: Sabyen91: jso2897: pciszek: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

The government hasn't done anything yet. They are trying to find out the identity of the guy who actually made the movie; since the government's right to spy on any of us at any time has already been established, I suppose they can't be stopped from finding out who he is.

They found him - he's a career criminal, convicted of bank fraud, and on probation which he may have violated. So far, there is nothing the government is doing to him, so nothing for the ACLU to do.

I have no doubt he violated parole considering he was supposed to not use a computer for five years after his release (in 2010).

So he's a criminal dipshiat as well as a bigoted dipshiat. Oh, and a cowardly dipshiat.


Yeah, he stole identities to commit bank fraud. He did time for that. I am not sure if he has dual citizenship or is an American. It is said he is an Egyptian Coptic. If he can be deported I hope he is.
 
2012-09-14 03:14:08 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?


Who was denied what right?
 
2012-09-14 03:15:23 AM  

Relatively Obscure: There's a reason why the ACLU doesn't give a fark who you are or what you represent.


Very true, and there's a reason everyone should support them.
 
2012-09-14 03:15:25 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

Who was denied what right?


AverageAmericanGuy was allowed the right to be a dumbass. Oh...that wasn't your question.
 
2012-09-14 03:15:46 AM  

Sabyen91: LordJiro: Sabyen91: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

Has a government agency done something to that douchebag? I must have missed it.

They revealed his name. Which is fine by me; the douchebag knew his film was inflammatory, and was gonna piss radical Muslims off, but that's not worth getting in trouble over. What IS worth getting in trouble over is misleading the actors as to the nature of the film, then "helpfully" editing the movie to make it more inflammatory, thus putting THOSE actors' lives in danger, while safely hiding behind a pseudonym like the pussy all bigots like that are.

Personally, I'm fine with just letting his real name be publicly known. Let him live the rest of his miserable, hateful life with the constant fear of retribution that, due to his living in America, will probably never come.

Also, it was the AP that revealed his name.


My mistake. And if the Feds DO somehow do anything that violates his first amendment rights (instead of/alongside appropriate punishment for the fraud, parole violations, etc.), I'll be happy to see the ACLU defend him.
 
2012-09-14 03:17:07 AM  

LordJiro: Sabyen91: LordJiro: Sabyen91: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

Has a government agency done something to that douchebag? I must have missed it.

They revealed his name. Which is fine by me; the douchebag knew his film was inflammatory, and was gonna piss radical Muslims off, but that's not worth getting in trouble over. What IS worth getting in trouble over is misleading the actors as to the nature of the film, then "helpfully" editing the movie to make it more inflammatory, thus putting THOSE actors' lives in danger, while safely hiding behind a pseudonym like the pussy all bigots like that are.

Personally, I'm fine with just letting his real name be publicly known. Let him live the rest of his miserable, hateful life with the constant fear of retribution that, due to his living in America, will probably never come.

Also, it was the AP that revealed his name.

My mistake. And if the Feds DO somehow do anything that violates his first amendment rights (instead of/alongside appropriate punishment for the fraud, parole violations, etc.), I'll be happy to see the ACLU defend him.


I will be as well but I hope they lose in that case.
 
2012-09-14 03:17:46 AM  
The ACLU defends rights, not people. It doesn't matter who it is...the KKK, NAMBLA, Rush Limbaugh, neo-Nazi groups, Al Qaeda terrorists at Gitmo...they will defend all the scum of the Earth because taking rights away from the scum opens up the door to take it away from the rest of us.
 
2012-09-14 03:18:48 AM  

Sabyen91: jso2897: pciszek: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

The government hasn't done anything yet. They are trying to find out the identity of the guy who actually made the movie; since the government's right to spy on any of us at any time has already been established, I suppose they can't be stopped from finding out who he is.

They found him - he's a career criminal, convicted of bank fraud, and on probation which he may have violated. So far, there is nothing the government is doing to him, so nothing for the ACLU to do.

I have no doubt he violated parole considering he was supposed to not use a computer for five years after his release (in 2010).


Really? I did not know that, hmmmm.
 
2012-09-14 03:19:05 AM  
The ACLU should be commended for its principles and its consistency. It's really telling that the right makes it out to be the boogieman. Apparently the right has a problem with an organization defending people's constitutional rights.
 
2012-09-14 03:22:06 AM  

furiousxgeorge: The ACLU defends rights, not people. It doesn't matter who it is...the KKK, NAMBLA, Rush Limbaugh, neo-Nazi groups, Al Qaeda terrorists at Gitmo...they will defend all the scum of the Earth because taking rights away from the scum opens up the door to take it away from the rest of us.


Yep, and I'm glad they're there doing it.
 
2012-09-14 03:22:49 AM  

Sabyen91: LordJiro: Sabyen91: LordJiro: Sabyen91: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

Has a government agency done something to that douchebag? I must have missed it.

They revealed his name. Which is fine by me; the douchebag knew his film was inflammatory, and was gonna piss radical Muslims off, but that's not worth getting in trouble over. What IS worth getting in trouble over is misleading the actors as to the nature of the film, then "helpfully" editing the movie to make it more inflammatory, thus putting THOSE actors' lives in danger, while safely hiding behind a pseudonym like the pussy all bigots like that are.

Personally, I'm fine with just letting his real name be publicly known. Let him live the rest of his miserable, hateful life with the constant fear of retribution that, due to his living in America, will probably never come.

Also, it was the AP that revealed his name.

My mistake. And if the Feds DO somehow do anything that violates his first amendment rights (instead of/alongside appropriate punishment for the fraud, parole violations, etc.), I'll be happy to see the ACLU defend him.

I will be as well but I hope they lose in that case.


I'm conflicted about that. On the one hand, he undoubtedly knew it would raise an epic shiatstorm; you don't get to throw rocks at the wasp nest in the neighbor's yard then act surprised when someone gets stung.

On the other hand, eliminating someone's First Amendment rights due to the reactions of others is kinda risky, precedent-wise. This isn't quite as clear-cut as yelling 'Fire' in a theater, I think.
 
2012-09-14 03:24:49 AM  

LordJiro: Sabyen91: LordJiro: Sabyen91: LordJiro: Sabyen91: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

Has a government agency done something to that douchebag? I must have missed it.

They revealed his name. Which is fine by me; the douchebag knew his film was inflammatory, and was gonna piss radical Muslims off, but that's not worth getting in trouble over. What IS worth getting in trouble over is misleading the actors as to the nature of the film, then "helpfully" editing the movie to make it more inflammatory, thus putting THOSE actors' lives in danger, while safely hiding behind a pseudonym like the pussy all bigots like that are.

Personally, I'm fine with just letting his real name be publicly known. Let him live the rest of his miserable, hateful life with the constant fear of retribution that, due to his living in America, will probably never come.

Also, it was the AP that revealed his name.

My mistake. And if the Feds DO somehow do anything that violates his first amendment rights (instead of/alongside appropriate punishment for the fraud, parole violations, etc.), I'll be happy to see the ACLU defend him.

I will be as well but I hope they lose in that case.

I'm conflicted about that. On the one hand, he undoubtedly knew it would raise an epic shiatstorm; you don't get to throw rocks at the wasp nest in the neighbor's yard then act surprised when someone gets stung.

On the other hand, eliminating someone's First Amendment rights due to the reactions of others is kinda risky, precedent-wise. This isn't quite as clear-cut as yelling 'Fire' in a theater, I think.


I am conflicted as well but I think if they had a reasonable expectation of the response (which their sick actions show) would be violent they are partially responsible.
 
2012-09-14 03:26:55 AM  
Wait, somebody made a movie denigrating Islam? Take to the streets! Kill diplomats from the country that let people think such horrible thoughts! Threaten the families of everybody connected with the film, its production and distribution! How dare anybody say anything against the religion of peace!

What's the film and is it online somewhere?
 
2012-09-14 03:28:57 AM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: Sabyen91: jso2897: pciszek: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

The government hasn't done anything yet. They are trying to find out the identity of the guy who actually made the movie; since the government's right to spy on any of us at any time has already been established, I suppose they can't be stopped from finding out who he is.

They found him - he's a career criminal, convicted of bank fraud, and on probation which he may have violated. So far, there is nothing the government is doing to him, so nothing for the ACLU to do.

I have no doubt he violated parole considering he was supposed to not use a computer for five years after his release (in 2010).

Really? I did not know that, hmmmm.


Probation, not parole, sorry. Link
 
2012-09-14 03:29:57 AM  

The One True TheDavid: Wait, somebody made a movie denigrating Islam? Take to the streets! Kill diplomats from the country that let people think such horrible thoughts! Threaten the families of everybody connected with the film, its production and distribution! How dare anybody say anything against the religion of peace!

What's the film and is it online somewhere?


He knew what would happen.
 
2012-09-14 03:31:44 AM  
Good.
I dont agree with anything the KKK stands for, but they are entitled to the same rights as anyone else. The word 'tasteful' does not appear anywhere in the constitution.
 
2012-09-14 03:31:50 AM  

The One True TheDavid: Wait, somebody made a movie denigrating Islam? Take to the streets! Kill diplomats from the country that let people think such horrible thoughts! Threaten the families of everybody connected with the film, its production and distribution! How dare anybody say anything against the religion of peace!

What's the film and is it online somewhere?


Imagine that, citizens of unstable theocracies might just have a good number of unstable fundamentalists.
 
2012-09-14 03:32:31 AM  
I need to save this link so I can cram it down the throat of the next farkwit who goes on a spittle-flecked rant about how the ACLU only helps out libruls.
 
2012-09-14 03:33:39 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?


Go away, you worthless threadshiatter.
 
2012-09-14 03:35:21 AM  

Sabyen91: LordJiro: Sabyen91: LordJiro: Sabyen91: LordJiro: Sabyen91: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

Has a government agency done something to that douchebag? I must have missed it.

They revealed his name. Which is fine by me; the douchebag knew his film was inflammatory, and was gonna piss radical Muslims off, but that's not worth getting in trouble over. What IS worth getting in trouble over is misleading the actors as to the nature of the film, then "helpfully" editing the movie to make it more inflammatory, thus putting THOSE actors' lives in danger, while safely hiding behind a pseudonym like the pussy all bigots like that are.

Personally, I'm fine with just letting his real name be publicly known. Let him live the rest of his miserable, hateful life with the constant fear of retribution that, due to his living in America, will probably never come.

Also, it was the AP that revealed his name.

My mistake. And if the Feds DO somehow do anything that violates his first amendment rights (instead of/alongside appropriate punishment for the fraud, parole violations, etc.), I'll be happy to see the ACLU defend him.

I will be as well but I hope they lose in that case.

I'm conflicted about that. On the one hand, he undoubtedly knew it would raise an epic shiatstorm; you don't get to throw rocks at the wasp nest in the neighbor's yard then act surprised when someone gets stung.

On the other hand, eliminating someone's First Amendment rights due to the reactions of others is kinda risky, precedent-wise. This isn't quite as clear-cut as yelling 'Fire' in a theater, I think.

I am conflicted as well but I think if they had a reasonable expectation of the response (which their sick actions show) would be violent they are partially responsible.


It would require proving intent, calculation, and knowledge of the outcome. Very difficult. I honestly don't see any percentage in trying to prosecute this guy - as Lord Jiro said - this is dangerous ground, and only to be tread upon with immense trepidation. And I don't think this tool is worth it.n he's just a useful idiot.
 
2012-09-14 03:35:33 AM  

LordJiro: The One True TheDavid: Wait, somebody made a movie denigrating Islam? Take to the streets! Kill diplomats from the country that let people think such horrible thoughts! Threaten the families of everybody connected with the film, its production and distribution! How dare anybody say anything against the religion of peace!

What's the film and is it online somewhere?

Imagine that, citizens of unstable theocracies might just have a good number of unstable fundamentalists.


The sad thing is they just elected a US educated guy over the Muslim Brotherhood. It is not a theocracy. In eastern Libya (where Benghazi is located) 60% are pro-US and only 28% like the Muslim Brotherhood). We cannot overreact to this. This is a burgeoning Democracy that needs time to grow.
 
2012-09-14 03:36:24 AM  

jso2897: Sabyen91: LordJiro: Sabyen91: LordJiro: Sabyen91: LordJiro: Sabyen91: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

Has a government agency done something to that douchebag? I must have missed it.

They revealed his name. Which is fine by me; the douchebag knew his film was inflammatory, and was gonna piss radical Muslims off, but that's not worth getting in trouble over. What IS worth getting in trouble over is misleading the actors as to the nature of the film, then "helpfully" editing the movie to make it more inflammatory, thus putting THOSE actors' lives in danger, while safely hiding behind a pseudonym like the pussy all bigots like that are.

Personally, I'm fine with just letting his real name be publicly known. Let him live the rest of his miserable, hateful life with the constant fear of retribution that, due to his living in America, will probably never come.

Also, it was the AP that revealed his name.

My mistake. And if the Feds DO somehow do anything that violates his first amendment rights (instead of/alongside appropriate punishment for the fraud, parole violations, etc.), I'll be happy to see the ACLU defend him.

I will be as well but I hope they lose in that case.

I'm conflicted about that. On the one hand, he undoubtedly knew it would raise an epic shiatstorm; you don't get to throw rocks at the wasp nest in the neighbor's yard then act surprised when someone gets stung.

On the other hand, eliminating someone's First Amendment rights due to the reactions of others is kinda risky, precedent-wise. This isn't quite as clear-cut as yelling 'Fire' in a theater, I think.

I am conflicted as well but I think if they had a reasonable expectation of the response (which their sick actions show) would be violent they are partially responsible.

It would require proving intent, calculation, and knowledge of the outcome. Very difficult. I honestly don't see any percentage in trying to prosecute this ...


Considering he tried to blame the Jews and duped the actors...I am not sure that would be too difficult.
 
2012-09-14 03:37:01 AM  

Sabyen91: tinfoil-hat maggie: Sabyen91: jso2897: pciszek: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

The government hasn't done anything yet. They are trying to find out the identity of the guy who actually made the movie; since the government's right to spy on any of us at any time has already been established, I suppose they can't be stopped from finding out who he is.

They found him - he's a career criminal, convicted of bank fraud, and on probation which he may have violated. So far, there is nothing the government is doing to him, so nothing for the ACLU to do.

I have no doubt he violated parole considering he was supposed to not use a computer for five years after his release (in 2010).

Really? I did not know that, hmmmm.

Probation, not parole, sorry. Link


Thanks, I had read about the check fraud bit but the article left out the probation clause. Interesting.
 
2012-09-14 03:38:49 AM  

Cyclometh: I need to save this link so I can cram it down the throat of the next farkwit who goes on a spittle-flecked rant about how the ACLU only helps out libruls.


It's amazing people really think that, but I know there are a lot of them out there.
 
2012-09-14 03:38:59 AM  

tinfoil-hat maggie: Sabyen91: tinfoil-hat maggie: Sabyen91: jso2897: pciszek: AverageAmericanGuy: How about making inflammatory movies denigrating Islam? Where's the ACLU on that?

The government hasn't done anything yet. They are trying to find out the identity of the guy who actually made the movie; since the government's right to spy on any of us at any time has already been established, I suppose they can't be stopped from finding out who he is.

They found him - he's a career criminal, convicted of bank fraud, and on probation which he may have violated. So far, there is nothing the government is doing to him, so nothing for the ACLU to do.

I have no doubt he violated parole considering he was supposed to not use a computer for five years after his release (in 2010).

Really? I did not know that, hmmmm.

Probation, not parole, sorry. Link

Thanks, I had read about the check fraud bit but the article left out the probation clause. Interesting.


I still want to know his status as a citizen. That somehow hasn't come out.
 
Displayed 50 of 147 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report