Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Thu 03/02/2006 View Wed 03/01/2006 View Tue 02/28/2006 View Mon 02/27/2006 View Sun 02/26/2006 View Sat 02/25/2006 View Fri 02/24/2006
1
2006-03-02 Home Front: WoT
NSA Sued for Surveilling Islamic Charity - Attorneys
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by .com 2006-03-02 04:55|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 It does not matter if you buy food or guns, sending 150K to the Chechens is supporting the enemy. Food for the families of the fighters is money saved for bullets. What is no big surprise is the ACLU is representing them. Who is paying for this? If they can send hundreds of thousands to terrorists one would think they couold afford legal services. I hope our tax dollars are not paying for the undermining of American law.
Posted by 49 Pan">49 Pan  2006-03-02 06:10||   2006-03-02 06:10|| Front Page Top

#2 good. Maybe with enough focus on this issue we can demand that our law be followed and that these traitors be hung.
Posted by 2b 2006-03-02 08:14||   2006-03-02 08:14|| Front Page Top

#3  Who is paying for this?

You are.

In order to prevent the poor from being unable to bring suits against those who violate their civil rights, the law provides that if the plaintiff in civil rights litigation prevails they have thier legal fees paid by the defendant. That is why the government is the defendant in the creche on the twon square suits. Nobody minds if the city and its insurance company have to pay. These legal fees are a major source of funding for the ACLU and an invitation to invent suits where no real controversy exists.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-03-02 08:19||   2006-03-02 08:19|| Front Page Top

#4 "... but we suspect that conversations of thousands of Americans..."

Sounds like a Fishin Mission
Posted by DepotGuy 2006-03-02 08:33||   2006-03-02 08:33|| Front Page Top

#5 So now the ACLU is going to bat to cover for jihadi funding channels?

Can we just get on with it and admit the ACLU is on the enemy's side?
Posted by Robert Crawford">Robert Crawford  2006-03-02 08:47|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/]  2006-03-02 08:47|| Front Page Top

#6 The ACLU was founded by people who might charitably be called fellow travellers. It has always been on the enemy's side. Only the enemy whose side it is on changes.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-03-02 09:09||   2006-03-02 09:09|| Front Page Top

#7 Aided and abetted by a 'friendly' judiciary which is no longer subject to 'checks and balances' of legislative overwatch.
Posted by Grererong Thromoger7008 2006-03-02 09:11||   2006-03-02 09:11|| Front Page Top

#8 NS, here I sit in Zamboanga wanting to strangle someone!! The ACLU, as you said, are there to protect the poor and those without representation. This is a disgusting distortion of what they were intended to do, it now is monster without controls. Thy are "The enemy within". God bless the United States of America, may each and every member of the ACLU rot in hell.
Posted by 49 Pan">49 Pan  2006-03-02 09:56||   2006-03-02 09:56|| Front Page Top

23:55 Rafael
23:54 KBK
23:51 Rafael
23:50 twobyfour
23:48 Pappy
23:39 Rafael
23:30 trailing wife
23:29 twobyfour
23:29 JosephMendiola
23:28 Inspector Clueso
23:25 twobyfour
23:15 Skidmark
23:10 3dc
22:52 Frank G
22:45 Barbara Skolaut
22:42 ed
22:23 49 Pan
22:13 trailing wife
22:08 Dreadnought
22:07 xbalanke
22:05 DMFD
22:02 RD
21:45 Pappy
21:40 Captain America









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com