Xah Lee's Unixism

[jmfbahciv at aol.com]

In article <60gbk01kj3h9rsvgikv7jahelsal0bfg1c at 4ax.com>,
   Alan Balmer <albalmer at att.net> wrote:
>On Mon, 13 Sep 04 10:39:16 GMT, jmfbahciv at aol.com wrote:
>
>>>Responding in "hints" and ALL CAPS brings us to the ludicrous situation
>>>where a Turk gets to give a pointer to the ACLU to an American:
>>>
>>>http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=13079&c=207
>>
>>I'm not going to be able to get out to read that one.  Just
>>mentioning the ACLU gives me the bias that you're listening
>>with a BS filter.  ACLU has gone bonkers in that they've
>>become completely inconsist these days.
>
>This particular article isn't even consistent within itself. They try
>to make the reader equate "detainees" (most of whom have just been
>sent back home) and "secret arrests" which they somehow know all
>about. They also complain that "this group is almost entirely Arab,
>South Asian, or Muslim ...". Surprise, surprise.
>
>In fact, the article with its list of actions the ACLU has taken
>belies its own premise that all these things are happening in secret
>without any representation for the "victims."

Yea.  They seem to have taken logic lessons from Kerry.
>
>Years ago, I thought the ACLU was a Good Thing.

I agreed with a few things they did; I disagreed with a lot more.
However, I recognized that they were a good check on the
balances.  But their latest choices (not only the secret
detainee thing..there were others but I can't recall details)
have had me wondering about how do they come up with their
choices?  It's almost as if they cast lots to choose the
case and then flip a coin to see which side they'll defend.
Perhaps our pet lawyer^Wex-lawyer can explain this legal
logic.

/BAH