ACLU has become primarily a money-raising
endeavor, paying its staff extremely generous
salaries and perks. It turns down requests which
does not promise fund-raising prospects. In this
it is like the Greenwalds who rush to promote
very lucrative grants for high-profile projects.
Check out the ACLU main site for its gold-plated
campaigns and screeching about contributions.
This bankable version followed departure of
long-time supporters repulsed by the greed and
cozying up to wealthy donors. It ain't what it
claims to be, and once was, maybe could be again
if it dumped the sleases who chase media coverage
like politicians, actually pursuing civil
liberites spectaculars like ambulance-chasing
lawyers. Far from being public defenders.
The org's alleged neutrality is bogus, it is
tipped toward profitable non-profitibility,
hardly alone in that, to be sure, ever ready to
arrange tax write-offs for over-loaded dudes and
dudettes, and in that way perfectly comfortable
with governments who dispense privilege and civil
liberties to those who never really challenge
authority. Every government agency, corporation
and NGO has a civil liberties policy as rancid as privacy and security.
Coda, few cypherpunks ever wrote code, those that
did went on to better rewards in industry and
government from which most came. The code mantra
was an inside joke to get grunts to labor for
free, even go to jail, since not many could
qualify for ACLU expensive and exclusive standards,
At 03:40 PM 2/14/2017, you wrote:
<http://observer.com/2017/02/aclu-defends-breitbart-milo-yiannopoulos-free-speech/>http://observer.com/2017/02/aclu-defends-breitbart-milo-yiannopoulos-free-speech/
[partial quote follows]
"On February 1, Breitbart technology editor and
right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos was
scheduled to speak at the University of
California-Berkeley. Students at the university
protested his speech, and radicalsmany of whom
may not have been studentssturned violent.
"Yiannopoulosâ speech was canceled for safety
concerns, as demonstrators
<http://watchdog.org/287426/violence-censorship-berkeley/>threw
rocks and fireworks at the building where the
speech was set to take place. What began as a
speech to 500 students expanded to thousands as
the media (including this writer) wrote
countless articles about the riots and Yiannopoulos.
"If the Left wanted to shut Yiannopoulos down,
<http://observer.com/2017/02/i-helped-create-the-milo-trolling-playbook-you-should-stop-playing-right-into-it/>they
failed by behaving in such a manner that raised
his profile. Who knows how many people wondered
who this person was who caused such a backlash,
and how many of those people then found at least
some of what Yiannopoulos says to be acceptable?
"In a
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/civilities-why-milo-yiannopoulos-is-a-man-to-be-feared-its-not-what-you-think/2017/02/10/3bff3f8e-ef06-11e6-9973-c5efb7ccfb0d_story.html?utm_term=.ab05c2e09ed2>follow-up
article on the riots, Washington Post columnist
Steven Petrow spoke to a lawyer for the American
Civil Liberties Union, Lee Rowland. Rowland told
Petrow that she finds much of Yiannopoulosâ
speech to be âabsolutely hateful an
despicablebut those adjectives donât remove
his sspeech from the Constitutionâs protection.â
[end of partial quote]
Jim Bell's comments follow:
The ACLU is being correct, at least here. They
were also attacked in the late 1970's, for
standing up for the right of Nazis to march in
Skokie, Illinois. That march (which never
actually happened) was humorously portrayed in
John Belushi's movie, "Blues Brothers".
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTT1qUswYL0>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTT1qUswYL0
(Head Nazi is played by actor Henry Gibson,
perhaps most famous for the TV show, "Laugh-In".
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k61ZJpMDBzU>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k61ZJpMDBzU
Jim bell
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k61ZJpMDBzU>T
