<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
The ACLU does some undoubtedly good work, but they have also been
remarkably selective in regard to whose rights they're willing to
defend.<br>
<br>
Case in point: I'm sitting here with my month-old granddaughter,
named for Julian of Norwich. (See Eliot's <i>Four Quartets</i>.)
In the ACLU's mythological world view, her civil liberties were
suddenly, magically conferred (how?) when she struggled free of her
mother's body. That's patent nonsense.<br>
<br>
Julianna, having a future like ours, had rights like ours more than
a month ago. --CGE<br>
<br>
<br>
On 11/19/10 8:57 PM, E. Wayne Johnson wrote:<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">> The ACLU, like the NRA, will
take Anyone as a member. I offer as<br>
> evidence the fact that I was a member of the ACLU in the mid
'90s<br>
> <br>
> But David Green makes a good point.<br>
> <br>
> Mr. Gehrig is a highly visible member of ACLU.<br>
> <br>
> Gehrig obviously supports American imperial militarism, and
the<br>
> current wars specifically to the point of inciting public
mockery of<br>
> those who are proactively anti-war.<br>
> <br>
> Gehrig, in the typical paradoxical authoritarianism of
"liberals"<br>
> seeks to squelch the voices of those he disagrees with. The<br>
> Orwellian shift of their appellation seems less and less
paradoxical <br>
> as one gets used to how these "liberals" operate.<br>
> <br>
> One still wonders at times if the "A" in ACLU stands for
"Anti-" or<br>
> for Authoritarian. As "American" becomes more and more
associated<br>
> with Authoritarianism, narrow bounds, and narrower minds,
perhaps it<br>
> doesnt matter much to bring any clarity.<br>
> <br>
> Since "you know them by their fruits", Mr. Gehrig as a
prominent<br>
> ACLU'er represents the produce of the ACLU. It doesnt matter
what is<br>
> happening nationally because at the local level that the
people get<br>
> to see who the ACLUers really are. Right now everyone can see
that<br>
> the ACLU are purveyors of bitter mocking invective and hip
urban<br>
> neologisms like "squashrot".<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> On 11/20/2010 5:20 AM, Robert Naiman wrote:<br>
>> I object to your guilt-by-association. If you want to
slam one<br>
>> person with whom you have an issue, that's one thing.
It's another<br>
>> thing to slam an organization, based on your interaction
with one<br>
>> individual who is in the organization.<br>
>> <br>
>> If you follow what the national ACLU has been putting out
on the <br>
>> policies of the Obama Administration, on detention, on<br>
>> assassination, on military commissions, on accountability
for<br>
>> torture, etc. I think one would be hard pressed to argue
that they<br>
>> have been pulling their punches.<br>
>> <br>
>> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 3:07 PM, David Green<br>
>> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:davegreen84@yahoo.com"><davegreen84@yahoo.com></a> wrote:<br>
>> <br>
>>> The ACLU stands for one of many possible fundamental
principles.<br>
>>> Too many of its members think that that is the only
one worth<br>
>>> standing for, and wish to cover themselves with glory
for doing<br>
>>> so. It's become a pretty transparent business, and
Gehrig's<br>
>>> behavior exposes one aspect of that--he's an overt
racist vis a<br>
>>> vis the Palestinians, and he's especially annoyed
that I showed <br>
>>> him to be a liar regarding the death of Rachel
Corrie. Bob, I<br>
>>> would think that that would concern you regarding the
credibility<br>
>>> of the ACLU, as well as the substantive issue I've
raised in my<br>
>>> letter; likely I would think wrong. Nothing about
liberals seems<br>
>>> to bother you.<br>
>>> <br>
>>> DG ________________________________ From: Robert
Naiman<br>
>>> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:naiman.uiuc@gmail.com"><naiman.uiuc@gmail.com></a> To: David Green
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:davegreen84@yahoo.com"><davegreen84@yahoo.com></a> <br>
>>> Cc: Peace Discuss
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net"><peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net></a> Sent: Fri,<br>
>>> November 19, 2010 12:14:54 PM Subject: Re:
[Peace-discuss] ACLU<br>
>>> liberals<br>
>>> <br>
>>> Is the ACLU responsible for what David Gehrig writes
in letters<br>
>>> to the DI? When he volunteered to sit at the table,
should they<br>
>>> have said: now, not just anyone can sit at this
table. What kind<br>
>>> of letters do you plan to write to the DI?<br>
>>> <br>
>>> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 12:03 PM, David Green<br>
>>> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:davegreen84@yahoo.com"><davegreen84@yahoo.com></a> wrote:<br>
>>> <br>
>>>> The last time I saw David Gehrig, he was manning
the ACLU table<br>
>>>> at the Farmers Market. I hear that he has
resigned from the<br>
>>>> Urbana City Council. Here's his comment in
response to my DI<br>
>>>> letter:<br>
>>>> <br>
>>>> <br>
>>>>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.dailyillini.com/opinions/letters-to-the-editor/2010/11/17/exploitation-of-war-for-fun-profit-disturbing#comments-title">http://www.dailyillini.com/opinions/letters-to-the-editor/2010/11/17/exploitation-of-war-for-fun-profit-disturbing#comments-title</a><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> </span><br>
"Is the Daily Illini really so hard up for letters that it must
print<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">>>>> near-weekly
squashrot from the fringe flake David Green? Has he<br>
>>>> absolutely no idea of how he comes across? I've
never seen<br>
>>>> anyone so brilliantly incarnate every facet of
the far-right<br>
>>>> parody of what a dour, smug, <br>
>>>> holds-the-copyright-on-sanctimonious leftist is
like. Is he<br>
>>>> some kind of counter-Colbert, except that
nobody's in on the<br>
>>>> joke?"<br>
>>>> </span><br>
<br>
</body>
</html>