ACLU defends its CIA paparazzi project
On August 26, my syndicated column blasted the ACLU for its spying operation on undercover CIA agents. The pictures of covert American CIA officers – “in some cases surreptitiously taken outside their homes” – were shown to jihadi suspects tied to the 9/11 attacks in order to identify the interrogators.
The ACLU responded to my column here, defending their paparazzi operation as both legal and ethical and attacking me as — wait for it — “insensitive” to the “due process” needs of jihadi enemy combatants.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
The Gitmo circus
May 7, 2012 09:28 AM by Michelle Malkin
186 CommentsKSM and company go on military trial, face death penalty
April 4, 2012 01:30 PM by Michelle Malkin
65 Comments
Eric Holder: Seriously, We’re Going to Close Gitmo Pretty Soon
September 20, 2011 04:07 PM by Doug Powers
40 CommentsCharges to be re-filed against KSM and Company
May 30, 2011 11:10 PM by Michelle Malkin
53 CommentsWaPo: Family Visitations For Gitmo Detainees Under Consideration
May 12, 2011 04:08 PM by Doug Powers
105 CommentsWaterboarding Point/Counterpoint: National Security Advisor vs. CIA Director vs. Attorney General
May 3, 2011 08:27 PM by Doug Powers
48 CommentsThe suicide stunts at Gitmo revisited
April 25, 2011 10:12 AM by Michelle Malkin
117 CommentsObama administration retreats (again) on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed civilian trial; Holder blames Congress
April 4, 2011 11:50 AM by Michelle Malkin
129 CommentsOmar Khadr: Guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty
October 25, 2010 10:16 AM by Michelle Malkin
17 Comments
“Out here, due process is a bullet.”- John Wayne in “The Green Berets”.
What a bunch of weasel-words. Sure, they didn’t give out names, big whoop. Passing out photos with the words “CIA” operatives stamped on them is WORSE. Do agents go around with their names on the front of thier heads? No, they’re called FACES and they’re useful in IDENTIFYING PEOPLE.
No doubt in my mind that if the ACLU founded in 1920 had been this full blown communist front-group that has usurped the organization today, we’d all be speaking Japanese or German today.
The CIA should start taking pictures of ACLU attorneys and showing them to jihadis with a little wink and a nod when they say, “These are NOT CIA agents.”
They would be telling the truth and doing us all a service.
Plus it shows even more sensitivity to the poor, downtrodden jihadis as it gives them more targets.
Must correct.
Sorry, Khyris, but the ACLU has always been Communist.
http://dianedew.com/aclu.htm
The ACLU will never fully understand the way the world is until the next jihad attack falls on their own heads. By then, it will be a bit too late to admit fault.
This is the snake that we are discussing. They are using the jihadis to undermine the US judicial system. The jihadis are using the ACLU to undermine our defenses. A match made in He11.
Anti-American
Communist
Liberals
Union
Just another union. Right ACORN…SEIU…et al…?
jangar – Oh, the ACLU understands, they just want us to lose.
Stories like this give me complete vertigo; where I just cannot believe that this is allowed to happen, or somebody is justifying it. Where the hell is the Congress investigating this? The President speaking out against it? This is surreal. The ACLU is a terrorist aiding abomination.
Start taking pictures of ACLU attorneys, show em to lots and lots of crack heads and promice them ETC……
When they aren’t busy attempting to destroy the fabric of what this country was founded on, they are looking in every nook and cranny for any signs of a Christian cross they find offensive. Then they use bullying tactics like the threat of legal action and high legal costs to victimize small towns and school districts.
They are purposely partaking in treasonous activities. Telling state secrets may be considered free speech and considered the “right” thing to do by a traitor, but it is still illegal and should be treated as such. In China or a dictatorship these people would be summarily lined up and shot along with the editors at the NYT.
These same hypocrits were yelling at the top of their lungs that Valerie Plame, a publicity seeking, non-covert CIA employee, should not have been outed by those in the Bush Administration. Now its okay for them to do it.
I’m beginning to think our (caution, a figure of speech is about to be spoken) sights should be aimed at the ACLU once ACORN is taken out of the picture. They are just as bad and have been undermining the American culture for too long.
The ACLU needs to change their name. They no longer fit with the present one.
the john adams project and the aclu are no better than acorn and should be looked upon as criminal groups posing as americans. they are frauds in every sense of the word, anti american lowlife garbage.
Some would refer to ACLU as:
Anti
Christian
Lawyers
Union
since they spend all their time stamping out prayer and any other sign or vestiage of Christianity that appears even to the far reaches of the hills and hollows of our most rural areas. They leave no “stone” unturned.
b-cat You misunderstand me.
In 1920, it was overt, and therefore powerless. Only by becoming a front group does it dupe the genuinely well intentioned into subversiveness.
There is NOTHING “American” about the ACLU. As a matter of fact, they could cost some lives of Americans. Who will be arrested if one of these agents is killed?
Sorry, I did misunderstand, Khyris.
Anyway, it gave me a chance to illustrate its past to the uninitiated.
Maybe we need a little more guerilla journalism here. A few videos of ACLU activists conspiring to violate the law might help expose these virmin for what they really are.
That is an idea with multiple applications: OUT ACLU attorneys, OUT newspaper reporters and editors (home address and phone numbers)who OUT Concealed Weapons License holders, OUT the clowns who OUT Conservatives. For far too long we have been letting them define the rules of engagement-this has to stop.
Hit back , it’s legal.
Hopefully no-one. If there’s going to be another star on the wall at Langley, that means there isn’t going to be a public arrest and trial, that being the definition of “covert” which they fail to understand. No arrests, but maybe a couple unsolved low-key missing persons reports would be nice.
Didn’t we just have a 5 year poltical scandal over ONE outed cia office worker???
They (ACLU, etc.) are the strong arm of the Obama administration and liberal Congress to shed light on the story in order to satisfy the blood thirsty, hard core left that wants America to cave in and submit to a one world government.
Yes, but that target was under different circumstances. Republicans are evil, and Democrats are saviors. Don’t forget it, buddy!
Tort reform with a loser pays provision would go a long way toward thwarting the standard ACLU tactic of sueing small cities and towns to win cheap victories.
The ACLU uses these cheap victories to spread their influence and to intimidate those who can’t afford to fight long court battles.
Tort reform has been given tangential mention in the health care debate and is encluded in some Republican plans. Obama even paid lip service to it in his joint session performance art event with congress. IMHO it is a key requirement to reverse the march of the statists.
(included.)
I really can spell; most of the time!
Lost at the mall, can not find and exit, stuck on the Metropolitan Transit Authority Train? Poor Charlie never returned and his fate is still unlearned.
Khyris said so, not me!
Blessed be those who are insensitive to the needs of all Jihadi terrorists.
For those who don’t comprehend that concept…. look up the definition of “justice”.
I find it nauseating that these people have named their project after John Adams – no doubt thinking they are following his example as he took a courageous and highly unpopular stand in defending the British soldiers involved in the infamous Boston Massacre.
But they’re missing some very important differences; the colonists and the British soldiers were both, at the time and place, British subjects, and as such, protected under British law.
The ninnies in the supreme court notwithstanding, enemy combatants who are neither citizens nor legal residents of the United States do not have the same rights as those persons who are.
If John Adams could rise from the grave, I’ve no doubt he would blast these cretins for misappropriation of his name.
Doesn’t the ACLU use very far left, liberal lawyers for a lot of its cases who do the work pro bono? There is an organization out there doing cases AGAINST the ACLU who are conservative, but sorry forget their name.
Read what you wrote again and think about how it makes no sense.
Actually, maybe we need a push for Universal Lawyer Insurance. Doesn’t everyone have a right to a lawyer in case they are sued or convicted of a crime?
I’d start with a cap on lawyer fees and make them pay the court costs and legal fees of the people they like to sue so much if they lose.
I have a feeling that with Universal Lawyer insurance and some regulations, all other costs, including health care would drop considerably. And, maybe we can start getting rid of all those uncommon sense laws that defy all logic.
You may be being sarcastic, but for anyone that proposes a “loser pays” scenario to somehow stem the tide of lawsuits, do you know what percentage of cases actually end up being decided by jury?
About 3-5%.
I agree, the wording leaves something to be desired. If I had to guess, what the author meant was there needs to be a way that the ACLU shouldn’t be able to have their way by threatening legal action and costly legal fees if the plaintiffs don’t comply with their demands. That could be accomplished with Universal Lawyer Insurance (ULI). The towns and school districts could tell them “bring it on”, we have ULI. If the ACLU loses, whatever fees and costs that have been incurred would be reimbursed to the ULI to help keep the premiums down.
The ACLU uses bullying tactics knowing that many of the poorer school districts and towns can’t afford high legal fees defending themselves. The ACLU may be legally allowed to do this but they are ethically challenged when they do.
Remember when leftists went bezerk over “outing” desk jockey Valerie Plame? Where are they now that real field agents are being exposed?
*Chirping crickets.*
ACLU = A-holes, Communists, Leftists United
But the sting against ACORN was evil?
Are you thinking of the Landmark Legal Foundation maybe?
Isn’t that mainly because its cheaper to not fight the case using the current rules? If there was incentive to fight, don’t you think more people/organizations would?
Valerie Plame was being abused by their enemeies.
The terrorists are also being abused by their enemies.
The ACLU is being totally consistent. In their view, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”
No one should be surprised or outraged by the ACLU, because they are as predictable as the sun rising in the east.
KNOW YOUR ENEMY.
Sure, but what incentives would you propose? And are you willing to invest the huge amount of money that would be needed in our court system to handle the influx of once-settled cases?
Yeah, and driving by the house of the S-Chip poster family was stalking.
Where’s Valerie Plame to complain – oh, I forgot, it was all about her, not National Security.
In the good old days, someone would have taken the photogs up a dark alley. Just sayin’…
Because it’s cheaper to settle. Loser pays would change the financial dynamics.
people need to post the photos of these folks on internet sites with addresses where people can get to know them. they feel identity is a good thing to establish for people going into dangerous places. so pictures of them in front of their homes on the web might make them reconsider their stupidity. that aclu bimbo the other night on fox didn’t look at all happy having the photographer show her and her car and her neighborhood after the reporter gave her name and locale.
How about just a ‘cap on lawyers’-a dunce cap. Except my lawyer-he is exempt.
p.s. loser pays laws and losing lawyer pays winning lawyer will soon take the wind out of these people’s sail. hit them in the pocketbook. they file suits against gubmint, knowing gubmint will settle rather than fight, because there is little upside for the gubmint to fight. give them some upside by letting the department keep half the winnings with the other half going into the general revenue. cops love that confiscation law since it nets tem some bucks. lawyers for the gubmint may just love to litigate if they benefitted also.
Decisions to settle are based on overall risk assessment. Sure the cost of representation plays a part, but at least that is a generally known factor. What is the unknown is what, if any, jury award there will be. That won’t change much even if “loser” pays. Especially in tort where it is not so much a question of whether or not there was ANY negligence by the defendant, but rather how much. Juries often come back with findings of negligence, but that the damages (or at least the defendant’s proportion of the damages) is nominal. What to do then?
And people should not forget that a losing claim does mean it was a frivolous claim.
Clarified.
Everyone here is making a great case for TORT reform. Like the tax code, it’s gotten so overly complex and tweaked, nothing makes much common sense anymore.
Fear of litigation and it’s cost should not be a criteria for settling cases. What a mess this society has gotten itself into.
I’d like to see a column by Michelle in which she compiles all the quotes from leftist politicians whining about the Plame issue and demanding someone be fried for it.
….with a reference to what the ACLU has done.
Chapoutier is correct. Most lawsuits wind up being settled..In terms of legal effort vs. return on their dollar (fees), it is in their economic interest as lawyers to seek settlement (so they can move on to the next case)…
The ACLU needs to be dealt with the same way that ACORN is being dealt with now…
I recall reading an article in which it said laws were passed in which the ACLU, when they win one of these frivolous lawsuits, can claim lawyers fees and other amounts of money when they win.
It’s a reason many small communities cave, because of the HUGE extra expense if they lose the case.
It’s nothing more than a fund raising operation for the ACLU, and a jobs program for hack leftist lawyers.
Sometimes lawsuits are settled because they SHOULD not have to have been brought. There are people who do silly things and get upset when they have to pay for it. People buy things and refuse to pay for them. They have to know you are serious. It is costly to do so but let your business get a reputation for not pushing the issue and that 2% of jerks can put a serious dent in the bottom line.
We talk of tort reform and I think we need it. But with a fine scalpel and not a broad ax. I love a lawyer joke as much as the next guy-I am related to lawyers–but these “technicalities of the law” we oft complain about are “our rights as a free people”. Sometimes it is messy; we who hold our Rights Dear must always be on guard to emotional persuasion.
defund them.
Can we start charging them with treason now?
Happy Talk Like a Pirate Day!
I’m not sure if what you said is funny or if it is the 3rd Sidecar coursing through my veins, but in either case I am laughing very herd.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGECIFa9rJM&feature=related
Chaps,this one is for you!
p.s. left same one on other thread.