DHS has deported over 2100 terrorists from US
- Thread starter T. A. Gardner
- Start date
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
No, they don't. How many J6 protesters did the ACLU defend? How many anti-abortion protesters have they defended? The ACLU picked a side and are politically biased--badly biased--today. That is a fact.
American Civil Liberties Union - Bias and Reliability
Is American Civil Liberties Union biased? Check out Biasly’s analysis of American Civil Liberties Union's bias rating. See if the news outlet leans liberal or conservative, and how reliable it i
www.biasly.com
The director of the American Civil Liberties Union has now acknowledged what should have been obvious to everybody over the past several years: The ACLU is no longer a neutral defender of everyone’s civil liberties. It has morphed into a hyper-partisan, hard-left political advocacy group.
The ACLU has become a darling of the left, but its history isn't so political
Known for defending constitutional rights, the American Civil Liberties Union has recently become synonymous with political activism. This year, membership more than doubled to 1.2 million people and the weekend of Trump’s first proposed travel ban, the ACLU raked in $32 million — eight times...
www.vice.com
Even the NYT says the ACLU is badly biased to the Left.
Once a Bastion of Free Speech, the A.C.L.U. Faces an Identity Crisis (Published 2021)
An organization that has defended the First Amendment rights of Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan is split by an internal debate over whether supporting progressive causes is more important.
www.nytimes.com
I just proved the ACLU is badly biased with a wide variety of sources.
The NYT says the ACLU is badly biased so your claim above is void.
QP!
Verified User
It is almost 100% that if @T. A. Gardner posts a source article he will misrepresent or lie about what is in it and get it wrong almost every fucking single time.you should take a refresher course in reading comprehension. Your site refers to "terrorist screening & encounter", and says they grilled individuals who were suspected of loose associations or potential knowledge of terrorist. THERE IS NO MENTION OF ARRESTS OR TRIALS OR JAILING.
Got that gumby?
And FYI; ICE IS NOT PART OF CBP. Look it up. Get educated man!
QP!
Verified User
Man you are such a simpleton. You are so base and dumb.No, they don't. How many J6 protesters did the ACLU defend? How many anti-abortion protesters have they defended? The ACLU picked a side and are politically biased--badly biased--today. That is a fact.
American Civil Liberties Union - Bias and Reliability
Is American Civil Liberties Union biased? Check out Biasly’s analysis of American Civil Liberties Union's bias rating. See if the news outlet leans liberal or conservative, and how reliable it i
The director of the American Civil Liberties Union has now acknowledged what should have been obvious to everybody over the past several years: The ACLU is no longer a neutral defender of everyone’s civil liberties. It has morphed into a hyper-partisan, hard-left political advocacy group.
The ACLU has become a darling of the left, but its history isn't so political
Known for defending constitutional rights, the American Civil Liberties Union has recently become synonymous with political activism. This year, membership more than doubled to 1.2 million people and the weekend of Trump’s first proposed travel ban, the ACLU raked in $32 million — eight times...
Even the NYT says the ACLU is badly biased to the Left.
Once a Bastion of Free Speech, the A.C.L.U. Faces an Identity Crisis (Published 2021)
An organization that has defended the First Amendment rights of Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan is split by an internal debate over whether supporting progressive causes is more important.
I just proved the ACLU is badly biased with a wide variety of sources.
The NYT says the ACLU is badly biased so your claim above is void.
You speak on topics when you have no clue about them.
The ACLU is not a public defender. They do not just jump in defend J6ers' or Bank robbers, or terrorists... because 'they did crime'.
The ACLU acts when they feel the gov't is breaching the constitution and they will act on behalf of left or right interests without hesitation.
QP!
Verified User
- The National Rifle Association (NRA): The ACLU supported the NRA in a prominent First Amendment case, culminating in a 2024 Supreme Court decision ruling that New York state officials could not unlawfully coerce private companies to blacklist the group over its political views. [1]
- Neo-Nazis (National Socialist Party of America): In the famous 1978 Skokie case, the ACLU successfully defended the right of American neo-Nazis to march through a predominantly Jewish suburb in Illinois. [1, 2]
- The Ku Klux Klan (KKK): In the landmark 1969 Supreme Court case Brandenburg v. Ohio, the ACLU defended a KKK leader's right to free speech, establishing the modern standard that the government cannot criminalize inflammatory speech unless it directly incites "imminent lawless action". [1, 2]
- White Nationalists (Charlottesville Rally Organizers): In 2017, the ACLU of Virginia legally represented alt-right coordinator Jason Kessler after the city of Charlottesville attempted to revoke his permit to protest the removal of a Confederate statue. [1, 2]
- Milo Yiannopoulos: The ACLU filed a lawsuit against the Washington, D.C. transit authority on behalf of the far-right provocateur after the agency refused to display advertisements for his book. [1, 2]
- Donald Trump: The organization defended the former president's speech rights against charges of inciting violence at a campaign rally. [1]
- The John Birch Society: The ACLU has historically defended the right of local police officers to maintain memberships within this ultraconservative advocacy group. [1]
- The Christian Coalition: The ACLU has cross-ideologically defended the speech and organizing capabilities of Christian fundamentalist and right-of-center religious organizations. [1, 2]
- Tea Party Activists: The organization filed amicus briefs supporting Tea Party groups and supporters fighting local bans against wearing political apparel or insignia at active polling places. [1]
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
1. The Jan. 6th attempted insurrection was a VIOLENT ACTION THAT INCLUDED Damage to public property, attacking and injuring police, invasion of the temporarily closed federal building, rioting, advocatong assault and interference of Congress in performance of their duty, etc. Nothing peaceful about it. ALL on camera. They were arrested, booked, tried with counsel and convicted (many pleaded guilty). So no, the ACLU does not advocate or defend riots with intent to harm.No, they don't. How many J6 protesters did the ACLU defend? How many anti-abortion protesters have they defended? The ACLU picked a side and are politically biased--badly biased--today. That is a fact.
American Civil Liberties Union - Bias and Reliability
Is American Civil Liberties Union biased? Check out Biasly’s analysis of American Civil Liberties Union's bias rating. See if the news outlet leans liberal or conservative, and how reliable it i
The director of the American Civil Liberties Union has now acknowledged what should have been obvious to everybody over the past several years: The ACLU is no longer a neutral defender of everyone’s civil liberties. It has morphed into a hyper-partisan, hard-left political advocacy group.
The ACLU has become a darling of the left, but its history isn't so political
Known for defending constitutional rights, the American Civil Liberties Union has recently become synonymous with political activism. This year, membership more than doubled to 1.2 million people and the weekend of Trump’s first proposed travel ban, the ACLU raked in $32 million — eight times...
Even the NYT says the ACLU is badly biased to the Left.
Once a Bastion of Free Speech, the A.C.L.U. Faces an Identity Crisis (Published 2021)
An organization that has defended the First Amendment rights of Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan is split by an internal debate over whether supporting progressive causes is more important.
I just proved the ACLU is badly biased with a wide variety of sources.
The NYT says the ACLU is badly biased so your claim above is void.
2. Will you learn how to read carefully and comprehensively? Leaning to the left didn’t stop them from defending the KKK right to march and current "hate speech" and such.
The ACLU Defends Everybody
Its clients have ranged from Muhammad Ali to Oliver North, but its real allegiance is to the Bill of Rights
www.smithsonianmag.com
Internal debates over the prority/worthiness of defending PROGRESSIVE cases is not bias.
And Akan Dershowitz?
Alan Dershowitz and the Bias Blind Spot
In one of the more fascinating moments of my interview with Alan Dershowitz , he claims that his own...
Get it together, man.
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win, Am Yisrael Chai
Terry is showing how really ignorant he is1. The Jan. 6th attempted insurrection was a VIOLENT ACTION THAT INCLUDED Damage to public property, attacking and injuring police, invasion of the temporarily closed federal building, rioting, advocatong assault and interference of Congress in performance of their duty, etc. Nothing peaceful about it. ALL on camera. They were arrested, booked, tried with counsel and convicted (many pleaded guilty). So no, the ACLU does not advocate or defend riots with intent to harm.
2. Will you learn how to read carefully and comprehensively? Leaning to the left didn’t stop them from defending the KKK right to march and current "hate speech" and such.
The ACLU Defends Everybody
Its clients have ranged from Muhammad Ali to Oliver North, but its real allegiance is to the Bill of Rights
Internal debates over the prority/worthiness of defending PROGRESSIVE cases is not bias.
And Akan Dershowitz?
Alan Dershowitz and the Bias Blind Spot
In one of the more fascinating moments of my interview with Alan Dershowitz , he claims that his own...slate.com
Get it together, man.
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
Let's start with Marxism, then we can eliminate two of the five links because clearly Marxism is a miniscule part in the scheme of things.
"Marxism is not considered a liberal ideology; rather, it critiques liberalism and capitalism, emphasizing class struggle and the need for a revolutionary change in society. While some elements of Marxism may align with liberal values, Marxism fundamentally opposes the individualism and property rights central to liberal thought."
People in Marxism.
There are approximately 279 individuals categorized as Marxists in the United States according to various subcategories, including members of different communist and socialist parties.
"Public reporting does not produce a single, authoritative head-count of "communists or Marxists" holding elected office in the United States; contemporary coverage and reference lists identify a small number of openly Communist Party USA (CPUSA) affiliates in local office and a broader set of elected officials who describe themselves as socialists or Marxists, but no consolidated, verifiable national tally is available in the supplied reporting."
Now the other links.
Mariame Kaba is an activist and organizer who does indeed call for the abolition of the prison industrial complex, and the police. She's a writer and teacher, and some of her works document police violence. She's not the leader of a political movement and her political affiliation is unknown. She calls herself an abolitionist.
Black Rose/Rosa Negra is a NYC local anarchist group designated as a libertarian socialist political association. Nowhere in their strategy is a call for violence to effect change.
The last link points to the most radical thinkers, who want to abolish everything. There aren't any formal names given to these people, and no head count of how many support the movement. The activists haven't given any information about who or what would replace everything that was abolished.
All the links show groups or individuals who want change but none are big enough to make a difference. Perhaps @Diogenes will enlighten us on how these people can overthrow society and put in a new order.
She asked for links. She got links. Then she tried to shrink them until they fit in a thimble.
The question was not “name the politburo that seizes Washington on Tuesday.” It was whether some leftists advocate abolishing police and prisons. Politico, The New Yorker, Marxist Unity, Black Rose, and a 2026 Quillette piece on Mamdani-world “abolish everything” all say yes. That is the whole assignment. She failed it on purpose.
Marxism first. Nobody called Marxism “liberalism.” She quoted a definition as if she had caught a contradiction. She didn’t. Then she announced there are “approximately 279” Marxists in America, as if a directory scrape is a census of influence. Influence is not a membership card. DSA chapters, campus orgs, city-council socialists, and foundation-funded abolition shops do not vanish because CPUSA is small.
Mariame Kaba. “She’s a writer and teacher… not the leader of a political movement.” That is like saying a bestselling cookbook author isn’t in the food business. Kaba is one of the main English-language voices for prison and police abolition. We Do This ’Til We Free Us did not become a movement text because she is obscure. “Affiliation unknown” is not a rebuttal. She calls herself an abolitionist. That was the point of the link.
Black Rose. “Nowhere in their strategy is a call for violence.” Cute. The document is about abolishing police and capitalism. The question was abolition, not “did they attach a bomb schematic.” Changing the charge mid-trial is her whole method.
The Quillette piece. She says no names and no replacement plan. That is the critique in the article: abolish police, prisons, borders, and capitalism, then shrug about what comes next. Treating the absence of a constitution as proof the demand doesn’t exist is backwards. The demand exists. The vacuum is the problem, not the alibi.
Then the closer: none of them are big enough to matter. That is not an argument. That is hoping the temperature stays low so she doesn’t have to deal with the idea. Abolition talk already moved from zines into 2020 city budgets, “defund” platforms, prosecutor races, and now circles around figures who talk about ICE, prisons, and borders in the same breath. You don’t need a majority to move a party’s language. You need a faction that never gets told no.
She is in a thread about deporting people DHS calls KSTs, after arguing a visa overstay “shouldn’t have happened” because the woman wasn’t a terrorist. Then she treats “abolish the cops and the cages” as a book-club hobby with 279 members. That is not analysis. That is damage control with a bibliography she didn’t want to read.
The NYT link is behind a paywall so I couldn't read it. The Vice article doesn't call them hard left, it was pretty even-handed. The Hill article was an opinion piece by Alan Dershowitz and the Hill wrote "The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill." Biasly said "somewhat left" and Allsides said "lean left." Even Media Bias Fact Check rates the ACLU left of center, not extreme. Your claim that the ACLU is "badly biased" doesn't hold up under the links you gave.No, they don't. How many J6 protesters did the ACLU defend? How many anti-abortion protesters have they defended? The ACLU picked a side and are politically biased--badly biased--today. That is a fact.
American Civil Liberties Union - Bias and Reliability
Is American Civil Liberties Union biased? Check out Biasly’s analysis of American Civil Liberties Union's bias rating. See if the news outlet leans liberal or conservative, and how reliable it i
The director of the American Civil Liberties Union has now acknowledged what should have been obvious to everybody over the past several years: The ACLU is no longer a neutral defender of everyone’s civil liberties. It has morphed into a hyper-partisan, hard-left political advocacy group.
The ACLU has become a darling of the left, but its history isn't so political
Known for defending constitutional rights, the American Civil Liberties Union has recently become synonymous with political activism. This year, membership more than doubled to 1.2 million people and the weekend of Trump’s first proposed travel ban, the ACLU raked in $32 million — eight times...
Even the NYT says the ACLU is badly biased to the Left.
Once a Bastion of Free Speech, the A.C.L.U. Faces an Identity Crisis (Published 2021)
An organization that has defended the First Amendment rights of Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan is split by an internal debate over whether supporting progressive causes is more important.
I just proved the ACLU is badly biased with a wide variety of sources.
The NYT says the ACLU is badly biased so your claim above is void.
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is rated Left-Center with Mixed factual reporting by Media Bias Fact Check. These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by appeals to emotion or stereotypes) to favor liberal causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information but may require further investigation.
@Diogenes This is what you wrote earlier.
"Sooner or later, we're going to have a societal collapse, IMO. Why do I say this?
Because of the things that leftists promote and the policies they enact when they have the chance.
By that, I mean policies that weaken deterrence, selective non-enforcement, and erosion of equal application of rules have predictably increased disorder."
To support your opinion, you blame Democrats, Soros, lefties on JPP, etc. for society's ills, and ramp up the fear with a bunch of tweets saying people should start arming themselves and collecting ammo immediately. Some readers who make decisions based on emotion may agree with you. Some will call your article hyperbole. I'll bet money that there will be no societal collapse (as defined by you) in either the near or distant future. I hope you're not losing sleep over this.
"Sooner or later, we're going to have a societal collapse, IMO. Why do I say this?
Because of the things that leftists promote and the policies they enact when they have the chance.
By that, I mean policies that weaken deterrence, selective non-enforcement, and erosion of equal application of rules have predictably increased disorder."
To support your opinion, you blame Democrats, Soros, lefties on JPP, etc. for society's ills, and ramp up the fear with a bunch of tweets saying people should start arming themselves and collecting ammo immediately. Some readers who make decisions based on emotion may agree with you. Some will call your article hyperbole. I'll bet money that there will be no societal collapse (as defined by you) in either the near or distant future. I hope you're not losing sleep over this.
Priorities. I'd rather not give any money to the corporate slugs who infest the NYT.
Is that so?
You're not, are you?
So?
You're betting your life.
Not on my own behalf.
You wrote it, I quoted from it.
Of course not.
Sew buttons.
Nope. I don't even bet on the lottery.
You shouldn't be losing sleep over anything but an immediate threat.
How about first giving a definition of societal collapse; stating a date when you think it will happen; say what it will consist of; and say who will be responsible for it. Then we'll have something specific to refer to.
"Consider the (often Soros-backed) observable results in many Democrat-dominated urban areas"
"When Democrat-dominated jurisdictions refuse to honor detainers for people already charged with or convicted of serious crimes, those individuals remain free to reoffend locally."
"Lest any JPP Democrat pretend their ideology isn't institutionally biased toward criminals, consider these examples:"
"When arson, assault, or property destruction is met with delayed or diluted charges because of the "cause" being perceived by Democrats as righteous,