A.C.L.U.'s Search for Data on Donors Stirs Privacy Fears

NY Times ^ | Dec 18, 2004 | STEPHANIE STROM

[snowsislander]

You would like to think that I had learned better, but I have to admit that I am surprised at this hypocrisy on the ACLU's part --- and I already had a very low regard for this group of legal hyaenas whose hypocrisy on the Bill of Rights (and particularly Nadine Strossen's outrageous version) was already plenty evident.

However, considering the vileness of any group that would attack the Boy Scouts of America and engage in this type of friendly research, it makes one wonder if they would not engage in some opposition research in this same manner.

[sure_fine]

One of my Law Professors said that she would give us an A for the course if we would send in our applications to become members of the

is there any way at all you can prove that, and maybe get others to testify to it?

sure would be a good start at kicking them off the face of the earth

[MikefromOhio]

the ACLU only cares about headlines and money...thats about it....I think that it's ultra leftist politics take a backseat to getting press/air/tv time and collecting donations....

[Dave278]

A perfect example of "do as we say, not as we do".

[traviskicks]

I don't understand this big hype over privacy. Individuals should be able to contract with any institution to give up any and all of their privacy if they CHOOSE. I would have no problem giving all my personal information to an advertising company so that it could tailor, say, TV ads specifically for me. How much better would that be then watching all this junk! Unlike all these CAlifornia liberals, I'd be willing to have Gmail do the same for my email.

And if someone didn't want to give up their privacy then they shouldn't have to. It is their right. IMO, the ACLU should ask if membership if they are willing to give up certain personal information to aid the organization and, if so, they can do so guilt free. It seems quite simple to me... Am I missing something?

People should be not be forced to give up their privacy and people should not be forced to NOT give up their privacy.

[muir_redwoods]

Let's each sent them a check for 89 cents. It'll cost them about $3 to process it and pollute their data base.

Sometimes I'm just too mean even for me.

[jriemer]

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others George Orwell, Animal Farm

[streetrepair]

"The American Civil Liberties Union is using sophisticated technology to collect a wide variety of information about its members and donors..."

Is this the sophisticated technology in question?

I'm shakin' in my boots!!!

[antivenom]

LOL the full size TV hanging on the wall is a HOOT! Thanks for the pic...and I do feel old...I actually know FORTRAN! LOL!!!!!

[OldFriend]

American Criminal Liberties Union

[evolved_rage]

The ends justifies the means.....Soulless communists.

[prairiebreeze]

It's the Anti-Christian Liberties Union: Jihad With A Law Degree.

Ping

[Hardastarboard]

What data do you need to collect? They're a bunch of rich, elitist, socialists who live in the city and drive foreign cars. Duh.

[killjoy]

The organization has been shaken by infighting since May, when the board learned that Anthony D. Romero, its executive director, had registered the A.C.L.U. for a federal charity drive that required it to certify that it would not knowingly employ people whose names were on government terrorism watch lists.

Huh? How is this possible since the government refuses to release the watch list?

[Grampa Dave]

Thanks for posting this.

We shouldn't hold our breath waiting for the Lunatic Lib NY AG Spitsball to investigate the ACLU.

He is probably a card carrying ACLU trooper since his law school days.

[Grampa Dave]

This article touches on one of the biggest stories about the ACLU that has been spiked by the mainstream mediots. That is the ACLU's refusal of grants from the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations when they have to promise no links with Terrorists. Since the ACLU is nothing but a band of Gay/Anti Christian and pro Islamofascist terrorists, they had to say no to these funds. In fact as this artice pointed out they refunded some funds taken earlier this year.

Re: ACLU says 'No, thanks' to Ford foundation re no money to be used for terrorism.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1289670/posts

ACLU says 'No, thanks'
Chattanooga Times Free Press ^ | Oct. 30, 2004 | Unknown


Posted on 11/27/2004 10:57:55 PM PST by w6ai5q37b


The Ford and Rockefeller foundations hand out millions of dollars each year to a variety of organizations. We may or may not agree with the activities of a given group that gets some portion of that money, but both foundations have properly drawn a line against their money supporting terrorism or other violence.

The Ford Foundation says funding recipients must agree not to engage in activity that "promotes violence, terrorism, bigotry, or the destruction of any state." News reports say this rule was put in place because some Ford money previously had wound up in the hands of radicals who bitterly oppose the state of Israel.

The Rockefeller Foundation says recipients may not "directly or indirectly engage in, promote, or support other organizations or individuals who engage in or promote terrorist activity."

It is hard to see how anyone would argue seriously that those guidelines are unreasonable. No American organization ought to want to support hateful, violent causes, let alone seek money from foundations to do so.

But amazingly, the American Civil Liberties Union has deemed the rules too restrictive and therefore has turned down more than $1 million in grants from the Ford and Rockefeller foundations.

The ACLU complains that the "vague grant language" might "have a chilling effect on civil liberties." An ACLU board member said the rules sounded too much like the anti-terrorist Patriot Act and seemed "to have arisen out of this kind of climate of fear and intimidation or something that the administration is pushing," The New York Sun reports.

We don't see the foundations' rules as an attempt to crush civil liberties. But the guidelines might have a "chilling effect" on terrorists. We hope so.

[Grampa Dave]

[Peach]

They are investigating each other. That's rich, isn't it? I thought they were concerned with privacy matters...

[TheRatHunter]

From CNN.com: ACLU Lawyers File Suit Against ACLU For Violation of Privacy, Protesters Confused

</sarcasm>

[JustAnotherOkie]

The last word in hypocracy.