Former ACLU Chapter President Arrested for Child Pornography.

[gardenweasel]

Feb. 23, 2007— ""Federal agents arrested Charles Rust-Tierney, the former president of the Virginia chapter of the ACLU, Friday in Arlington for allegedly possessing child pornography.

According to a criminal complaint obtained by ABC News, Rust-Tierney allegedly used his e-mail address and credit card to subscribe to and access a child pornography website.

The complaint states that federal investigations into child pornography websites revealed that “Charles Rust-Tierney has subscribed to multiple child pornography website over a period of years.”

As recently as last October, the complaint alleges, “Rust-Tierney purchased access to a group of hardcore commercial child pornography websites.”"

disclaimer...he`s been charged.....not convicted...but,he accessed this material...i believe bought and paid for....

what they weren`t honest enough to mention was that the material this reprobate had accessed showed very young female children bound,gagged and raped while screaming and crying.......

here`s my guess on the excuse..."i was just doing research on pedophiles"....

this guy,if convicted,will be removed from general population.....which is more than our border patrol agent got....lol


the aclu has defended these kinds of people in the past.... this time it should be even easier since they all work nearby....

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Maybe Edward will stop in to defend him alla ACLU and child porn sites--with his constitutional rights issue--under "pursuit of happiness" clause

 

[Eddie Haskell]

You're right Wayne, he doesn't deserve a legal defense. If he's charged by the government, he is guilty and should be in jail.

If you were in the military in 1776, how red would your coat be? You are quite the loyalist. Why don't we stop pretending and just dump the Constitution and Bill of Rights all together. After all we have the Patriot Act to protect us from terrorists.

You are quite a simpleton.

Eddie

PS: Sorry Gary to leave you out. The foregoing applies to you also. Except you're just an average simpleton.

 

[gardenweasel]

we do know this....

he had purchased access to several vicious child porn websites...over a periosd of years.......

he paid with his own credit card.....

when the authorities came to his house he led them to his room/office and turned over his computer.....

maybe he is not guilty, but I don't think anyone here believes that, just more obligatory mouthing of a legal concept by counselor slip and fall........

we also know that some of this filth was of little girls screaming as they were raped and tortured......

this guy did not do that himself, but he, and men like him, drive the industry in which little kids are kidnapped or sold and this is done to them....

this is evil, pure satanic evil....

and the aclu in general?....the patriot act you say?......isn`t it interesting that the very same laws that they fight against that are used to track terrorist financing would be useful in shutting down the financial networks that pay for abusing children?

yes.....the aclu has opposed those laws as well...

quite a coicidence....

and heres another aclu gem:

NEW YORK (AP) - ""A civil rights group asked a judge Friday to find it unconstitutional for the federal government to exclude a prominent Muslim scholar or anyone else from the United States on the grounds that they may have endorsed or espoused terrorism. The American Civil Liberties Union filed the papers attacking the policy in U.S. District Court in Manhattan. The group included in its submissions a written declaration in which the scholar, Tariq Ramadan, said he has always “opposed terrorism not only through my words but also through my actions.”

The ACLU said schools and organizations who want to invite Ramadan and others into the United States are concerned about what is known as the ideological exclusion provision.

It said an entry in the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual says that the provision is directed at those who have voiced “irresponsible expressions of opinion.”"

yeah,lets let `em all in....the constitution says that all citizens of the world have the same protections under OUR constitution.....

meanwhile the aclu headquarters in downtown manhattan conducts bag searches in the lobby...

back on point...bottom line...eddie and his aclu bunky..both lawyers...they wouldn't know kiddie porn is illegal to purchase?.....lol

any decent adult who accidentally fell into a site which featured child rape films would call the fbi, not purchase the videos...

and this happened over a period of years?... ........YEARS?....

.....c'mon......

and btw....the aclu also defends nambla....

 

[The Sponge]

we do know this....

he had purchased access to several vicious child porn websites...over a periosd of years.......

he paid with his own credit card.....


Weasal i hope you read this because i had no clue there were pay sites like this.
On another note you happen to see dateline where they set up traps for these scumbags? They just caught an assistand D.A. Fuker wouldn't answer the door and then killed himself. WTF is wrong with these guys? I can see their point of being lonely but for christ sake go pay for a freaking woman and if you have to a man. A freaking kid?

 

[buddy]

but for christ sake

Sponge,

This is my Lord and Savior. I don't appreciate seeing His name used in vain.

 

[Chadman]

If he is tried and convicted of the crime, throw the big book at him. But you continue to crack me up with your verbiage, weasel. You admit he has not been tried or convicted, and then say you'd expect (insert liberal bashing term here) to defend the man.

Are you saying he does not deserve a trial, because of what he is charged with? If he does deserve a trial, then who should defend him?

 

[The Sponge]

Sponge,

This is my Lord and Savior. I don't appreciate seeing His name used in vain.

That is my buddy Jimmy Christ from the old neighboorhood.

 

[The Sponge]

If he is tried and convicted of the crime, throw the big book at him. But you continue to crack me up with your verbiage, weasel. You admit he has not been tried or convicted, and then say you'd expect (insert liberal bashing term here) to defend the man.

Are you saying he does not deserve a trial, because of what he is charged with? If he does deserve a trial, then who should defend him?

Chad here is the problem with throwing the book at these guys. On one hand it sounds great and just get rid of them but these strange people might feel the only way to stay ahead of the law is to kill the child. Its a catch 22. Like this guy who just got caught with these two kids the one he had for 3 years. If the punishment is the same as the guy who actually kills the child then why would these scums keep the kid alive? With smaller punishment at least the kid has a chance.

 

[Chadman]

I wasn't advocating any type of sentence, I agree that kidnapping/abuse and murder should carry different sentences in theory. Was merely asking the question, as weasel always wants to deal with real life and seems to think some are less worthy of being defended prior to being convicted. Wondering what his solution was other than just calling liberals wrong for defending unpopular crimes.

 

[The Sponge]

funny this guy has nothing to do with th aclu but Haggard had everything to do with those nut jobs that followed him.

 

[bjfinste]

You're right Wayne, he doesn't deserve a legal defense. If he's charged by the government, he is guilty and should be in jail.

If you were in the military in 1776, how red would your coat be? You are quite the loyalist. Why don't we stop pretending and just dump the Constitution and Bill of Rights all together. After all we have the Patriot Act to protect us from terrorists.

You are quite a simpleton.

Eddie

PS: Sorry Gary to leave you out. The foregoing applies to you also. Except you're just an average simpleton.

Edward- you should know by now that believing we should still be following the Constitution is flat-out anti-American (unless it's the second amendment, of course).

 

[Eddie Haskell]

Good point, BJ. Seems like this administration follows UN mandates (when convenient) instead of the US Constitution. Never pictured these guys as pro-UN.

The first time I ever made a post here was after 90% of these members wanted to fry Andrea Yates after she killed 4 or 5 of her kids. I offered a proposition for discussion concerning whether or not capital punishment applied to the insane.

Everyone jumped on my case. I think thats when I developed my personality disorder and feel like everyone hates me. So all you right wingers are to blame for creating Eddie Haskell.

Ed

 

[gardenweasel]

the nyt`s and nbc news ignored the story entirely....

cbs ,cnn didn`t cover it......

the washington post ran a brief story in their second section......

hmmmmm?......theres a shocker for ya`......

this guy was directly involved in the lawsuit that involved libraries allowing public access to this kind of sickness........that`s another coincidence,i`d guess....

a pedophile...who actually coached kids...so ironic that he wanted unrestricted access to the internet in arlington's public libraries, so he could download this filth anonymously....

aclu values....working for you and your family....

 

[StevieD]

the nyt`s and nbc news ignored the story entirely....

cbs ,cnn didn`t cover it......

the washington post ran a brief story in their second section......

hmmmmm?......theres a shocker for ya`......

this guy was directly involved in the lawsuit that involved libraries allowing public access to this kind of sickness........that`s another coincidence,i`d guess....

a pedophile...who actually coached kids...so ironic that he wanted unrestricted access to the internet in arlington's public libraries, so he could download this filth anonymously....

aclu values....working for you and your family....

Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. How many people are involved in something like this? Probably the same guys who blew up the towers.:shrug:

 

[Chadman]

Still waiting to hear your answer to my question, weasel.

 

[gardenweasel]

If he is tried and convicted of the crime, throw the big book at him. But you continue to crack me up with your verbiage, weasel. You admit he has not been tried or convicted, and then say you'd expect (insert liberal bashing term here) to defend the man.

Are you saying he does not deserve a trial, because of what he is charged with? If he does deserve a trial, then who should defend him?

i guess you missed the parts about him being retired and using his credit card to access known child porn sites.......it's illegal to possess child pornography,dontcha` know?.....

innocent until proven guilty you say?....

he`ll get his trial.....i hope he gets his trial...and i wish they`d put cameras in the courtroom......i hope this doesn`t just fade away......as it seems the msm isn`t the least bit interested....


chad...i`m sure you`ve read up on this case......your opinion?...you think he`s innocent?....

what could he claim as a defense?...free speech?..free expression? ...he's entitled to see children engaged in forced sexual acts?...scooter libby broke into his house and subscribed to child porn sites using mr. rust-tierney's credit card to set him up?....

lol

next to no media coverage....and as much as i dislike him,i thought it was funny the way lefty commentators hooted, "CONSERVATIVE rush limbaugh addicted to vicodin"!!....


whoooopeee!!!

of course,WE knew that conservatism had nothing to do with it and that they weren`t using someone's personal problem to tar his cause and his followers....

right?....

ACLU?....msm/no big fricking deal....

so,some children were viciously molested.... while he pulled his pud.....


he`s been caught with the goods..... i only hope he gets "nick-the-grip" as his celly........

 

[Chadman]

My initial opinion (after very little review of this case) is that he is probably guilty. Which has absolutely nothing to do with my question to you, which you continue to avoid. No big deal. I think you answer it with your avoidance. Carry on.

 

[StevieD]

My initial opinion (after very little review of this case) is that he is probably guilty. Which has absolutely nothing to do with my question to you, which you continue to avoid. No big deal. I think you answer it with your avoidance. Carry on.

Speaking of avoidence, you notice how Weasel laughs off every conspriacy theory....except his about the media? Just sayin'

 

[AR182]

Just sayin'

stevie....

you are being influenced by kosar & smurphy. i wish you would pick better role models like gw or dtb.....just sayin'