Skip to comments.Muslim group blasts judge over "sea monster" comparison (Judge tosses CAIR and ACLU lawsuit)
Posted on 08/15/2012 10:14:49 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A Muslim rights group criticized a federal judge on Wednesday, complaining he had compared the civil liberties of Muslim Americans to a "hideous sea monster" while tossing out a lawsuit over the infiltration of California mosques by an FBI informant.
U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney dismissed the lawsuit on Tuesday, which charged that the undercover FBI informant had violated civil liberties of U.S. Muslims by spying on them, ruling that allowing the case to proceed could risk disclosure of government secrets.
In his 36-page order, Carney invoked the fictional Greek hero Odysseus, who was forced to sail his ship between a six-headed sea monster and a dangerous whirlpool during an epic voyage home from the Trojan War.
"Odysseus opted to pass by the monster and risk a few of his individual sailors, rather than hazard the loss of his entire ship to the sucking whirlpool," Carney wrote. "Similarly, the proper application of the state secrets privilege may unfortunately mean the sacrifice of individual liberties for the sake of national security."
Carney allowed the case to go forward only against five current or former agents named as individual defendants, who the plaintiffs claim violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Plaintiffs attorneys have said they will appeal.
"Our civil liberties are not a hideous sea monster, but they are instead the most stalwart defense against the real threats of tyranny and oppression," Ameena Mirza Qazi, deputy executive director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), said in a written statement.
The lawsuit, jointly filed by CAIR and the American Civil Liberties Union last year in U.S. District Court in Santa Ana, said the FBI sent undercover informant Craig Monteilh into Orange County mosques to collect personal information on hundreds, or possibly thousands, of Muslims.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
I hope Romney puts this judge on a short list for the SCOTUS after he is elected.
Seems spot on to me.
Seems far too kind to me.
Totalitarian political systems inimical to everything the US stands for should not be tolerated.
That's an Orwellian statement. I understand about Muslims, though, and think their pseudo-religion is really a political cult, which is plotting against us, but the nature of the statement makes me wonder what is the point of liberty if it can be so easily sacrificed? In other words, who gets to decide when government gets to invoke "the sake of national security"?
Okay, Muzzies. You’re the whirlpool then. Happy?
Indeed. "National security" is not the root passphrase to the U.S. Constitution. The burden on the government should be fairly high if they want to keep something secret. That's not the way a police state works though.
Carney wrote. “Similarly, the proper application of the state secrets privilege may unfortunately mean the sacrifice of individual liberties for the sake of national security.”
“Those who would trade in their freedom for their protection deserve neither. Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security.” B. Franklin
That’s all I have to say....
Those who grant our rights to jihadi scum who use those rights to BEHEAD US, are fools or useful infidels.
Sorry, I had to.