Ashcroft's New Old War

St Leo · September 6, 2003, 15:48

Google News Search

ABCnews.com report

Family.org's crackpot angle

JewishWorldReport's convervative angle

During the Clinton administration, Attorney General Janet Reno largely eschewed adult obscenity prosecutions, focusing instead on combating child pornography and online predators.

Ashcroft, whose political reputation was one of strict social conservatism, drew notice by the pornography industry in his first year on the job, when his department paid $8,000 for curtains to drape a bare-breasted statue, Spirit of Justice, and a male counterpart, Majesty of Law, at its headquarters in Washington.

Ashcroft's priorities are wonderful.

Earlier this month, Mary Beth Buchanan, the chief federal prosecutor in Pittsburgh, filed a 10-count criminal charge against two owners of Extreme Associates, an adult-video operation based in Los Angeles that bills itself as "The Hardest Hard Core on the Web."

Yes, suing a California company from Pittsburgh is an honourable thing for Ashcroft to do.

Aug. 27— Rob Zicari and his fiancée, Janet Romano, arrived at a Pittsburgh courthouse this morning to face the first major federal prosecution for obscenity in more than a decade. Earlier this month, they were indicted and today they were arraigned on 10 counts relating to the production and distribution by mail of obscene materials. They each face 50 years in prison and a fine of up to $2.5 million.

"We're facing more time than the guy that they just arrested that was trying to sell the surface-to-air missile," said Zicari.

I can't believe the nerve of Zicari comparing corrupting the minds of billions opting to watch his films with something as minor as murdering the passengers and crew of an airliner.

/me wonders how an AdultFi equivalent of Ray Bradbury's Usher II short story would play out:P

Lawrence of Arabia · September 6, 2003, 16:04

Democrats have no backbone.

chequita guevara · September 6, 2003, 16:08

So Ashcroft's finally launched his inquisition? It was scheduled to start a little less than two years ago . . . on 9/11. Unfortunately, the universe had other plans.

We need to destroy the Christian right, utterly.

mrmitchell · September 6, 2003, 16:24

Ashcroft

But they paid $8,000 for drapes just to cover a statue!? He should be thrown out for fiscal mismanagement, not for being an evil crusading bastard!

Nubclear · September 6, 2003, 16:27

anyone hve "boob in front of the boob" picture?

realpolitic · September 6, 2003, 16:33

Breasts aren't only sexual, they represent nurturing and mothering. That was Ashcoft's real objection.

St Leo · September 7, 2003, 02:11

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1788845.stm

Dis · September 7, 2003, 02:34

don't worry

I have plans to kill him

St Leo · September 7, 2003, 02:50

Hopefully, the dead man won't get elected once Ashcroft is dead.

mindseye · September 7, 2003, 03:39

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
So Ashcroft's finally launched his inquisition?

Che, I remember your postings about Ashcroft when his nomination was first proposed. I also remember those who dismissed it as Chicken Little-isms. Wonder what they think since The Patriot Act?

I'm convinced Ashcroft is a greater threat to basic American freedoms than bin Laden, Kim, or any other bogeyman. He's also more dangerous than Rumsfeld, Rove, Cheney, or any of the other creeps currently prowling our halls of power (no small feat).

I had not heard of that business of hiding the brazen nakedness of those classical statues. Why is it I can never think about Ashcroft without being reminded of" The Handmaid's Tale"?

geeslaka · September 7, 2003, 04:17

Anybody else get suspicious of people who hide statues that are supposed to represent justice?

DaShi · September 7, 2003, 04:32

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
So Ashcroft's finally launched his inquisition? It was scheduled to start a little less than two years ago . . . on 9/11. Unfortunately, the universe had other plans.

We need to destroy the Christian right, utterly.

geeslaka · September 7, 2003, 04:35

DaShi · September 7, 2003, 04:38

Forum trouble, it appears. Well, the overall effect is still there.

MichaeltheGreat · September 7, 2003, 12:50

Quote:

Originally posted by St Leo
Yes, suing a California company from Pittsburgh is an honourable thing for Ashcroft to do.

Actually, it's the US Attorney, and internet distributors have a legal presence anywhere their sites are visible. If you do commerce in Pittsburgh, you can be indicted in Pittsburgh.

Oh, and it helps if you actually read articles you link to:
(from the Jewish World Review article)

"The Justice Department has had a strategy of going after only the most extreme material distributed by small operators," said Patrick Trueman, a former head of the Justice Department's Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section who now consults with anti-obscenity groups.

Trueman pointed out that the Extreme Associates videos cited in the indictment are extraordinarily violent, depicting women being beaten, stabbed, suffocated and raped. It is material not likely to be sold in most adult video stores, he said."

Excuse me if I wait for more of an "inquisition" before I get bent out of shape.

Lefty Scaevola · September 7, 2003, 12:58

"Ashcroft, whose political reputation was one of strict social conservatism, drew notice by the pornography industry in his first year on the job, when his department paid $8,000 for curtains to drape a bare-breasted statue, Spirit of Justice, and a male counterpart, Majesty of Law, at its headquarters in Washington."

I Call BS on you.

Draping the statue began more than 14 years before Ascroft when certain ******* photogrphers would dive to the foot of the podium to get a camera angle to get the then attorney general and the statures tits, which were were many feet higher, in the same frame. During Reno's term as AG, they get rid of the old drapes, and in a ridiculous wasteful boondoggle, rented drapes at inflated rates for each press conference. What Ascroft did was buy drapes (for the cost edqual to only 1.5 days rental that the Clinton Admin did) and thus save taxpayer money.

mindseye · September 7, 2003, 13:53

Thanks for illuminating the statue-draping affair.

However, I think it's worrisome that it seemed quite credible, given the man's character. (shudder)

geeslaka · September 7, 2003, 13:58

I think it's worrisome that a representation is being hidden from sight.

mrmitchell · September 7, 2003, 14:03

Of course, as an illustration of how people really think of Ashcroft....

Didn't he lose the Missouri Senate race to the dead guy? Or was that something else?

General Ludd · September 7, 2003, 14:15

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat

Trueman pointed out that the Extreme Associates videos cited in the indictment are extraordinarily violent, depicting women being beaten, stabbed, suffocated and raped. It is material not likely to be sold in most adult video stores, he said."

Hollywood movies depicting violent acts are released all the time. It's only when it's got sex in it that anyone cares.

Where's the lawsuit over the latest terminator movie?

Lefty Scaevola · September 7, 2003, 14:21

Quote:

Originally posted by mindseye
However, I think it's worrisome that it seemed quite credible, given the man's character. (shudder)

I think it worrisome that people hare are stupid enough to be fooled by such blatant and easily checked propaganda. The mama of the internet generation seemed to have raised lots of fools.

Thorn · September 7, 2003, 14:34

Asscroft has a file on me, I had to come close to sueing the goverment to get me taken off the terrorist watch list.

mrmitchell · September 7, 2003, 15:21

Quote:

Asscroft has a file on me, I had to come close to sueing the goverment to get me taken off the terrorist watch list.

And you're mostly just a gay kid in college, right?

(or youre kidding

)

The Emperor Fabulous · September 7, 2003, 17:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
Draping the statue began more than 14 years before Ascroft when certain ******* photogrphers would dive to the foot of the podium to get a camera angle to get the then attorney general and the statures tits, which were were many feet higher, in the same frame. During Reno's term as AG, they get rid of the old drapes, and in a ridiculous wasteful boondoggle, rented drapes at inflated rates for each press conference. What Ascroft did was buy drapes (for the cost edqual to only 1.5 days rental that the Clinton Admin did) and thus save taxpayer money.

And that makes it right?

St Leo · September 7, 2003, 17:05

Actually, it's the US Attorney, and internet distributors have a legal presence anywhere their sites are visible. If you do commerce in Pittsburgh, you can be indicted in Pittsburgh.

I didn't say it was illegal or even unusual. I said it was dishonourable.

Oh, and it helps if you actually read articles you link to:
(from the Jewish World Review article)

I did read it.

Excuse me if I wait for more of an "inquisition" before I get bent out of shape.

They are fictional productions, not documentaries. Oh, well. I guess obscenity laws need to be tossed out by your Supreme Court sooner or later.

St Leo · September 7, 2003, 17:12

Smut by Tom Lehrer

I do have a cause though. It is obscenity. I'm for it. Unfortunately the civil liberties types who are fighting this issue have to fight it owing to the nature of the laws as a matter of freedom of speech and stifling of free expression and so on but we no what's really involved: dirty books are fun. That's all there is to it. But you can't get up in a court and say that I suppose. It's simply a matter of freedom of pleasure, a right which is not guaranteed by the Constitution unfortunately. Anyway, since people seem to be marching for their causes these days I have here a march for mine. It's called...

Smut!
Give me smut and nothing but!
A dirty novel I can't shut,
If it's uncut,
and unsubt- le.

I've never quibbled
If it was ribald,
I would devour where others merely nibbled.
As the judge remarked the day that he
acquitted my Aunt Hortense,
"To be smut
It must be ut-
Terly without redeeming social importance."

Por-
Nographic pictures I adore.
Indecent magazines galore,
I like them more
If they're hard core.

(Bring on the obscene movies, murals, postcards, neckties,
samplers, stained-glass windows, tattoos, anything!
More, more, I'm still not satisfied!)

Stories of tortures
Used by debauchers,
Lurid, licentious, and vile,
Make me smile.
Novels that pander
To my taste for candor
Give me a pleasure sublime.
(Let's face it, I love slime.)

All books can be indecent books
Though recent books are bolder,
For filth (I'm glad to say) is in
the mind of the beholder.
When correctly viewed,
Everything is lewd.
(I could tell you things about Peter Pan,
And the Wizard of Oz, there's a dirty old man!)

I thrill
To any book like Fanny Hill,
And I suppose I always will,
If it is swill
And really fil
thy.

Who needs a hobby like tennis or philately?
I've got a hobby: rereading Lady Chatterley.
But now they're trying to take it all
away from us unless
We take a stand, and hand in hand
we fight for freedom of the press.
In other words,

Smut! (I love it)
Ah, the adventures of a slut.
Oh, I'm a market they can't glut,
I don't know what
Compares with smut.

Hip hip hooray!
Let's hear it for the Supreme Court!
Don't let them take it away!

geeslaka · September 7, 2003, 17:15

Thorn · September 7, 2003, 17:28

Quote:

Originally posted by mrmitchell

And you're mostly just a gay kid in college, right?

(or youre kidding

)

Yeah now I am, I used to be a MUCH different person. They never did nail me for that plan to attack the military installation though... not that it has been an issue for a quite a while.