DISCLAIMER: This weblog is not connected in any way with either of World Wrestling Entertainment or the Republican National Committee.

This blog is best viewed with the Hit The Road font which is available for free on DAFONT.COM.
C-View Conservative Net Ring by MoveOff.Us.
Previous 5 Sites Skip Previous Previous Next
Skip Next Next 5 Sites Random Site List Sites
Powered by RingSurf

This site is certified 63% GOOD by the Gematriculator  This site is certified 37% EVIL by the Gematriculator



In 1970, Congress passed the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1961-1968. At the time, Congress' goal was to eliminate the ill-affects of organized crime on the nation's economy. To put it bluntly, RICO was intended to destroy the Mafia.

RicoAct.com LLC



§ 1961. Definitions Of The Act

As used in this chapter—
(1) “racketeering activity” means (A) any act or threat involving murder, kidnapping, gambling, arson, robbery, bribery, extortion, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act), which is chargeable under State law and punishable by imprisonment for more than one year; (B) any act which is indictable under any of the following provisions of title 18, United States Code: Section 201 (relating to bribery), section 224 (relating to sports bribery), sections 471, 472, and 473 (relating to counterfeiting), section 659 (relating to theft from interstate shipment) if the act indictable under section 659 is felonious, section 664 (relating to embezzlement from pension and welfare funds), sections 891–894 (relating to extortionate credit transactions), section 1028 (relating to fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents), section 1029 (relating to fraud and related activity in connection with access devices), section 1084 (relating to the transmission of gambling information), section 1341 (relating to mail fraud), section 1343 (relating to wire fraud), section 1344 (relating to financial institution fraud), section 1425 (relating to the procurement of citizenship or nationalization unlawfully), section 1426 (relating to the reproduction of naturalization or citizenship papers), section 1427 (relating to the sale of naturalization or citizenship papers), sections 1461–1465 (relating to obscene matter), section 1503 (relating to obstruction of justice), section 1510 (relating to obstruction of criminal investigations), section 1511 (relating to the obstruction of State or local law enforcement), section 1512 (relating to tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant), section 1513 (relating to retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant), section 1542 (relating to false statement in application and use of passport), section 1543 (relating to forgery or false use of passport), section 1544 (relating to misuse of passport), section 1546 (relating to fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents), sections 1581–1591 (relating to peonage, slavery, and trafficking in persons).,[1] section 1951 (relating to interference with commerce, robbery, or extortion), section 1952 (relating to racketeering), section 1953 (relating to interstate transportation of wagering paraphernalia), section 1954 (relating to unlawful welfare fund payments), section 1955 (relating to the prohibition of illegal gambling businesses), section 1956 (relating to the laundering of monetary instruments), section 1957 (relating to engaging in monetary transactions in property derived from specified unlawful activity), section 1958 (relating to use of interstate commerce facilities in the commission of murder-for-hire), sections 2251, 2251A, 2252, and 2260 (relating to sexual exploitation of children), sections 2312 and 2313 (relating to interstate transportation of stolen motor vehicles), sections 2314 and 2315 (relating to interstate transportation of stolen property), section 2318 (relating to trafficking in counterfeit labels for phonorecords, computer programs or computer program documentation or packaging and copies of motion pictures or other audiovisual works), section 2319 (relating to criminal infringement of a copyright), section 2319A (relating to unauthorized fixation of and trafficking in sound recordings and music videos of live musical performances), section 2320 (relating to trafficking in goods or services bearing counterfeit marks), section 2321 (relating to trafficking in certain motor vehicles or motor vehicle parts), sections 2341–2346 (relating to trafficking in contraband cigarettes), sections 2421–24 (relating to white slave traffic), sections 175–178 (relating to biological weapons), sections 229–229F (relating to chemical weapons), section 831 (relating to nuclear materials), (C) any act which is indictable under title 29, United States Code, section 186 (dealing with restrictions on payments and loans to labor organizations) or section 501 (c) (relating to embezzlement from union funds), (D) any offense involving fraud connected with a case under title 11 (except a case under section 157 of this title), fraud in the sale of securities, or the felonious manufacture, importation, receiving, concealment, buying, selling, or otherwise dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act), punishable under any law of the United States, (E) any act which is indictable under the Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act, (F) any act which is indictable under the Immigration and Nationality Act, section 274 (relating to bringing in and harboring certain aliens), section 277 (relating to aiding or assisting certain aliens to enter the United States), or section 278 (relating to importation of alien for immoral purpose) if the act indictable under such section of such Act was committed for the purpose of financial gain, or (G) any act that is indictable under any provision listed in section 2332b (g)(5)(B);
(2) “State” means any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, any territory or possession of the United States, any political subdivision, or any department, agency, or instrumentality thereof;
(3) “person” includes any individual or entity capable of holding a legal or beneficial interest in property;
(4) “enterprise” includes any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity, and any union or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity;
(5) “pattern of racketeering activity” requires at least two acts of racketeering activity, one of which occurred after the effective date of this chapter and the last of which occurred within ten years (excluding any period of imprisonment) after the commission of a prior act of racketeering activity;
(6) “unlawful debt” means a debt
(A) incurred or contracted in gambling activity which was in violation of the law of the United States, a State or political subdivision thereof, or which is unenforceable under State or Federal law in whole or in part as to principal or interest because of the laws relating to usury, and
(B) which was incurred in connection with the business of gambling in violation of the law of the United States, a State or political subdivision thereof, or the business of lending money or a thing of value at a rate usurious under State or Federal law, where the usurious rate is at least twice the enforceable rate;
(7) “racketeering investigator” means any attorney or investigator so designated by the Attorney General and charged with the duty of enforcing or carrying into effect this chapter;
(8) “racketeering investigation” means any inquiry conducted by any racketeering investigator for the purpose of ascertaining whether any person has been involved in any violation of this chapter or of any final order, judgment, or decree of any court of the United States, duly entered in any case or proceeding arising under this chapter;
(9) “documentary material” includes any book, paper, document, record, recording, or other material; and
(10) “Attorney General” includes the Attorney General of the United States, the Deputy Attorney General of the United States, the Associate Attorney General of the United States, any Assistant Attorney General of the United States, or any employee of the Department of Justice or any employee of any department or agency of the United States so designated by the Attorney General to carry out the powers conferred on the Attorney General by this chapter. Any department or agency so designated may use in investigations authorized by this chapter either the investigative provisions of this chapter or the investigative power of such department or agency otherwise conferred by law.

We all know that the American Civil Liberties Union have involved themselves in a number of controversial courtroom decisions in recent years. We have seen them get involved in issues ranging from immigration issues to marriage issues to unborn rights to freedom of speech.
But their voracity toward attacking laws that the people approved in effort to counter some of the more radical problems afflicting our society with some common sense may have gone way too far.
So what does the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organisations Act---the RICO Act---have to do with the ACLU's antics? More than you think. And here's one example:

Last year the ACLU successfully won the overturn of an Oregon law prohibiting live sex acts. But before you start cheering, understand that they also explain their own motives in their Policy 211: “The ACLU supports the decriminalization of prostitution and opposes state regulation of prostitution”.
There is a sinister side behind this policy: With their opposition to zoning laws and their claim that whatever consenting adults do in private is "their own business" it suddenly becomes more evident that such activity can suddenly become public and next thing you know you have houses of ill repute opening near schools and churches and amusement parks and neighbourhood park.
But wait, you say. What about my right to conduct business like that?
NO! WHAT ABOUT PARENTS' RIGHTS TO RAISE THEIR CHILDREN WITHOUT THAT SORT OF THING CONSTANTLY LOOMING OVER THEIR HEADS? You want to sell pornograhic magazines at corner markets? I have no problem! But this is different!
And speaking of children and sex acts, they even challenged a 1997 Massachusetts law prohibiting the mere possession of child pornography. But for those who do not have the benefit of HighBeam.com membership I'll reprint excerpts from that Boston Herald article.

From the Boston Herald, ACLU: New child porn law won't pass high court challenge, 9 December 1997:

QUOTE: John Roberts, executive director of the Boston branch of the American Civil Liberties Union
"Mere possession should not be a crime. This law really sweeps too far, and from an ACLU point of view, this really gets into areas that we believe are protected by the First Amendment."
And the ACLUnatics would even like to see child pornography legalised---which a Supreme Court ruling appeared to favour in their 2004 case that crippled the Child Online Protection Act.
Right off the bat I can tell you of SEVERAL RICO Act violations committed by the ACLUnatics:
Section 1503 (relating to obstruction of justice)
Section 1510 (relating to obstruction of criminal investigations)
Section 1511 (relating to the obstruction of State or local law enforcement)
Sections 2251, 2251A, 2252, and 2260 (relating to sexual exploitation of children)

In their particular quest for seeking the appeasement of paedophiles and paedophilia and decriminalisation of child pornography the ACLUnatics have dug themselves a deep enough hole that if we had an attorney general with enough balls to indict them we could surely see them hit with no less than seven ways to pursue criminal charges under the RICO Act...and the case would stick like peanut butter to hot toast.

"The law was officially signed by acting Gov. Paul Cellucci at a ceremony yesterday. Under the statute, individuals who are caught with any visual or computer image of a child under 18 engaged in sex acts could be prosecuted as felons.
First-time offenders could be jailed for up to five years if convicted, while second-time offenders could face five years to life imprisonment and those convicted a third time could be jailed for 10 years to life, the law states. "

And that's supposedly not good enough for the ACLU? Hello, I thought that this was the ACLU that cared so much for children's rights when they have problems with schools that won't let them wear "F--K BUSH" tee shirts!
Alas that is the other side of the coin: The ACLU will eagerly protect child molestors claiming it is just a lifestyle choice, denigrating homosexuals and bisexuals by comparing paedophilia to those two groups...and this ON TOP of the ACLUnatics' blind defence of a Marxist agenda concerning LGBT folk!

""There will be zero tolerance for those who dare to dabble in this filth," Cellucci said, adding that Massachusetts was the 43rd state in the nation to enact such a law.
Cellucci was joined at yesterday's signing by the father of 10-year-old Jeffrey Curley, who was kidnapped, raped and murdered in October allegedly by two men branded by authorities as sexual predators.
Curley dismissed the legal concerns about the bill, and said it was a "major step forward in the fight against child predators.""

And guess who is bankrolling the canteen of one of the killers of young Jeffrey Curley?

The Boston Herald reports that Jaynes is now battling efforts by his victim’s mother to uncover whether NAMBLA is bankrolling Jaynes’ prison canteen. There were court affidavits from two inmates claiming Jaynes engages in sex acts in the prison without discipline, shows off his victim’s autopsy and has a fat canteen account courtesy of NAMBLA.

What do the ACLU have in common with the North American Man/Boy Love Association?

From "The ACLU And Nambla: A Match Made In Hell"

"The ACLU is a supporter of NAMBLA, representing the organization in the civil case related to the aforementioned murder. The ACLU is representing NAMBLA PRO BONO. Their official position: “In representing NAMBLA, the ACLU does not advocate sexual relationships between adults and children. What we do advocate is robust freedom of speech. This lawsuit strikes at the heart of freedom of speech. The defense of freedom of speech is most critical when the message is one most people find repulsive.” "

Want to know how Jeffrey Curley was murdered? Get ready for this, from the same source:

"Charles Jaynes, 25, reportedly viewed the group’s web site shortly before the killing of Jeffrey Curley, a 10 year old boy, slain in 1997. Jaynes also had in his possession some of NAMBLA’s publications. Also convicted in the killing was 24 year old Salvatore Sicari. Sicari, convicted of first degree murder, is serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole. Jaynes’ second degree murder and kidnapping convictions enable him to seek parole within the next 20 years. Was this a case of misunderstanding? Does this fit with NAMBLA’s philosophy of man/boy love that is non violent? Hardly. Prosecutors said Jaynes and Sicari were sexually obsessed with the boy, lured him from his Cambridge neighborhood with the promise of a new bike, and then smothered him with a gasoline soaked rag when he resisted their sexual advances. They then stuffed him into a concrete filled container and dumped it into a Maine river."

Sick? OK, I'll wait for you to grab a SevenUp or some saltines.

Now, this is the sort of filth that the ACLU seek to appease in their entirely ungodly alliance with Nambla. And we come back to those four elements of the RICO Act which if we had an attorney general with enough balls we could easily break those filthy bastards under that act...and then bust Nambla under the same act to boot! THINK ABOUT IT!

Back to that Boston Herald article:

"But even supporters of the bill such as Plymouth County District Attorney Michael J. Sullivan admitted the law will be tough to enforce because it will involve monitoring private activities in the home or on a personal computer.
"Detection obviously is going to be a challenge," he said.
And civil rights lawyers scoffed at the notion the bill will pass constitutional muster."

I can't see why we mayn't be able to trace child pornography if we can trace terrorist activity...but more importantly it is going to come down to us to start busting child pornographers online and those efforts are being aided by law enforcement and by websites like this one. And BTW that law would most certainly pass constitutional muster considering the grave impact child pornography would impose upon the general public!


Illegal immigration is constantly in the news day and night, 24X7X366. Most Americans, irrespective of skin colour, age, ancestry, sex, or sexuality, are increasingly opposed to people jumping the borders...so much that an organisation formed in order to monitor the borders to check for gaps in the Immigration and Naturalisation Service's and the Border Patrol's efforts.
What you may or may not also know is the ACLUnatics have been front and centre in their efforts to oppose the Minuteman Project---in fact they harassed the organisation by interfering with their efforts to help enforce immigration laws and the borders by falsely branding them as "racists" and setting up warning systems and advising illegal aliens not to cross the border where Minuteman Project volunteers were working in Arizona. Sounds like the Minuteman Project are within their rights to sue the ACLUnatics for defamation of character and libel...and could crush them with a bootheel from HELL.
The ACLU even have an "Immigration Rights Project" which for 19 years has worked to find ways to flout US immigration laws. And this is on top of their move to ask a Los Angeles court to allow illegal immigrant groups to intervene in Judicial Watch's Special Order 40 Lawsuit in September 2006.
Earlier this year the ACLU complained about immigration law reforms stripping away the due process rights of illegals...showing you just how far off course immigration law enforcement has really gone.

I just found another THREE sections of the RICO Act with which we can indict the ACLUnatics which apply in this situation and they are as follows:

Section 1425 (relating to the procurement of citizenship or nationalization unlawfully)
Section 1426 (relating to the reproduction of naturalization or citizenship papers)
Section 1427 (relating to the sale of naturalization or citizenship papers)

In addition, because such activities invariably involve forged government documents like passports and drivers licences and visas, we find that these articles ALSO warrant prosecution under the following acts:

Section 1542 (relating to false statement in application and use of passport)
Section 1543 (relating to forgery or false use of passport)
Section 1544 (relating to misuse of passport)
Section 1546 (relating to fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents)

The ACLU have even been known to defend illegal aliens' supposed rights to welfare payments. Therefore I propose that we also charge them under the following section of the act:

Section 1954 (relating to unlawful welfare fund payments)

How many charges could we file in this case? I could think of no fewer than 15 counts of RICO Act violations...and that is only the tip of a massive iceberg in which we could nail the ACLU for hundreds if not thousands of RICO Act violations...and George Romero, the ACLU President, would be amongst those headed to federal prison where they belong!
Is it any wonder talk radio host Mark Levin calls them the American Criminal Liberties Union?