Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

- General Discussion (https://thetfp.com/tfp/general-discussion/)

- - NAMBLA Adopts a Highway (https://thetfp.com/tfp/general-discussion/87528-nambla-adopts-highway.html)

NAMBLA Adopts a Highway

Quote:

If this group is involved, it's a really bad sign
LINK

Published April 14, 2005
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1..._a_highway.jpg

As Illinois politicians wheedle for an income tax increase to help grow the government payroll, a reader of this column, Scott Broehl, wrote me a letter.

His was a fascinating story about how government works, or doesn't.

It involves the Illinois Adopt A Highway program, one of the million--or is that 10 million?--government programs. This involves a road in Arlington Heights and a group that should be barred from adopting anything, even a chunk of asphalt.

"I couldn't believe it," Broehl, a retired homicide detective, told me Wednesday. "All these politicians are grandstanding. They grandstand on everything. But then this happens.

"So the other day I'm out there on Golf Road and I see the Adopt A Highway sign. It's a state sign. And I see the name of the group that adopted the highway. They let these people adopt highways? It's sick. So I took a photograph and sent it to you."

Until we started asking questions about the Adopt A Highway program, this is how it worked: You applied to the Illinois Department of Transportation, it gave you a stretch of highway to clean up as a highway volunteer and provided plastic litter bags for cleanup and safety vests.

In exchange, the adopters received recognition in the form of a state highway sign, planted right there on their adopted 2-mile chunk of highway, for all drivers to see. There were more than 10,200 individuals in about 1,700 various groups having adopted around 3,400 miles of highway.

"That's all changed now. We're suspending the program and we're going to have to study this," said Tim Martin, the director of IDOT. "I can't believe it either. I'm sick about it. I can tell you I lost my cool. I have a temper. And I don't think the governor will be pleased, either."

Here's what was on the sign photographed by Scott Broehl.

First, there was the IDOT logo, and "ADOPT A HIGHWAY" in big letters. Then the name of a fellow named Kevin. I'm withholding the last name because we couldn't reach him. Given what the organization under his name stands for, I think you'll understand.

The name of the organization that adopted the highway was also in big letters. Here it is.

"NAMBLA INC."

Then it said, "KEEP ILLINOIS CLEAN."

Seeing the NAMBLA name up there irritated Broehl. He served on police departments in the northwest suburbs until he left to become a homicide detective in Atlanta. Cops know what it stands for.

NAMBLA stands for the North American Man-Boy Love Association. According to news articles and the group's Web site, it advocates changing those old-fashioned laws about sex with minors, including very young kids. It advocates pedophilia.

The only time pedophiles should be cleaning highways is when they are accompanied by prison guards and wearing leg-irons and bright orange uniforms. Pedophiles should never be released from prison. They can't be rehabilitated. There's something inside them beyond repair.

But there they were on the highway--NAMBLA and KEEP ILLINOIS CLEAN.

"Our politicians all jumped to get publicity on that registered sex-offender law," Broehl said, "even if the list includes some kid who was 17 and had sex with his 15-year-old girlfriend after school, he's a sex offender. The politicians were all over it. But NAMBLA gets to adopt a highway. Fantastic."

A call to IDOT had the usual effect, involving suspicion, paranoia and general agita. There's a reason for that. Some of the IDOT guys know me from their City Hall days, when they worked for Anthony Pucillo, the boss of the city's Department of Transportation.

Department officials said that Martin erupted with much anger and yelling in a meeting on Wednesday, in which he ordered the sign removed, and for it never to be put up again upon severe penalty, which may include a left hook to the head, but definitely would include firing.

At an IDOT meeting, Martin said, one official told him that legally, NAMBLA might have the right to the sign, given a recent court case in Missouri in which the Ku Klux Klan retained its name on a similar adopt-a-highway sign on 1st Amendment grounds.

Martin called the official a lunatic and demanded a full review of the program. He also spoke in French to make himself perfectly clear.

"I've heard about the KKK in Missouri, but let me tell you, we won't have NAMBLA signs on Illinois highways," Martin told me. "They can sue. But there won't be any NAMBLA signs."

The state is investigating who exactly applied for the sign, whether it was NAMBLA or whether it was a prankster.

In its review, IDOT is going over all the signs and applications to determine if other offensive groups or names beautify the state highways, and to decide whether to kill the program outright. Martin promised to tell me if he finds any more offensive signs. But just in case he doesn't, and you see one, let me know.

such a slippery slope we live on. personally, NAMBLA as a group to me doesn't warrant anything positive. It doesn't do anything to help generate positive force within the communities it exists. But since the criteria for adopting a highway is pretty succinct and straightforward, then what's the difference of me putting up something like, USA2World UFIA, Inc.?

I think everyone should start dumping trash on that highway, once the group cannot keep up, they lose the right to put their sign there. If they are out working, I hope that they do not get hit by flying debris.

I think this is just a prank, and I'm not too sure about the photo either.
Did anyone else notice the N.H.D.O.T. in the bottom right of the top sign? I googled it, and unless Illinois is buying their road signs from the New Hampshire Department Of Transportation.... I think you get my point, especially since I don't believe there is any National Highway Department of Transportion, which is the only other thing I can think that would stand for. Also, a Department head cursing and threatening? Come on.

Second, they can't refuse an organization participation in a public program because of the organizations views. NAMBLA may be sick and disgusting, but they can't be discriminated against because of their views. It's the same situation as the KKK and Nazi's, both advocate actions that are currently illegal, but their status to exist and participate in public programs is protected.

For those interested in the KKK information and the TFP discussion.

Quote:

High court allows KKK to adopt a highway
March 5, 2001
Web posted at: 5:40 p.m. EST (2240 GMT)

From staff and wire reports

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Supreme Court Monday allowed the Ku Klux Klan to participate in a Missouri "adopt-a-highway" program in which volunteers pick up roadside trash and in return receive a sign recognizing their efforts.

Monday's action was not a decision on the merits of the case.

The court turned down without comment an appeal by Missouri that argued the state should be allowed to prohibit the Klan from participating in the program because the organization does not accept blacks and other minorities as members.
The high court also rejected a separate U.S. Justice Department appeal arguing the nation's civil rights laws would have been violated by allowing the Klan to participate in a program run by a state agency that receives federal funds.

Missouri appealed an 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision that said Missouri must allow the Klan to join the highway cleanup program and that the state unconstitutionally rejected the Klan because of its views as a racist organization.

Missouri's lawyers said the state had a right to control its own speech and that allowing the Klan to participate would violate the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibition on racial discrimination in federally funded programs.

Law Professor David Cole, who teaches constitutional law at Georgetown University in Washington, called it "a stretch" to say the Klan's participation in the highway program violates the civil rights act.

"The Klan, like everyone else, can pick up garbage on the highway," Cole said. "They can't be penalized because they discriminate. Lots of groups discriminate. The Boy Scouts discriminate against gays. But when and if they [Ku Klux Klan] engage in criminal conduct or violence, the state should go after them."

Jeff Briggs, a spokesman for the Missouri Department of Transportation, which administers the highway cleanup program, said officials were reviewing the Supreme Court's action.

"It's what I expected right from the beginning. With us it was a purely constitutional issue," said Thomas Robb, national director of the Ku Klux Klan in Harrison, Arkansas.

The case began in May 1994 when Michael Cuffley, the top official in the Missouri organization of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, filed an application to participate in the Adopt-A-Highway program by cleaning up a half-mile segment of Interstate 55.

The stretch of highway is one of the routes used to bus black students to county schools as part of court-ordered desegregation efforts in the St. Louis area, a program the Klan opposes.

The state denied the Klan's application. Missouri said nine other states have rejected similar Klan requests: West Virginia, Texas, Ohio, Maryland, Kansas, Georgia, California, Arkansas and Alabama.

Missouri cited the Klan's membership, which is limited to "Aryans." The Klan excludes anyone who is Jewish, black, Hispanic or Asian.

Missouri also said the Klan violated state and federal anti-discrimination laws, and that it had a history of unlawful violence.

The Klan sued, arguing that its exclusion from the program violated its constitutional rights. A federal judge ruled for the Klan and in March 2000 the 8th Circuit Court concurred.

The 8th Circuit said the state would not violate the federal civil rights law by letting the Klan adopt a stretch of highway.

"So long as the state does not deny anyone an opportunity to adopt a highway on an improper basis, the state does not violate Title VI [of the Civil Rights Act of 1964]," the appeals court said.

The court said the Klan, as one of many voluntary participants in the highway beautification program, is free to determine its own membership.

"Requiring the Klan essentially to alter its message of racial superiority and segregation by accepting individuals of other races, religions, colors, and national origins in order to adopt a highway would censor its message and inhibit its constitutionally protected conduct," the 8th Circuit wrote.

The appeals court also rejected Missouri's discrimination-related reasons.

The court wrote that "the state has never denied the application of any other group on the grounds of discriminatory membership. A quick glance down the list of participants in the Adopt-A-Highway program, however, reveals many adopters that have discriminatory membership criteria. For example, it is commonly known that the Knights of Columbus, a venerated service organization that has chapters adopting many stretches of highway across the state, limits its membership to Catholic men."

In the appeal acted on Monday, Missouri's lawyers said the Constitution's free-speech guarantee protects the state from having to post signs "suggesting that the state approves of, and is grateful for, the Klan's participation" in the program.

The Klan's lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union said the First Amendment protects the organization "against those who would misuse government power to suppress political dissidents."

A group of 28 states supported the appeal, saying the highway sign conveyed more than information, or even thanks.

"It also implies a message of acceptance, a message that the state regards the Klan as a valuable member of society just like the Rotary Club or the Jaycees who have adopted the next stretch of highway down the road," the states said.

The 8th Circuit said the First Amendment protects everyone, "even those with viewpoints as thoroughly obnoxious as those of the Klan, from viewpoint-based discrimination by the state."

The court added, "There are better ways of countering the Klan's repellant philosophy than by the state's engaging in viewpoint-based discrimination. In a myriad of constitutionally sound ways, state officials and private citizens alike may oppose the Klan's racially divisive views and express disapproval of those views in the strongest terms.

"But viewpoint-based exclusion of any individual or organization from a government program is not a constitutionally permitted means of expressing disapproval of ideas -- even very poor ideas -- that the government disfavors."

It looks photoshopped to me.

Notice how the top sign was photographed at an angle and is tapering to the right?

The bottom sign doesn't appear to follow.

Plus I think that highway departments always round the corners of the signs to avoid injuries to workers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lebell

The picture came from this site:

Quote:

Illinois Investigating Adoption of Highway by NAMBLA
Filed under News

Yes, our photo is a fake, but this story is real. The North American Man-Boy Love Association may have adopted a stretch of highway in Illinois, according to a column by Chicago Tribune writer John Kass. Kass quotes a retired homicide detective who photographed a sign pronouncing the roadway’s adoption by “NAMBLA, Inc.” Officials are trying to determine if the adoption was a prank, or, if not, whether the roadway has been involved in any incidents of man-roadway love.

but that still doesn't change the rest of the situation.

You know, they're right there... on the side of the road cleaning up... only one slip of the steering wheel and I'll bet you could get 2 or 3 of em all at the same time.

No court would convict you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antikarma

You know, they're right there... on the side of the road cleaning up... only one slip of the steering wheel and I'll bet you could get 2 or 3 of em all at the same time.

No court would convict you.

as fucked up as they may be, you can't kill someone just because you don't believe in their ideas. You would be convicted.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antikarma

You know, they're right there... on the side of the road cleaning up... only one slip of the steering wheel and I'll bet you could get 2 or 3 of em all at the same time.

No court would convict you.

Of course not. Association wtih a group that promotes something that goes against the rest of society, whether or not the individual has actually done anything illegal, is always justification for use of lethal force. :rolleyes: I think I'll subpoena your post as my defense when I start running down members of the KKK, the Westboro Baptist Church, and the Communist party. (Would I get triple points if one person was in all three?)

Well I'm glad to see humour and sarcasm aren't lost on EVERYONE. Or was it? Wait, was that humour and sarcasm back at me?

And if one person was in all three thats triple points and free beer at the legion afterwords.

OK, that's definitely a New Hampshire Adopt-a-Highway sign as seen here

The Illinois Adopt-Highway signs look very different as seen here

And even though the jalopnik.com site states that it's a fake didn't originally state it as such, which is how rumors get started.

What I find highly suspect is that all references to this story point back to this single columnist for the Chicago tribune, who supposedly has a "real" photograph (but no evidence of one). This in contrast to the KKK story which has multiple sources.

im thinking that sign gets stolen in 24 hours

At what age do you think it's right to tell a highway it was adopted?

thank you TOK for that dose of humor!

I think that what is boils down to is what is perverted anyway? Me, I think that sex with anyone young, and I mean too young to understand what's really going on, is perverted (in a bad bad way). But to NAMBLA, they think their beliefs are totally justified, and everyone else is wrong. It's like the Cathloic church vs. the Baptists. I'm going to take a Libertarian stance on this and say that, while NAMBLA does have the right to exist as a group, they don't have the right to adopt a strech of highway somewhere where it might interfere with other's saftey. For example, where is this highway? Is it in a residential area where small children often wait for the bus? That would make their parents VERY uncomfortable I'd imagine- and rightly so. However, if this is like, a road in the middle of BFE where there are no kids around, I don't see why they couldn't adopt it. I totally agree this is a slippery slope- how much free speech is too much?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sage

so then you're basically saying that "back of the bus" is fine, because it's a judgement call. Then who's judgement and who's decision as to just what's considered the right areas? what happens as the area changes and sprawl encroaches?

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Original King

At what age do you think it's right to tell a highway it was adopted?

lol....................................................

I don't care what nambla does, as long as it isn't trying to fuck young children.