remember this bit?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/03/wto_antigua_ruling/

allow me to re-quote:

"When FBI supervisors in Miami met with new interim U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta last month, they wondered what the top enforcement priority for Acosta and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales would be. Would it be terrorism? Organized crime? Narcotics trafficking? Immigration? Or maybe public corruption? The agents were stunned to learn that a top prosecutorial priority of Acosta and the Department of Justice was none of the above. Instead, Acosta told them, it's obscenity. Not pornography involving children, but pornographic material featuring consenting adults."

I am far from a fan of GGW, and the guy who runs it sounds like your classic douchebag, but I think his treatment has far less to do with his attitude and approach in the courts than it does with his underlying challenge to the moral code embraced by the right.

To don my prognosticator's hat and coat for a moment, I'm confident that the next public pronouncement we'll hear about this chump is that he's got a raging substance abuse problem and it was just the drugs or alcohol talking. What with the erratic behaviour and the mounting pile of charges against him, it seems only inevitable that he'll claim that he's been whacked out on sleepers and whatnot.

What does it take to get a judge removed from the bench? A judge has absolutely no right to force a plaintiff or defendant to settle. He's just a lazy sack of shit who doesn't want to do his job.

Simple questionnaire:

1. Did the girls see the cameras?

2. Were the girls aware that the cameras were operated by GGW?

3. Were the girls aware that the cameras were filming?

4. Were the girls aware that the film was going to be used for public consumption?

If the answer to each of those questions is "Yes", then there is absolutely no "exploitation".

And state charges for trying to get a bottle of water, and for having prescription sleeping pills? Sure, we give prisoners college educations, better libraries than our cities, job skills, etc., but god forbid we allow them to have bottled water and be able to sleep.

Those who rush to the defence of Joe Francis for whatever reason should first read Claire Hoffman's article in the Los Angeles Times, published just over a year ago, at http://www.latimes.com/features/magazine/west/la-tm-gonewild32aug06,0,2664370.story