Posted on 05/15/2004 3:30:47 PM PDT by wagglebee
Edited on 07/12/2004 4:15:23 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
No our constitution recognizes the rights as given by the creator only and recognized by our government by the Creator's endowment and blessing. Human's have them no matter who or where they are. It's just that as a nation we acknowledged and recognized them through our constitution and the wisdom of our founding fathers to acknowledge what all men (humans) are blessed with.
Oh? Then why does he keep dancing with it? Look, he's busted and trying to spin it.
"How outraged are you about what happened to Jessica L?"
"Very. However, I didn't want to sodomize the first Iraqi I saw with a light stick."
LOL Good! Please remember the "light stick" story was not the "photos" Rush was referring to with his statements.
Do you now see where I was going with this?
For the sake of America I sincerely hope there is no such monstrosity as Burkeman2!!!!!!!!!! Drop dead and get off FR. Your stench is offensive to true Americans.
Someone above answered you already, but I guess you still didn't get it. Consititutional rights and God-given rights are not the same thing. US constitutional rights do not apply to Iraqi's. Frankly, I think we should impose the former rights imposed by Hussein...that should satisy you....lets give the Iraqi's their old system back, then maybe you'll shut up, won't you? You know, the one where one million people died.
As has been said many times here and other places...what was done by those soldiers was wrong, and against the military code they are under. They will be punished, which is far more than will happen to most of the Iraqis who are killing the good guys.
Sheesh, you missed the boat on the newbie thing. Forget about it.
Someone above answered you already, but I guess you still didn't get it. Consititutional rights and God-given rights are not the same thing. US constitutional rights do not apply to Iraqi's. Frankly, I think we should impose the former rights imposed by Hussein...that should satisy you....lets give the Iraqi's their old system back, then maybe you'll shut up, won't you? You know, the one where one million people died.
As has been said many times here and other places...what was done by those soldiers was wrong, and against the military code they are under. They will be punished, which is far more than will happen to most of the Iraqis who are killing the good guys.
Wrong again. The US Constitution has an assumption of inherent rights, ie - "shall not infringe," but does not attribute a source and enumerates or recognizes very few rights, hence the Ninth Amendment.
Human's have them no matter who or where they are. It's just that as a nation we acknowledged and recognized them through our constitution and the wisdom of our founding fathers to acknowledge what all men (humans) are blessed with.
And a person locked in a dark cell in the bottom of a dungeon is perfectly free...within his own mind. Humans may have basic rights, in that our culture holds to a principle of certain basic rights. However, humans have absolutely no protection to those rights outside of the restrictions of their own government or the defense of rights that those people take into their own ands.
The recognition of rights, the protection of rights as described by the the US Constitution does not apply to anybody but US citizens.
Whatever protections or recognitions in the new Iraqi constitution will apply to Iraqi citizens, but not US citizens - or British, Spanish, Chinese, Brazilians.....
I can't speak to that one, I didn't see it. And I'm pretty Rush didn't mention it when he was describing the photos, so I'm not positive he had seen it either. Who knows.
Yes their behavior IS barbaric which VIOLATES their membership agreement in the Human Race. Behavior is what makes humans civilized..or monsters.
I'm Honored By Effort to Discredit Me
May 11, 2004
Listen to Rush… (...explain how the media works, and why it's taking him out of context)
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
I want to say something here, folks, so go ahead and turn up the volume. Turn it up to at least 800 decibels. Just checking the 24/7 e-mail, the Rush comments line for people who are subscribers of my website, and a couple in there, "Aren't you upset? You don't even sound upset that the media is trying to discredit you," and I'm not. But I think it's because I understand it. I've been through 16 years. This is just par for the course. I mean, there's nothing new here. Can we review some things? In the first place, let's go back and look at the Woodward situation, just describe how the media works a bit. Once you know how they work, it's hard to get upset -- once you know how they work. They surprise you and do something outrageous, yeah, but once you know and it's predictable. Why get upset about something you know is going to happen?
The Wall Street Journal e-mailed me on Thursday, Friday, said, "We want you to do a piece on the new Woodward book." I said, "I haven't seen the Woodward book." They said, "Oh, it doesn't matter. He's going to be on 60 Minutes," and they gave me a list of areas of possible interest for the op-ed.
So I watched Woodward on 60 Minutes and I wrote the op-ed, and then Woodward is asked about my op-ed. He says, "Well, I guess he never read my book." I said, "Duh, exactly! I was just responding to what you said on 60 Minutes, which is not in your book!" and yet the criticism is, "Rush Limbaugh totally missed the point." We were out in front and very honest and up front about what happened. He was out there saying things on TV that were not in his book! I was commenting on what he was saying, not what was in the book, and of course then I get the charge I haven't read the book. (laughing) Of course! I admitted this up front. Second thing. You remember back in the Bush campaign era, during the 2000 campaign, Bush is out west somewhere, and he starts ripping conservatives and Republicans saying, "We shouldn't balance the budget on the backs of the poor."
Well, I flipped my wig. I said, "We don't need a Republican bashing conservatives using the language of liberals to do this," and so I made known my criticism and spent some time out on the program -- and these journalists all called, and they wanted me on Nightline. They wanted me on the morning shows; they wanted me on nightly news and they wanted me to expand on the comment. They called me. "What did you mean by that? What were you saying about that? Really, do you think Bush sounded -- really?" Because any time a conservative attacks a Republican, the media is on it like white on rice, and they love it and they want to build on it. Now, let's look at this prison business. When the first two or three pictures came out -- you know which ones they are. The pyramid picture, which is what looks like a Skull and Bones initiation, the pyramid, the guys in the hoods and we got the female prison guard with a cigarette dangling from the mouth, and we had the guy in all black, hooded and so forth, wires attached to various, uhhh, extremities, and there was one other picture, and I said, "Well, what's the big deal here? This just looks like an average Skull and Bones initiation."
That quote made the first day the pictures were published is all that I am quoted as saying. Maybe one other little quote, I forget what it is, but in this instance not one journalist, and that's what they are, not one journalist has picked up the phone or sent me an e-mail and said, "What do you mean by this? You really think this?" Not one journalist has dared ask me for the context of the remark. Not one person -- not one! No conservative journalist has, either. If there are conservatives upset with me, I want to -- no one has gotten hold of me, and I'm assuming that they're not listening to the program, because otherwise they would know the context of all this. You can't... I mean, I've spent ten to 12 hours on this subject, and said a whole lot on it, but that one comment seems to serve the purpose of those who have an agenda -- and there's this new website that the libs have set up out there, and one of the things they have is a couple guys that transcribe this program, and they select certain outtakes or excerpts, and they put them on the website, and it's become a clearinghouse for lib propaganda.
So the lib media goes there, sees what's there, then repackages it as "news," and never once have I been asked for, uhhh, detail, context, explanation. No one has asked me anything about it. They just (clap) because they don't want to know any more than that, because that quote is just fine for their agenda-driven purposes. Now, I know this, so why get upset about it? If I may be really honest -- and, of course, I'm always striving to do that and to share with you my feelings -- I have to tell you, folks, and this is the third time I will have said it in this context and say it again, because it's the best way I know to put this in context. Here I am. Who am I? I am a radio talk show host. I am a kid from Missouri who wanted to be on the radio, now -- that's all I've ever wanted to do. I've wanted to be the best at what I am and the best at what I do, true -- but on the radio.
Now all of a sudden I have to be discredited in order for the left to win. I have to be discredited for their agenda to gain primacy in this whole story, and so that Skull and Bones quote is everywhere, and it's being asked of everybody: "Do you condemn Limbaugh?" Not one of the people who has been asked to condemn me has bothered to get hold of me. Even somebody who may be upset with me, "What the hell you doing to us? Why are you saying...?" Nobody has even asked me that. Why should they? I'm on the radio for three hours every day, 15 a week. All they have to do is turn on the knob, and they're not even making that effort, those who are putting this out. So am I upset about it? No, folks. To tell you the truth, I'm honored. If you want to know the truth, I'm not upset about this at all. I am honored. I'm just a kid from Missouri who wanted to be on the radio and all of a sudden what I say has to be discredited, taken out of context.
This is just another sign of effectiveness to me. If they can take one or two sentences of all that I've said and try to discredit an entire movement or -- Whatever you want to call it -- ideology, I'm proud to be the target. Because I know who I am and I know what I believe, and I know what I've said, and for every newspaper or TV show that spends time quoting this little thing I said. I've got hours and hours and hours to put it back in context for the people that matter to me most, and that's you, who invest the time to listen to this program every day. So, please, don't, don't, don't worry. If you want to get excited, I understand it, but I'm not. I look at it a totally different way. After all, I'm 53 years old. I've been through a lot as everybody 53 has. You learn things. If this were my second year on the air, or first year on the air and this were happening, yeah, I'd be worried. "These people are out to destroy me." They can't destroy me, folks. The media didn't make me; the media can't destroy me. Media didn't make me who I am. I did that along with you.
So if the media didn't make me, if they're not responsible for building me, they can't tear me down. They can try, and I don't know that that's what they're doing, but nevertheless, don't sweat it. I just felt compelled to answer this because it must have been over the last three or four days a whole bunch of e-mails from people who think I ought to be angry about it, want me to fight back and this sort of thing, and I've also learned over the years that fighting back is not the right way to handle this. Just keep doing what you're doing. Just be who you are. Let that be the fight. If you start responding to these people that's all you're going to end up doing, which is why I was reluctant to even do this. I wanted to do it one more time, get it out of the way get it on the record and let's just see how much of this, this total explanation, including the context of the Skull and Bones comment. Let's see how much of this ever shows up in any of these places which have used that quote as a means to be critical, disparaging, discrediting, whatever.
END TRANSCRIPT
He's simply worked hard to create something to discredit.
No, sadly, even barbarians have souls. By being barbaric they don't automatically drop from being human beings.
Many of these folks were detained for nothing more than some neighbor ratted on them, but in fact they did nothing.
Is this a proven fact? I have heard 2 stories regarding the severity of their crimes. One is your post and the other is that the prisoners in this particular cell block were insurgents and they had actually attacked some of the people guarding them.
I'm not saying they were all saints. Far from it. But this prison housed many people for no crime greater than someone wanted them detained.
Thar she blows...
Me thinks we have Mobys at work here.
You seem to be concerned with prisoner rights.
I agree (as does Rush) that we should treat prisoners appropriately.
However, these are not people who were picked up for credit card abuse. And, may we remind you, we are at war, and these are dangerous people who may have killed our own dear servicemen and women, and who certainly would if they got a chance.
The stuff was a little sick, okay a lot sick, but no one was injured or killed.
So, why don't you transfer some of your concern to worrying about Rush's rights as a citizen. That's what this post is about, after all.
So, let's see then. The only human being you DON'T care about is Rush.
No deep intellectual thought on your part either. Just an irrational obsession against someone who helped us get rid of the democrat controlled congress and who keeps the media from fooling everyone. Try listening to him sometime with an open mind. I suspect you don't impress anyone but yourself. And, DU would be the perfect place for you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.