Comments on: Supporting our troops on Patriot’s Day

By: GARKO FACTOR

GARKO FACTOR — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 00:43:44 +0000

i like the picture!
otherwise i invite you to watch this video i recently did at the End the Fed Rally in Los Angeles where one of the attendees was this Marine…

By: Ed Dawson

Ed Dawson — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 16:47:59 +0000

This is especially demented tongue-in-cheek:

http://www.jtk3.com/laissezfirearm/hugowine.htm

By: Merlin

Merlin — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 05:29:18 +0000

Great pointer to the writing of Mark Penman – just spend some time with some of his articles like

- Slave Reparations Hue Betcha, and
- The Parable of the Good Cop

Love it!

By: Ed Dawson

Ed Dawson — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:31:21 +0000

Change of subject: superb reading.

I was regularly corresponding with Mark Penman, and I was horrified when he killed himself 7 years ago. I am glad to see his stuff is still up.

Ladies and Germs, the funniest Libertarian EVER:

http://www.jtk3.com/laissezfirearm/

By: Ed Dawson

Ed Dawson — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:13:17 +0000

I misspoke. I should have said:

“Should Iraqis have legal guarantees of those rights in the iraq constitution?”

That is what I meant.

But you ignored my point, probably because it contradicted your position. My point is that the only PRACTICAL way the iraqis can have their rights protected is to get our military to change its rules of engagement, AND the Iraqi government change its constitution and laws.

I agree that raiding someone’s house is wrong, here or in Iraq. At least here we theoretically have legal recourse if some enthusiastic fascist breaks down your or my door.

Hmmm… you seem to be speaking in terms of absolute principles, while I am talking practical solutions. I agree with your principles. (I just checked my wallet — voter registration still says LIB.)

cheers
Ed

By: Larken Rose

Larken Rose — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 22:41:45 +0000

Who wrote this extremist hate-speech!? Oh, wait. It was me. Never mind.

As for Mr. Dawson’s comments, while the Constitution doesn’t pretend to “guarantee” rights (which it fails to do here as well), it doesn’t pretend to CREATE such rights either. A quote from Mr. Dawson:

“Should Iraqis have those rights? Yes, of course. But that would involve changing the laws in Iraq.”

No, it wouldn’t. Rights don’t come from politician scribbles (a.k.a. “laws”). The Fourth Amendment, for example, does not create, but IDENTIFIES the right of people to be secure in their houses, possessions, etc. The fact that Iraq tyrants, as well as American tyrants, IGNORE that right–and lots of others–doesn’t change anyone’s rights. If you have the right, so do the Iraqis. The fact that their politician scribbles don’t acknowledge that has NO bearing on what their rights are, in the same way that the fact that the fascists here completely disregard the rights identified in the Constitution doesn’t mean they cease to be rights. If raiding YOUR house without probable cause is wrong, so is raiding the house of some guy in Iraq. No law can change that.

Larken

By: Ed Dawson

Ed Dawson — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 18:50:23 +0000

The guarantees in the constitution of the USA do not legally extend to Iraq. And cannot unless and until Iraq is annexed as a USA territory, giving it the same legal status as Puerto Rico or Guam. Laws of the USA, and constitutional rights of the USA, do not apply there.

We can wish them to, but the fact remains they do not. Should Iraqis have those rights? Yes, of course. But that would involve changing the laws in Iraq, and rules of engagement used by our military. The fact is that the rights expressed in the US constitution do not apply to foreign nationals in a foreign country.

Therefore, though I agree often with Mr Larkin Rose, in this case he is incorrect to desire to apply the US constitution in Iraq.