June 17, 2005
As you all know – I have been unable to get video this week because I am interning in DC. I will return home Saturday afternoon and video posting will be back in full swing. However I have been able to record audio and radio shows. Today I was listening to the Sean Hannity show and Newt Gingrich was a guest. Newt and Sean talked about the Dick Durbin comment that referred the treatment of suspected terrorists as Gulags, Nazi-like, and Pol Pot’s Cambodia. Newt is absolutely disgusted with this and has some harsh words for Durbin.
Download and listen to audio here.
Transcript of Newt’s strong words:
I believe that when a US Senator compares the USA to Nazi Germany, Stalin’s Soviet Union, and Pol Pot’s Cambodia, and then suggesting that Americans in uniform are the equivalent of the Gestapo or the KGB or the murderers in Cambodia.That is an action that is so reprehensible and so destructive to the US that it requires a very serious response. Not a political response, not the usual rhetoric, but a very serious susceptive response. My position is, unless Sen. Durbin comes to the Senate floor and apologizes to the men and women in uniform who he has defamed, apologizes to the US senate to which he has smeared, and apologizes to the people of the US who he has on a worldwide basis weakened by giving our enemies this kind of language to use because they can now quote the second leading Democrat in the US, saying that the US and the number two Democrat in the US Senate comparing Nazi Germany, Stalin’s Soviet Union, and Pulpot’s Cambodia .. I can’t tell you how deeply I feel about this.
BLACKFIVE linked with Marine Recruiter And the MSM Part Two
Right In Texas linked with Rush Gets It
Michelle Malkin linked with DURBIN WATCH: CHENEY COMMENTS
46 Responses to “Hannity: Newt on Dick Durbin (AUDIO)”
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Register to comment here.
4:58 pm [ Quote ]
DURBIN WATCH: CHENEY COMMENTS
Just received this e-mail from Steve Gill: Vice President Dick Cheney appeared this morning on Steve Gill Mornings in Nashville, Tennessee and was asked about Dick Durbin’s comparison of U.S. troops at Guantanamo Bay to Nazis. The Vice President noted…
5:15 pm [ Quote ]
Senator Durbin is a disgrace to the US Senate. The shameful silence of his fellow Democrat colleagues is equally disgraceful. The Democratic Party is unfit to lead our nation and lacks the moral fiber to defend it. Unfortunately, Senator Durbin is not a fluke. He, like Dean, Moore, Franken, etc., represents the thinking of the party core. He does not deserve to be an American.
5:16 pm [ Quote ]
My position is, unless…
Uh…Newt never actually gets to the “unless” part.
Unless what Newt???
And then he goes on to defend Hillary.
And this guy is trying to kiss-up to the right now?
Puh-lease.
5:19 pm [ Quote ]
He wasn’t saying the troops are Nazi’s idiots. He was saying the report sounded like a desription of tactis used by the world most repressive regimes, not the beacon of freedom to the world.
5:22 pm [ Quote ]
Uh. . .The Nazis had Christina Aguilera also?
5:29 pm [ Quote ]
Oh, okay Jim. See, I’m not calling you an idiot, I’m just saying that your making such a meaningless distinction sounds idiotic. And you’ll never hear me call you an a#$hole, but I will say that only an a$#hole would make such a meaningless distinction and then call the rest of us idiots. Thanks for clearing all that up.
5:34 pm [ Quote ]
Actually, Richard, when the person is the twentieth hijacker, I think of the US doing a hell of a lot worse, and with my blessing to boot.
The good thing about this whole incident is that it confirms what everybody suspected during the election: liberals are not serious about defending this country and are willing to use any means they can to elevate themselves into power, regardless of the cost to the rest of us.
5:39 pm [ Quote ]
Rush Gets It
UpDate: Newt Gingrich Weighs In on The Sean Hannity Program Via: The Political Teen
6:02 pm [ Quote ]
Richard – those poor babies, they had to sit in their feces for 24 hours. Are your delicate sensabilities offended? Too bad. Not too nice, but it will wash off. That’s a heck-of-a-lot different from actual torture where physical harm and pain is inflicted. Perhaps you would feel better if we turned Gitmo into a Club Med and made nice to those people who were non-uniformed combatants captured on a fielkd of battle. If having them sit in feces (a much better word than s—-) is the worse that the guards do, while El Quida is sawing off the heads of innocent civilians and blowing up Iraqis of a differen sect, I feel that America is in pretty good shape. Richard – get a life – wake up to the real world. These are really bad people, and the Red Cross and 1000’s of reporters have been to Gitmo. Save your sympathy. If you are still unhappy with that, why not buy some toilet paper and ship it down there instead of condeming the American military. Sort of like a CARE package for the detainees. As an American citizen, you will be helping to right the wrong that you feel was committed. Stop complaining and act. It’s your privilege as an American citizen.
6:43 pm [ Quote ]
There’s nothing more that I can say that his first name doesn’t already…
6:45 pm [ Quote ]
“The issue isn’t whether or not we are the same as the Nazis, the issue is that we aren’t different enough.” Avi Shlaim
7:30 pm [ Quote ]
Richard, grow up.
I read a comment that said, if the
libs are so upset why don’t the libs
take them home with them and they
can take care of them. Neat idea.
Maybe they could just bring them home
for Thanksgiving, the 4th of July,
and easter. They could give them lovely
presents, this should make them feel
Americans are just really nice people
as this is what the libs seem to
want.
8:12 pm [ Quote ]
If that’s what Avi Schlaim (whoever he is) said. Then said Avi is a Jacka$$ along with old Dick.
9:33 pm [ Quote ]
There is nothing Mr. Durbin said in regards to prisoner torture that isn’t untrue.
Why isn’t the Bush administration willing to acknowledge that the Geneva Conventions have been largely ignored in Guantanamo Bay?
9:37 pm [ Quote ]
There are sufficient numbers of words in the English language to make the case that you belive a captured combatant is being unreasonably treated. This can easily be done without resorting to bilious comparisons and invective. Either the senator from Illinois lacks rhetorical facility or he intentionally smeared members of the military knowing full well they cannot respond to his slander directly.
10:27 pm [ Quote ]
Gray: Exactly what part of Durbin’s statement was slander?
12:50 am [ Quote ]
The simple fact is, Democrats have always been, and always will be, a party of Anti-Americans. They hate the military, they hate patriotism, and they are ashamed of freedom, liberty, and self-government. They are socialists who believe in elitist rule, and support dictators and thugs throughout the world. And that is why not ONE democrat has yet to denounce Durbin for his outrageous comparisons.
1:14 am [ Quote ]
We are treating the detainees better than required by the Geneva Convention. People who say otherwise are referring to their own imaginary revisions of the Geneva Convention—about which many of them, in their Che shirts, don’t really give a freaking hoot anyway.
1:17 am [ Quote ]
Jarjarhead,
My recommendation to you is that you make every attempt to stifle your conscience. It is tricking your fingers into turning what you intend as slams into perfectly true statements, and that’s likely to get you kicked out of the Movement if you aren’t careful.
The Bush Administration has repeatedly and forcibly asserted that the Geneva Conventions are being ignored in the Guantanamo Bay detention facility. The people being held there aren’t covered by the Geneva Conventions, so the Administration is ignoring things that aren’t applicable.
Zack,
Senator Durbin is a skilled and experienced orator with a well-paid and competent crew of speechwriters. The presumption must be made that he both says what he means and means what he says.
There are any number of comparisons that could have been made that would make the point the Democrats are trying to spin Durbin into; the Senator chose to equate the behavior of U.S. troops with that of, e.g., Pol Pot’s “Year Zero Policy” enforcers. “Slander” is unfortunately the only possible characterization of his remarks, unless qualifiers like “vile” are appended.
Regards,
Ric
1:24 am [ Quote ]
Not one Marine guarding the prisoners at Gitmo have ever hanged them with piano wire ( as the Nazis did) nor by their testes( like the Japanese did our POWs in WWII) or use them for medical research (Nazis) or kill them for being teachers, doctors, etc (Pol Pot).
Actually, not one prisoner has ever been killed at Gitmo!
Nor have they been used for slave labor (Gulags).
So, to compare their treatment to that of the Nazis, Pol Pot, or Gulags is just plain ignorance.
Liberals do NOT know what the military is for. Hillary will NEVER be President because, thanks to Durbin, the military will NEVER support her or any Liberal.
If Senator McCain doesn’t come out and condemn Durbin soon, he can kiss the White House good-bye as well.
1:43 am [ Quote ]
ForNow, one small correction to your otherwise good post on the Geneva Convention: No need for military tribunals, Excedrin Headache #.357 can be administered as soon as it is clear they were both bearing arms and are not in a uniform easily recognizable at a distance. These detainees have been given far more than their legal rights under international law by being allowed to continue breathing.
4:45 am [ Quote ]
Nothing in the Republicans’ arguments against Mr. Durbin hold water if they are not ready to admit that we have suspended Geneva Convention protections for inmates at Guantanamo.
Seems it’s like a dog and pony show on both sides, really. I also think it’s the Republicans and the conservative media who are blowing the comments out of proportion; if the talking heads didn’t make such a hay out of his comments, we wouldn’t be seeing them on “unfriendly” foreign media outlets such as Al-Jazeera, etc. I think we need to shut down Guantanamo, because it is a huge source of festering resentment against the U.S., and is hatching future “terrorists” as we speak.
-jarjarhead
7:06 am [ Quote ]
These idiots that cite the Geneva Convention are so stupid. Terrorists are not soldiers. The GC only applies to soldiers fighting for a government that we are fighting against.
Wake up you morons, you don’t give your enemy aid and comfort, you kill them.
Period!
1:10 pm [ Quote ]
Durban etal occupy the media with vitriolic retoric in order to draw attenion away from the fact they have no constructive programs in the liberal cormer. In their quest to return to power they damage the USA and give support to an enemy who has vicously attacked our citizens for at least 15 years. If we wern’t fighting them Iraq we would be fighting them here.
1:12 pm [ Quote ]
Ric: Slander comprises false statements. Durbin said nothing false. He claimed that if one didn’t know the context, one would believe that the events had taken place where there was no regard for human rights. With people chained to the floor in their own feces,with no water in an overheated cell, I’d say that’s a pretty fair assessment.
1:23 pm [ Quote ]
Sydney Carlton; “They are socialists who believe in elitist rule, and support dictators and thugs throughout the world”
You mean like that socialist Bush who supports the dictators in Saudi Arabia, and Yemen, and Pakistan and in Kyrgyzstan, where the thugs boil people alive? Of course you’be complained about that too, haven’t you?
2:19 pm [ Quote ]
Marine Recruiter And the MSM Part Two
On June 9th, I posted a skeptical review of Susan Paynter’s article about a Washington state young man by the name of Axel and his mother, Marcia, and their alleged horrendous ordeal at the hands of the Marine Corps Recruiters.
4:00 pm [ Quote ]
JARJARHEAD-
BY YOUR WRITINGS YOUR NAME SHOULD REALLY BE JARJARBINKS. YOU SOUND AS BRIGHT AS HE DOES. IF IT WERE UP TO ME. I’D SQUEEZE THEM IN ANY WAY POSSIBLE-SHORT OF PHYSICAL TORTURE- TO SECURE THE LIVES OF AMERICANS.
4:34 pm [ Quote ]
Judging by your writing in ALL CAPS and your failure to refute my argument, I’d say that you’re wrong.
5:43 pm [ Quote ]
jarjarhead, you idiot.
15A. “There is nothing Mr. Durbin said in regards to prisoner torture that isn’t untrue.” You sir are correct.
15B “Why isn’t the Bush administration willing to acknowledge that the Geneva Conventions have been largely ignored in Guantanamo Bay?” and what part of the GC do these thugs fall under? ans. = none
24 “Nothing in the Republicans’ arguments against Mr. Durbin hold water if they are not ready to admit that we have suspended Geneva Convention protections for inmates at Guantanamo” ans.= ans. 15B.
As ol’ Bugs used to say “Oh man, what a maroon.”
From me to you I’ll always be;
thirdfinger
6:00 pm [ Quote ]
You have engaged in a personal attack on me instead of refuting the facts I brought up. As conservatives we should not let emotions get in the way of rationality (but sadly that is what happened in the Durbin tempest-in-a-teapot).
Are our Representatives and Senators ready to admit that we have suspended Geneva Convention protections of our inmates in Gitmo, or are we prepared to allow it to become a big target on our back?
Please refrain from responding with your “feelings.” Thank you.
6:39 pm [ Quote ]
“There is nothing Mr. Durbin said in regards to prisoner torture that isn’t untrue.”
jarjarhead. Do you know you wrote that everything Durbin said was untrue? Sounds about right to me.
6:48 pm [ Quote ]
Yeah, I hoped nobody would call me out on that mistype.
What I meant to say is that Mr. Durbin’s comparison of Guantanamo to a communist Cuban gulag, for example, is accurate.
6:55 pm [ Quote ]
Anyone who refuses to apologize when they’ve done or said something wrong, is less than honorable. Anyone who is less than honorable should not be trusted or believed. It really is that simple.
7:14 pm [ Quote ]
Just as Rush Limbaugh is living proof one can do a fine job on drugs, Dick Durbin demonstrates that ignorance and stupidity are our real enemies.
11:12 pm [ Quote ]
“Anyone who refuses to apologize when they’ve done or said something wrong, is less than honorable.”
Mr. Durbin said nothing wrong or inaccurate, so I think he is an honorable man, and I commend him. Bush, on the other hand, lied and misled our country into the war on terror. I think apologies are due from him.
12:43 am [ Quote ]
After reading Senator Durbin’s statement in its entirety it is clear that his words do attempt to place blame on the military personnel at Gitmo and the military in general.
The Senator prattles on about the “interrogators” at Gitmo using “torture techniques”. The Senator has been allowed to infer that the “interrogators” are uniformed military personnel simply by making the following statement. “I believe the torture techniques that have been used at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo and other places fall into that same category”.
We should remember that the individuals put on trial for the situation at Abu Ghraib were uniformed military personnel.
Were they the interrogators at Abu Ghraib ? No they were not.
Are the uniformed military personnel at Gitmo the interrogators that are alleged by an FBI agent to be torturing detainees?
The Senator further attempts to link the “torture” to the military by citing Colin Powell’s opposition to the alleged “setting aside” of the Geneva Convention… “will reverse over a century of U.S. policy and practice… and undermine the protections of the law of war for our own troops… It will undermine public support among critical allies, making military cooperation more difficult to sustain.”
The Senator then praises General Powell as being “wise” and “prophetic” in his opposition to the Bush administration.
Read the entire statement for yourself folks. I believe you will get more out of it than having a reporter or columnist or pundit tell you what they think you should think about it. Read it.
2:59 am [ Quote ]
God the ignorance of the right is sometimes to glaring it hurts my eyes. Durbin didn’t say that the methods the FBI agent described were the EXTREME MEASURES that these regimes used, but they are undeniably still measures that the regimes that Durbing mentioned DID USE, so the comparison is more than fair.
And in terms of enemy combatants not being fitting under the definitions of who is or is not covered by the Geneva Convention, it is absurd for you to jump on some sort of high horse because the Bush administration is playing in a legal black hole. Yes, the fighters didn’t have patches or some sort of identifiable insignia identifying them, but they fulfill every other aspect of article 4.1.1 and 4.1.2 and make a very good case for recognition under article 5. Don’t act like it’s OK what is being done because they aren’t covered by the Geneva convention.
Some of you assholes have gone as far as saying things along the lines of “Who cares if they shit themselves, anything it takes to secure America”, well remember that attitude next time there is footage of American soldiers being tortured.
Durbin hit the nail on the head, the fuss put up by the right is nothign more than a smokescreen for a failing domestic agenda, a failing war, in a failing, virtually lame duck Presidency.
9:46 am [ Quote ]
“...the law of war draws a distinction between the armed forces and the peaceful populations of belligerent nations and also between those who are lawful and unlawful combatants. Lawful combatants are subject to capture and detention as prisoners of war by opposing military forces. Unlawful combatants are likewise subject to capture and detention, but in addition they are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals for acts which render their belligerency unlawful. The spy who secretly and without uniform passes the military lines of a belligerent in time of war, seeking to gather military information and communicate it to the enemy, or an enemy combatant who without uniform comes secretly through the lines for the purpose of waging war by destruction of life or property, are familiar examples of belligerents who are generally deemed not to be entitled to the status of prisoners of war, but to be offenders against the law of war subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals.”
This the part of the GC that talks about lawful and unlawful combatants, no rewrite or revise, these prisonors at Gitmo are unlawful combatants and by all rights the military could set up military tribunals and have them hanged if they are found guilty.
1:09 pm [ Quote ]
Then CHARGE THEM, SET UP THE TRIBUNALS UP AND TRY THEM!
Article 5 of the third convention of the Geneva Convention:
“Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal.”
The U.S. has not convened these tribunals, and as such the prisoners should be treated as P.O.W, instead hiding inside a bit of a legal black hole, but what the administration is doing is far from completely legal. If the administration wants us to be seen as the “beacon of freedom and democracy”, how can it handle this situation in Gitmo under the cover of a legal black hole rather than fully abide by its legal obligations.
You have also failed to mention that being as they are in American custody, they do have the right to file habeas petitions in federal courts for due process, this having been decided by the Supreme Court. Yet, the administration has hampered this process.
This has nothing to do with the left or the right, it has to do with the very soul of what America is.
3:11 pm [ Quote ]
It has everything to do with left and right. Does anyone remember the outrage expressed by liberals when the Bush administration announced that terrorists captured on the battlefield would not be tried in Federal Court but by Military Tribunals?
Liberals(journalists, Democrats in Congress, & the ACLU) were indignant in their arguments against Military Tribunals because the “lefties” theorized that these terrorists would have a secretive and therefore, unfair trial.
Could it be that Senator Durbin and his liberal colleagues don’t want any trials of any kind for the detainees at Gitmo or anywhere else?
I find it troubling that Senator Durbin would use the following quote “Military sources, according to the media, indicate that many detainees have no connection to al-Qaida or the Taliban and were sent to Guantanamo over the objections of intelligence personnel who recommended their release”. According to the media? Because Dan Rather or another talking head says so? Sure thing.
It strains credulity to suggest that the number two Democrat in the United States Senate only knows about these matters because it has been “reported” by the media. Any offiicial reports that are disseminated to members of Congress on this subject have been read by Senator Durbin and/or his staff. Period.
3:16 pm [ Quote ]
Charges aren’t necessary to hold a combatant during wartime, my blue Oregonian friend. If you dispute is that we are at war, then we’ll just have to disagree, and people can judge for themselves who has the facts on their side. If you agree that we are at war, then your argument is that we should apply the rules differently than they are written to suit your sensibilities and/or ideal of what America stands for. This would follow with the liberal (or blue) approach to applying the law generally, which is to have it mean what you want it to mean in a particular situation. Perhaps you could offer a pragmatic solution to the problem of what we ought to do with these +/-525 people who have been actively engaged in combat or acts of or in support of terror against the U.S. Somehow, I doubt that affording non-U.S. citizen full legal protections under the bill of rights is going to be seen as either pragmatic or in accord with mainstream Constitutional thought.
4:23 pm [ Quote ]
M.L. Rine- You are failing to address the point and instead use a cop out, the liberal media, the ACLU, what a crock!
The issue, TL is about legally classfying these detainees. As i noted before, the fifth article of the third convention of the Geneva convention states:
“Should any doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal.?
And here is article 4 for good measure:
Art 4. A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:
(1) Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict, as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
(2) Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:[
(a) that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) that of carrying arms openly;
(d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
(3) Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.
Until the detainees are tried by a competent tribunal, they are covered by the Geneva Convention. I’m not rewriting anything, i’m not even interpreting the Geneva Convention, i’m stating the convention.
As far as a pragmatic solution to the 525 people who have supposedly actively engaged in combat against the U.S., you either try and convict them, or if you don’t have the evidence to do that you let them go. That’s not only the solution, that’s our obligation as a signatory to the Geneva Convention.
12:47 am [ Quote ]
BlueInOR-
This discussion began in response to comments made by Senator Durbin from the well of the Senate about Gitmo.
My comments/responses have included exact quotes taken from Senator Durbin’s speech. I have tried to use the Senator’s own words to show how a man with a liberal ideology feels about the detainees being held at Gitmo. (And that he has a serious axe to grind with the current POTUS.) Do you understand that these are simply Senator Durbin’s own words?
Do you dispute the fact that members of the Democrat party in the United States Congress, members of the media and the ACLU expressed outrage by the mere suggestion that these terrorist detainees might possibly be tried by means of a Military Tribunal? Are you suggesting that wasn’t the response by liberals?
There are others here, I’m sure, that would agree with the notion that this group of ragtag terrorists were not in any way conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. Do you say that they were, Blue?
Lastly my friend, I will not even pretend that I understand anyone who can be so uninformed as to say that members of the Taliban and Al Qaeda are among those “525 people who have supposedly actively engaged in combat against the U.S.”.
Did you really mean to say “supposedly actively engaged in combat against the U.S.” ?
Supposedly?
If the Taliban and Al Qaeda aren’t currently engaged in combat against the U.S. military in Afghanistan and Iraq, then who are we engaged in a shooting War against on a daily basis ?
What more proof do you require, Blue?
1:04 pm [ Quote ]
Blue,
I’ll take it from your reliance upon the GC that you agree that we are at war and that this is not a law enforcement matter. While you quote from the GC, you fail to apply it correctly, assuming that there is some doubt as to the status of those taken off of the battlefield or engaged in terrorist activities. Is there anybody in Gitmo or any of our detention facilities that meet all of the conditions Article 4A2 required for non-conventional forces to be included? No. And yet, you maintain that there is some doubt as to whether or not the GC applies to these people. That is an enormous and erroneous assumption on your part. Without that element of doubt, the requirement for a tribunal is not applicable, and yet we are attempting to provide one that will not compromise our sources and methods.
I would submit that the classifications most similar to those we are fighting and holding is that of a pirate or a spy. Either way, the GC does not extend to them.
As for your suggestion of letting them go, make that your platform for winning the next election and see how far you get. Wrapping yourself and your idealism in truth, justice and the American way doesn’t make your ill-founded ideas any better. It just makes you look cynical.
6:39 pm [ Quote ]
Hey Blue,
We will continue to disagree about this subject being a highly political one. You on the left and me on the right.
You have said that the terrorist detainees at Gitmo should be classified in such a manner that they would deserve the protections afforded under the Geneva Convention.
I could not disagree more with you on that point.
These fourteen words are the basis for excluding these detainees because they do not fulfill this condition: “that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war”.
In fact the Geneva Convention does consider them to be combatants by definition.
By virtue of their actions and tactics they will never meet this condition. Never.
But not because you or I say so Blue.
Because the Geneva Convention says so.
That is about as complicated as it needs to be Blue.