Media Repression in a ?Liberated? Land -

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: CQuinn

I still see no "freedom of the press" specifically stated therein

Chapter 2: Article 13(B); freedom of expression carries as implicit both freedom of speech and written word.

Chapter 2: Article 23 expands upon the stated right to include the interpretation of
practices and principles already in common usage in other constitutional governments.

The U.S. Constitution is relevant to this discussion, as it was (claimed as) the primary documentary
source for the U.S. to aid Irag in creation of thier own constitutional government. As such, all the
enumerated (and many of the implied) rights accorded by the source document(s) can and should be regarded when interpreting the statements of the Iragi document.

I repeat again:

"I still see no "freedom of the press" specifically stated therein. "

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: CQuinn

I still see no "freedom of the press" specifically stated therein

Chapter 2: Article 13(B); freedom of expression carries as implicit both freedom of speech and written word.

Chapter 2: Article 23 expands upon the stated right to include the interpretation of
practices and principles already in common usage in other constitutional governments.

The U.S. Constitution is relevant to this discussion, as it was (claimed as) the primary documentary
source for the U.S. to aid Irag in creation of thier own constitutional government. As such, all the
enumerated (and many of the implied) rights accorded by the source document(s) can and should be regarded when interpreting the statements of the Iragi document.

I repeat again:

"I still see no "freedom of the press" specifically stated therein. "

Well, we all know how much you neocons love to play word games.

WMD threat becomes WMD program becomes regime change becomes freedom and democracy becomes democracy spreading in the Middle East becomes the New World Order becomes the New American Century.

Words don't matter anymore when you can use them any way you like then tell everyone that's not what you meant.

 

[imhotepmp]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: CQuinn

I still see no "freedom of the press" specifically stated therein

Chapter 2: Article 13(B); freedom of expression carries as implicit both freedom of speech and written word.

Chapter 2: Article 23 expands upon the stated right to include the interpretation of
practices and principles already in common usage in other constitutional governments.

The U.S. Constitution is relevant to this discussion, as it was (claimed as) the primary documentary
source for the U.S. to aid Irag in creation of thier own constitutional government. As such, all the
enumerated (and many of the implied) rights accorded by the source document(s) can and should be regarded when interpreting the statements of the Iragi document.

I repeat again:

"I still see no "freedom of the press" specifically stated therein. "

You are incredibly dense.

Imouthes

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: CQuinn

I still see no "freedom of the press" specifically stated therein

Chapter 2: Article 13(B); freedom of expression carries as implicit both freedom of speech and written word.

Chapter 2: Article 23 expands upon the stated right to include the interpretation of
practices and principles already in common usage in other constitutional governments.

The U.S. Constitution is relevant to this discussion, as it was (claimed as) the primary documentary
source for the U.S. to aid Irag in creation of thier own constitutional government. As such, all the
enumerated (and many of the implied) rights accorded by the source document(s) can and should be regarded when interpreting the statements of the Iragi document.

I repeat again:

"I still see no "freedom of the press" specifically stated therein. "

Well, we all know how much you neocons love to play word games.

Excuse me? Who is playing word games? I asked a concise question and got BS and "implicit" definitions shoved in my face instead.

WMD threat becomes WMD program becomes regime change becomes freedom and democracy becomes democracy spreading in the Middle East becomes the New World Order becomes the New American Century.

From strawman to diversion tactic. How...transparent.

:yawn;

Words don't matter anymore when you can use them any way you like then tell everyone that's not what you meant.

Keep repeating that to yourself.

Originally posted by: imhotepmp
You are incredibly dense.

Imouthes

Thanks for your valuable contribution to clarity and understanding.

Please drive through.

:roll:

 

[GrGr]

Since when is reporting de facto US war crimes, for example, 'freedom to incite violence'?

Are not the Iraqi people entiteled to know the truth?

To close down Iraqi media because the US invaders are committing war crimes and atrocities is to shoot the messenger and nothing more than a totalitarian power ploy.

And what about the US media that revelled in the Bush administrations warmongering propaganda before and during the early stages of the invasion of Iraq? Does the rule of not having 'freedom to incite violence' apply to US media as well?

 

[imported_Aelius]

Originally posted by: GrGr
Since when is reporting de facto US war crimes, for example, 'freedom to incite violence'?

Are not the Iraqi people entiteled to know the truth?

To close down Iraqi media because the US invaders are committing war crimes and atrocities is to shoot the messenger and nothing more than a totalitarian power ploy.

And what about the US media that revelled in the Bush administrations warmongering propaganda before and during the early stages of the invasion of Iraq? Does the rule of not having 'freedom to incite violence' apply to US media as well?

Touche.