Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: Get this. Eric Holder, the attorney general, just said that our commandos acted in self-defense in the raid to get Bin Laden. Yeah, this gets murkier and murkier every time somebody in this regime speaks up about it. How could they have acted in self-defense when nobody in the house was armed? We’ve been told that everybody in there was unarmed. You know, I think the media’s unhappy we got this piece from Mark Halperin at TIME, unhappy with the way the regime is handling the aftermath, Politico, ditto. And I think what’s going on here is the State-Controlled Media is unhappy they’re not getting clear marching orders from the regime on how to handle this. There are conflicting talking points going out and they don’t want to have to wing it and think for themselves. They want to be on the same page as the regime, but people inside the regime are not on the same page.

For example, CNN is now reporting the story about the daughter of Bin Laden witnessing her father’s shooting, but they left out her claim that he was shot after he was captured. She has said that her father, Osama Bin Laden, was shot after he was captured. CNN also reported Bin Laden had $750 sewn into his clothes and that he had two telephone numbers on him. It’s a wonder they haven’t given out the phone numbers, but I’m guessing they’re saving that for the New York Times. Now, a treasure trove, by the way, ladies and gentlemen, a treasure trove of intel is being gathered. Five computers, hard drives, floppy disks, whatever. Why, if there was no Internet access? We’ve been told there were no phone lines in or out, that there was no Internet access, that there was no television. Well, why all the computers, then? And, by the way, there’s a giant satellite dish in that compound. Have you seen the pictures? Huge dish there. A lot of things don’t jibe.

Pakistani authorities say that there were no weapons found in the Bin Laden luxury mansion and here’s Eric Holder saying that this all took place in self-defense. Now, speaking of a treasure trove of intel, wouldn’t an alive Bin Laden have been an even bigger treasure trove of intel? But you and I both know the last thing this regime wanted was an alive Bin Laden. “Why, Mr. Limbaugh? Why do you say that? What is so obvious to you that the regime was, as you say, would not want a live Bin Laden?” Very simply, Mr. New Castrati, the last thing this regime wanted was a Bin Laden alive subjected to their own foolish policies: an ACLU lawyer, a civilian trial, Miranda rights, they’d be politically DOA if they tried that. They didn’t want an alive Bin Laden in any way, shape, manner, or form.

Speaking of which, we want to go back to our archives, the Grooveyard of Forgotten Favorites. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was ecstatic when he learned that Eric Holder wanted to try him in public in a civil criminal court, public criminal court in New York City. Club Gitmo has its own recording studio and KSM made a beeline for it. We had the tune exclusively here on the EIB Network.

(playing of song)

RUSH: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, from Club Gitmo.

(continued playing of song)

RUSH: White comedian Paul Shanklin as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and New York, New York, back in the days when the regime wanted the trial in New York City rather than a military commission at a Club Gitmo. No, no, no. Snerdley, I’m dead serious. There was no way, there is no way they were gonna take Bin Laden alive. There was no way this administration is gonna bring him here alive and apply their own sissified techniques to this guy. You talk about politically DOA. If you bring Osama Bin Laden anywhere, you put him in Club Gitmo and you give him an ACLU lawyer and you promise him a trial, everything they’ve done with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, there’s no way they were going to apply their own sissified policies that they’ve tried on everybody else to Bin Laden. And if they kept him alive and they brought him here and they did anything other than that their base would go absolutely nuts.

I mean this regime has talked about restoring American values, America’s reputation around the world, Miranda rights and all this on the battlefield. If they capture the guy and they bring him here and they don’t treat him the way they have demanded that every other prisoner be treated, they’re in heap, heap big doo-doo. There’s no way. No way whatsoever. (interruption) Well, they did just say they shot him. Obama, pretty much just like with those Somali pirates, I pulled the trigger, I, me, my. And now all of a sudden Holder says it’s self-defense. The Pakistanis said there weren’t any weapons in there. By the way, this luxury mansion was built by Mohammed Abu Faraj al-Libi who was the number three guy. I don’t know who the architect was, but clearly these people are still in the seventh century.

So al-Libi built the thing, and he later was captured. The Pakistanis got him on a tip from us, from US authorities. It was built in 2003 by Mohammed Abu Faraj al-Libi, who was the guy who replaced Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. (interruption) Will that place become a shrine? Hell, it already is a media shrine. Well, we’re not gonna blow it up. That’s up to the Pakistanis. We’ve already done our bit, got in there, got it, and gotten out. We’re not gonna blow the place up. Well, who knows what we’ll do. They claim we don’t want a shrine to Bin Laden, but there that it is. Media’s using it as a shrine. Now the kids, when their soccer balls go over the wall can actually go get the ball now rather than have to be paid two or three bucks. So the neighborhood’s probably a little happier about it.


RUSH: Here’s Eric Holder. I referenced this earlier. I want you to hear the bite. Shortly after this program started today, just after noon, Holder was testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

HOLDER: Let me make something very clear. The operation in which Oooosama Bin Laden was killed was lawful. He was the head of Al-Qaeda, an organization that had conducted the attacks of September the 11th. He admitted his involvement. As you indicate, he said he would not be taken alive. The operation against Bin Laden was justified as an act of national self-defense.

RUSH: Okay. There you have it. It just gets more convoluted every time the regime opens up. “National self-defense.” Unharmed. There were no weapons in there. By the way, the dollar has hit a three-year low. How can that be? Obama killed Osama! How can that be? And how about this? According to CNN, 44.2 million Americans now use food stamps. That’s one out of every seven Americans use food stamps. But Obama killed Osama! How can there be any bad news? How can this happen? Unemployment, private sector: “US private employers added fewer jobs than expected in April,” but… but… Obama killed Osama! This is not possible. This bad news shouldn’t be happening.

From The Politico: “Amid some inconsistencies in early Administration and media accounts of Osama bin Laden’s death, a reader points out that President Obama himself was always — if very subtly — clear that the terrorist was not killed in a shootout. Indeed, two pieces of language that seem more consistent with Bin Laden’s being shot and killed deliberately — as, in some reports, was the goal of the mission — than in his being shot ‘resisting,’ as if in some kind of police action. Obama said Sunday night:

“‘Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability. No Americans were harmed. They took care to avoid civilian casualties. After a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body.'” They shot an unarmed Bin Laden after a firefight. “The key word there is ‘after,’ not ‘during,’ and it matches the revised White House account. You had to be listening extremely carefully the first night to catch that nuance.

“In less formal remarks last night, Obama offered a similar sequence, describing ‘an operation that resulted in the capture and death of Osama bin Laden.'” The UK Daily Mail: “Shot Dead ‘With Money Sewn into His Clothes’ — Osama Bin Laden’s daughter has claimed he was captured alive in his Pakistani hideout and then shot by U.S. special forces, it was reported today. Arabic news network Al-Arabiya quoted ‘senior Pakistani security officials’ who said the 12-year-old saw her father executed and his body dragged to a helicopter. … Bin Laden had money and two phone numbers sewn into his clothes …”

They haven’t released the phone numbers. They’re probably, as I say, saving that for the New York Times. Speaking of which, from the New York Times: “New U.S. Account Says Bin Laden Was Unarmed During Raid — Osama bin Laden was not carrying a weapon when he was killed by American troops in a fortified house in Pakistan, the White House said Tuesday, as it revised its initial account of the nighttime raid. Members of a Navy Seals team burst in on Bin Laden in the compound where he was hiding and shot him in a room on an upper floor, after a fierce gun battle with other operatives of Al Qaeda on the first floor,” but the Pakistanis said were there no weapons anywhere in this compound.

“Bin Laden’s wife, who was with him in the room, ‘rushed the U.S. assaulter and was shot in the leg but not killed,’ said the White House spokesman, Jay Carney, reading from the brief account, which was provided by the Defense Department. ‘Bin Laden was then shot and killed. He was not armed,'” and then it says this: “But the episode also reveals the pressures as the White House, intent on telling a dramatic story about a successful operation, sought to manage a 24-hour news media ravenous for immediate and vivid details. … Other experts noted that the members of the Navy SEALs faced difficult conditions, moving through dim rooms under gunfire, and needing to make a split-second judgment about whether Bin Laden posed a threat.

“‘They say he was unarmed now, but did the SEALs know he was unarmed?’ said Scott L. Silliman, an expert on wartime legal doctrine at Duke University Law School. ‘It was in the dark. They were wearing goggles.'” All of a sudden now — and I’m glad, don’t misunderstand — the troops get compassion now, but remember when these same SEALs were knocking on doors in Haditha? Remember when the Marines were knocking were knocking on doors and it was John Kerry and John Murtha were calling them terrorists? They were terrorizing women and children? A Navy SEAL was court-martialed for giving a terrorist leader in Iraq a fat lip. But now members of the Navy SEALs face “difficult conditions, moving through dim rooms under gunfire” while the stress in the air-conditioned Situation Room mounted.

Washington Post: “Osama Bin Laden Resisted Assault But was Unarmed.” Self-defense, you see?


RUSH: Here’s Andrew in Chicago. Andrew, I’m glad you waited, and welcome to the EIB Network.

CALLER: Mr. Limbaugh, it’s a pleasure to be talking with you today.

RUSH: Thank you, sir.

CALLER: Sir, I had a comment regarding Osama Bin Laden’s burial at sea.

RUSH: Yes, sir?

CALLER: If he was labeled a “combatant,” the law of the land, the UCMJ, we are obligated to give him a military burial. Your military is held to a much higher standard, regardless of our individual feelings toward the person.

RUSH: Why didn’t they just say that, then?

CALLER: I’m sorry, sir?

RUSH: Why don’t they just say that, if that’s the rationale they’re using?

CALLER: I cannot speak for my commander-in-chief, sir. I can’t speak for anybody else in the military. But as far as off on the lower rung of things, the guys who just take the orders —

RUSH: But wait a second.


RUSH: Pardon the interruption. This administration’s made it plain that they don’t consider terrorists to be military combatants, that they are not the same as soldiers on the battlefield. They are committing illegal criminal acts. They deserve to be Mirandized and all that. In fact, that is one of the contradictions in Eric Holder claiming they went ahead and shot him because he is a military enemy, and they call this self-defense because Osama was a military enemy. But this regime has gone out of its way to make it plain that in their view, this is not a subject where they talk about military combatants. They’re all over the ballpark on this. So bottom line, you don’t think there’s anything really wrong with the 40-minute ceremony on board the Vinson and then carefully laying the body at sea?

CALLER: I know it’s gonna aggravate a lot of people by me saying so, but fact of the matter is: No, sir. If a Navy SEAL was held at gunpoint by Osama Bin Laden and he was firing back or had hostile intent, he is considered — no matter really, as far as my understanding of the law of armed conflict, as far as I’m concerned — he was considered a combatant if he was firing at anybody in uniform.

RUSH: Quick question, 45 seconds. We’re told there were no weapons in that compound, and that Bin Laden was not firing back.

CALLER: Sir, he was one of the most highly wanted men on the planet.

RUSH: That’s true.

CALLER: Period. I’m just an individual from Illinois. I have a weapon. I can guarantee that every person over there is just about armed. I’ve been over there a few different times and I’ve never met anybody that’s not armed.

RUSH: Okay, but that’s the thing. Here we go. That’s fine; that’s the normal thing. We would all think that thing was loaded with weapons and ammo, but we’re being told by our regime that there were no weapons. The Pakistanis back it up. There was no firefight. This regime has further said — I don’t think people are hearing me — that terrorists are not military combatants. They are plain and simple criminals.


RUSH: I have, ladies and gentlemen, in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers (shuffling paper) a communique from a friend of mine who is highly achieved in the field of the law. He said, “Rush, your last caller is wrong because Bin Laden was an unlawful combatant. That is, he is a combatant. The Obama administration’s wrong on that, of course. But because he did not comply with the laws of war — i.e., he didn’t wear a uniform; he was not part of a regular military chain of command; he did not carry weapons openly, and he targeted civilians — he did not qualify for treatment as a lawful or honorable combatant.

“The treatment your caller was talking about is reserved for lawful combatants, and Bin Laden was unlawful.” This goes to the whole thing about Holder who issued (March 13th of 2009, I think it was) a statement that the United States had abandoned the Bush administration term “enemy combatant,” and he did that in an effort to try to argue that terrorists should get civilian trials. So they were considered unlawful military combatants, and therefore they were subject to military tribunals. They can’t have it both ways on this.

You can’t sit here and say this guy was a normal military combatant who was owed the traditions and honor of normal, lawful military combatants killed in action and how they are disposed of. This bunch is so all over the ballpark, it is impossible to keep up with them — and remember, as I mention merely moments ago (brilliantly, I might add) here’s Holder out there today saying, “Well, look, this was a self-defense operation! I mean, this guy was an enemy of the United States. This guy was a national military target.”

No! You people yourselves have said they are not military targets. They are common criminals with Miranda rights. We don’t grant Miranda rights and so forth (nor lawyers) to lawful combatants on the battlefield. So here’s Holder doing a 180 today to justify this, and he’s speaking on the basis that the news reports are there were no guns, there was no ammo, there was no firefight and people ask, “Why did you go in there with guns a-blazing?” Okay, well, now it’s time to pretend he was a soldier, when they had stripped that away by virtue of the fact that he wasn’t.

That’s why the whole argument about whether or not the Geneva Conventions apply to these people was had, and they don’t.


RUSH: Let’s very simply establish a timeline here. On Sunday night we’re all minding our own business, and the networks all stop what they’re doing ’cause at 10:30 Obama is going to make a major announcement. So at 10:30 NBC interrupts The Celebrity Apprentice, Trump’s show, one night after Obama tells ridiculous Trump jokes at the White House Correspondents Dinner. But Obama doesn’t go on for an hour. He’s scheduled to appear at 10:30, finally shows up at 11:30 or maybe a little later. Then we get the announcement of what happened, and from Sunday night through Monday, all kinds of variations on the story take place, different versions here and different versions there.

Then yesterday Panetta tells us that the photos are going to be released around two p.m., between two and 2:30. I got a note from somebody that said, “You can use this, this is good, it’s official: Photo to be released at two or 2:30 says Panetta.” No photo yesterday, no photo last night, no photo this morning. Finally we find out no photo period by virtue of Obama announcing it in an interview being taped for 60 Minutes on Sunday night. Meanwhile, the story of the raid is changing by the hour, and then there’s this from the UK Telegraph: The assault team sent into his hideout… Oh, I left something out.

“US commandos were told to assume Osama bin Laden was wearing a suicide vest, and must be killed, unless he was naked when they found him, it has emerged. — The assault team sent into his hideout would only have accepted surrender if they could be sure he had nothing hidden under his clothing, meaning his fate was sealed as soon as he was found in his bedclothes. The admission by John Brennan…” Now, why didn’t they tell us this Sunday night? Why didn’t they tell us this Monday?

This is Wednesday afternoon, and we are just learning that the commandos, the assaulters, SEAL Team Six, were told to kill Bin Laden because of fears he was wearing a suicide vest, and only if he was nude were they to capture him, otherwise blow him to bits. Now, on Monday, we had stories saying that it was a capture mission, and Reuters came out and said, “Nope, it was a kill mission from the get-go.” Then they started debating that. Then we heard that it was a wife acting as a human shield who shouted, “No, Osama, no!” that he had used her and shoved her in front of the gunfire.

Then that changed. “No, it was a daughter!” Then it was a wife who was shot in the leg. Then Nic Robertson gives us the news that we can’t do without, that neighborhood children’s soccer balls were not returned to ’em when the balls were kicked over the wall of the compound into the luxury mansion yard. Now this from the UK Daily Mail: “CNN’s Nic Robertson documented the plants growing alongside cabbages and potatoes in a report from the region on Tuesday,” and there is a picture of the marijuana plant growing in the luxury mansion backyard where Osama was living. “Pakistan makes around $4billion a year from drug trafficking — though opium is more popular than cannabis.

“No doubt there will also be some Google review reaction to the advert for Jamia Ashrafia’s girls’ college crudely scrawled on one of the compound’s walls. Bin Laden,” it says here, “was not well known for his progressive female education policies…” (laughing) Progressive female education policies! (laughing) He was growing dope.


RUSH: You know, wait ’til that pothead, George Soros, finds out that Bin Laden was growing marijuana in his compound. Somebody double-check this for me, but I think that marijuana is considered to be against Islam. It’s not condoned. You don’t think I’m right about that, Snerdley? Well, I know they make money and sell poppy, heroin, opium and so forth, but I don’t think that alcohol, all that stuff, I don’t think you’re supposed to use it. Oh, don’t give me this “it’s for the staff” business. The staff would be all Muslims as well and don’t give me this renal failure business because he had kidney problems and medical marijuana. Still, wait ’til the left gets a load of this. Okay, I told you, it’s unlawful. Marijuana, heroin, and opiates are unlawful in Islam.

I’ve got a story here. This is the UK Telegraph from Toby Harnden in April of 2009. We’ll link to this a RushLimbaugh.com so you can see it. “Barack Obama to Release up to 2,000 Photographs of Prisoner Abuse.” Two thousand photographs of prisoner abuse. Obama could not wait to release them.


RUSH: Carney just said, “Consistent with the laws of war, Bin Laden’s surrender would have been accepted if feasible.” But they would not explain how it was not feasible, and these people are not part of a war, according to this regime anyway. So the confusion continues.


*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This