REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Now Rand Paul Thinks It’s OK To Kill U.S. Citizens With Drones On American Soil?

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 05:03
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 528
PAGE 1 of 1

Tuesday, April 23, 2013 7:27 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

Remember when Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) stood up on the Senate floor for nearly 13 hours in an ideological protest of the Obama administration’s hypothetical authority to use drone technology to kill U.S. citizens on American soil? Well, now he’s saying killing a certain U.S. citizen on some specific American soil in Watertown, Massachusetts last Friday may not have been the worst thing in the world.

During an interview with Neil Cavuto on Fox Business Network Monday night, Paul attempted to make a distinction between the American “sitting in a café” example he has often cited and the “imminent threat” faced by Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Friday night. “I’ve never argued against any technology being used when you have an imminent threat, an active crime going on,” Paul said. Though his next example offered up a disturbingly low bar for the predator drone option. “If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash,” he said, “I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him.”

“It’s different,” Paul continued, “if they want to come fly over your hot tub or your yard
just because they want to do surveillance on everyone and watch your activities.” But again, he added, “if there’s killer on the loose in a neighborhood, I’m not against drones being used.”

Paul’s comments in light of the Boston suspect’s arrest are a far cry from his staunchly anti-drone stance just last month. At the very beginning of his filibuster, Paul delivered the words below, which appear to directly contradict his statements from last night.
Quote:

“I will speak as long as it takes, until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast that our Constitution is important, that your rights to trial by jury are precious, that no American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court.”

The purpose of the filibuster was to put pressure on Attorney General Eric Holder and the CIA’s John Brennan to renounce the idea of using drones to kill American citizens. During the Boston investigation last week, the Obama administration along with the FBI made a very deliberate choice to capture the younger suspect alive. Not only because that is the lawful thing to do with a suspect who, however dangerous, is not resisting arrest, but also because preserving the ability to question him will give the country to best chance at finding answers as to why he and his brother committed the attack.

Up until the interview last night, Paul had been remarkably silent about the Tsarnaev case, making no attempts to stand up for the rights of this American citizen, no matter how heinous his crimes were. The only public move he did make was to petition Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to delay the immigration debate until after the Boston hearings. “The facts emerging in the Boston Marathon bombing have exposed a weakness in our current system,” Paul wrote. “If we don’t use this debate as an opportunity to fix flaws in our current system, flaws made even more evident last week, then we will not be doing our jobs.” http://www.mediaite.com/tv/now-rand-paul-thinks-its-ok-to-kill-u-s-cit
izens-with-drones-on-american-soil/


How quickly they change their tune...

I'm assuming it should be Rand Paul or some other Republican who should be in charge of deciding whether the person they want to use drones against is guilty or innocent, yes?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 23, 2013 7:46 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash,” he said, “I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him.”






I think Senator Paul has forgotten a third, court-sanctioned outcome: how 'bout if the policeman apprehends him, takes him to court, lets a jury decide if the person is guilty or innocent, then imprisons that hold-up man as required by law? And you're right, Niki, a couple of paragraphs later, he does stand up for trial by jury. I think that one's in the Constitution somewhere, or maybe the Bill of Rights, if ya wanta split hairs.

Maybe that only applies to him and his friends?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 23, 2013 7:48 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


"Maybe that only applies to him and his friends?"

The entire point of the last few things I have quoted; that apparently IS how they think. Which is scarier than anything they EVER accuse "The Left" of, and they're completely unaware of it.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:34 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Okay, I'm barely here at all these days, but Niki, did you post anything about the state senator telling the guy at the town hall to be quiet because he's the senator and the other guy is just a citizen?

If not, I can probably find it.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, April 24, 2013 5:03 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Oh, yes, please do; I've been posting so much of this crap, I'm not at all surprised you haven't followed it all--I hardly expect anyone to! But that's a goodie, and worthy of reminding the righties of THEIR "representative" in action! ;o)

Tho' in all fairness, I think more than one Democratic Congressman or Senator can be found to have told a constituent to sit down and shut up at one time or another...


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Elections; 2024
Thu, March 28, 2024 21:07 - 2072 posts
Biden
Thu, March 28, 2024 21:04 - 852 posts
Russia says 60 dead, 145 injured in concert hall raid; Islamic State group claims responsibility
Thu, March 28, 2024 21:02 - 54 posts
China
Thu, March 28, 2024 20:53 - 446 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, March 28, 2024 17:24 - 3413 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, March 28, 2024 17:20 - 6155 posts
BUILD BACK BETTER!
Thu, March 28, 2024 16:32 - 9 posts
Well... He was no longer useful to the DNC or the Ukraine Money Laundering Scheme... So justice was served
Thu, March 28, 2024 12:44 - 1 posts
Salon: NBC's Ronna blunder: A failed attempt to appeal to MAGA voters — except they hate her too
Thu, March 28, 2024 07:04 - 1 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Wed, March 27, 2024 23:21 - 987 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Wed, March 27, 2024 15:03 - 824 posts
NBC News: Behind the scenes, Biden has grown angry and anxious about re-election effort
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:58 - 2 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL