Rand Paul Filibustering Over Drones: I Will Not Let Obama ‘Shred the Constitution’

You know, Obama didn't say anything about bombing Americans. Holder gave an off the cuff answer to a tough question and everyone's crucifying the whole administration for it. Until I see where Obama said to bomb people I don't think anyone has a right to attack him about this.

reply to post by CB328


First, you would need to understand the difference between a bomb,
and a hellfire missile. Obama has authorized drone strikes that have
killed thousands of people abroad by way of a drone overhead,
zoom missile launched target out, 30 dead. 1 target 29 collateral damage.

Mission accomplished.

reply to post by burntheships


I realize this is late in the thread and will most likely go unnoticed. I agree with your post. Drones are despicable. When in the future will it be "PC" to discuss how technology is going to kill us all?

We can remotely view, spy kill whatever. We can destroy power plants with malware. We can tap into every persons views in a click. Will the next President be accused of using the latest technology or be applauded?

CJ

Originally posted by CB328
You know, Obama didn't say anything about bombing Americans. Holder gave an off the cuff answer to a tough question and everyone's crucifying the whole administration for it. Until I see where Obama said to bomb people I don't think anyone has a right to attack him about this.

The decision to drone strike an American citizen and MINOR overseas and without due process was that of the executive branch/Obama/Obama Admin/White House, whatever you want to call it. The point of the filibuster was to ask the Obama administration if they thought it was Constitutional to do the same to an American here on US SOIL without due process.

At what point do Obama supporters like yourself wake up and start questioning his decisions? Seems like half the internet (figuratively not literally) has woken up to question Obama's authority.

Prosecuting whistleblowers
NDAA
Drone strikes
Shady CZAR appointments
Lying about not reauthorizing the Patriot Act
Tax breaks for the corporations but tax increases for the poor

Name your poison, they're all true and they all must be exposed.

reply to post by ColoradoJens


You are noticed. This is my best answer with all sincerity.

This seems to be an advancing agenda...with many of the game rules
changing. One of the rules that was changed after 9/11....al Qaeda became
an enemy without a country.

Many people initally bought into that, then came the
continued infringements upon Americans rights, from the Patriot Act ...all the way
to the Airport checks with TSA and many of us thought that it was our duty to
comply after all nothing to hide so why worry...then in comes the drone strikes
on the key members of al Queda and and many people were ...yeah get them with the drones.

Now...a decade later bin Laden is dead many times over and al Qaeda is all but defeated
according to Obama....but however in the last 4 years drone strikes have taken out at least
2,700 people perhaps 4, 700....and now all of the sudden we have a new drone base in
Niger to hunt al Qaeda there as its supposedly a harbor for thousands of new al Qaeda
operatives. What I see, and many people see is that drones strikes were launched
on the back of the terrorism war but have now been extended into killing associates
of al Qaeda, in occupations, with thousands of dead by way of collateral damage.

So here we are, a decade later and now al Qaeda is "everywhere", advancing and now even
law abiding citizens in the U.S have been spied on with drones, some have been convicted with
data from drone camera footage...yes wandering cows to pasture...

Will Obama be lauded with praise? It seems many scrutinize this infringment upon
our rights as U.S. citizens....though some say it is fair. In the long run I see this as an agenda
to strip away the freedoms that are granted to us U.S. citizens in the U.S. Constitution,
and The Bill of Rights. The war against terrorism has come home to America with the
drones. Will enough people wake up, and stand by the few in office
and reject this advancment of terror in the skies? Only time will tell.

One thing is for certain, the people need leaders, otherwise most will wander the
fields looking for the next batch of green grass.

reply to post by eLPresidente


Again, agreed in sequence of posts. The question seems to me to be when will we realize technology has stripped the balance of understanding. When will we finally realize having a camera in your bed room recording you is wrong? Is it too late already? We are after all computer cultures.

CJ

reply to post by burntheships


The reason why you are such a respected member here bts's is that you respond as such, imo.

Perhaps the drone deal is simply math. Easier and cheaper way to kill, along with no causalties on "our" side.
Your #'s show the indescriminate nature of a hell-fire missle. The "unknowns" remain and always will. Remeber the Reuters (could be wrong) journalists in Iraq getting blown up? Hard to know (as of now) what is really in someone's hand from 1200 feet. Regardless. The "public" was upset kids were dying on "our" side. This was a not too far fetched result. Now it has turned on us. We need to say that sometimes we have out-thought ourselves with the tech we have at hand.

CJ

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
Now it has turned on us. We need to say that sometimes we have out-thought ourselves with the tech we have at hand.

CJ

Yes, this is a very key element you have brought into the discussion, thanks!



Drone strikes did take place during the Bush
presidency, though the numbers were very small. Yet there were no governing
rules over drone strikes then, and now 5 years later there are no rules.

In that amount of time the tech has increased, yet not the governance.
And in that all, one thing to remember and its no small thing is a life
is a life, wars supposedly justify taking lives but do they really?
One must ask, are the drone killings over U.S. sovereignty, or are they
for advancment of occupations that serve a NWO reshape of power and
resources.

When I find myself cheering U.N. hearings on the matter of drone strikes,
its a very sad day. This is also why so many people, ( imo) millions of people
were cheering Rand Paul on, as he asked these very questions.

Young minds understand technology, its not such a struggle for them to see
that in a few years, this spy and killingtech will be out of control, and must be
reigned in under new legislation, and governed according to The Constitution
and The Bill of Rights.

In addition, there are different rules for the battlefield, and the "homeland"
as it was named under Bush ( I always shudder at that name) ....
The military can not police the U.S., the CIA is prohibited from use of
force, and is not (supposedly) allowed to operate in The U.S.

So, if here in the U.S. drones are to be operating as the spy in the sky,
by law it can not be military or CIA...which leaves the LE, and they must
operate within the laws, accordingly providing due process....they can
not just take out people who are breaking laws, and surveillance must
be according to the laws that protect innocent until proven guilty.

reply to post by burntheships


I think based upon recent events of domestic drone use we can both agree it is high time the youth of the world, born into this tech says, "no way dude". Of course, most USA'ers you speak with think it is fine and dandy. More time I guess.

CJ

Originally posted by CB328
You know, Obama didn't say anything about bombing Americans. Holder gave an off the cuff answer to a tough question and everyone's crucifying the whole administration for it. Until I see where Obama said to bomb people I don't think anyone has a right to attack him about this.

What Obama said was "I don't intend to" You are right, he never said that he was going to do this, but he also tried to keep the option open to Presidents, that was the issue. During the 13hr filibuster Sen. Paul said repeatedly that he didn't believe that our current president had any plans to do so. All he wanted was confirmation that the POTUS does not have the authority even if he did want to.

Originally posted by CB328
You know, Obama didn't say anything about bombing Americans. Holder gave an off the cuff answer to a tough question and everyone's crucifying the whole administration for it. Until I see where Obama said to bomb people I don't think anyone has a right to attack him about this.

i agree...

this whole thing is ridiculous, imo..

americans would never be bombed in this country, will never happen..

its just right wing propaganda.

reply to post by cornucopia


You are naive to put it kindly. or nicely.

You believe that basic human nature is good.

You believe that because you are around
friends and family that share that paradigm.

If everybody in the world just had their needs
met than everyone would be at peace and
get along and love each other to death.

Originally posted by slugger9787
reply to post by cornucopia

 

You are naive to put it kindly. or nicely.

You believe that basic human nature is good.

You believe that because you are around
friends and family that share that paradigm.

If everybody in the world just had their needs
met than everyone would be at peace and
get along and love each other to death.

basic Human nature is good, i KNOW this

we are much more amazing than what we have been told...

we are all powerful, playful spiritual beings, ALL an actual piece of God...

sure there are some people in their minds that are "dark" as you would perceive and that is just ego as our true selves love each other...

how could you not love yourself?

lol

sounds complex, but it's very simple..

you/we are God

Thank You

so as an immortal being i KNOW that ALL is well

While I commend the fact that Rand stood up and questioned the drone program (somebody needed to, regardless of their agenda, method) I am happy of the response Holder gave. Obviously Holders response will not be enough, but then again no response will.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
While I commend the fact that Rand stood up and questioned the drone program (somebody needed to, regardless of their agenda, method) I am happy of the response Holder gave. Obviously Holders response will not be enough, but then again no response will.

While he gave Rand a response it took a while. Did you see how many times it took Ted Cruz to get Holder say it was unconstitutional? You may be happy with it but it was like pulling teeth. Holder did not want to admit it was unconstitutional.

Originally posted by cornucopia

Originally posted by CB328
You know, Obama didn't say anything about bombing Americans. Holder gave an off the cuff answer to a tough question and everyone's crucifying the whole administration for it. Until I see where Obama said to bomb people I don't think anyone has a right to attack him about this.

i agree...

this whole thing is ridiculous, imo..

americans would never be bombed in this country, will never happen..

its just right wing propaganda.

Obama apologist reasoning.

reply to post by texasgirl

Originally posted by texasgirl
While he gave Rand a response it took a while.

Well yes, and I actually don't blame Holder and the administration for taking the time because anything they say they will be legally held accountable. I don't care who is in power, whether it is Obama, Romney, McCain, Jeb Bush, the question of whether the American government can and will kill American citizens on American soil will inevitably be a yes, there is no way to avoid this reality. There is no way for any administration to give a definative "no" answer to the satisfaction of skeptics because there will always be extraordinary events where such action will be necessary. Now whether the American government can just randomly kill American citizens without due trial, or giving them opportunities to defend themselves, it's a no. But when you have a scenario of individual Americans threatening the lives of millions, and threatening violence if any attempts are made to arrest them, take them into trial, there's just no other alternative sorry.

Initially I was concerned about the drone program, but I read into the facts of the matter recently, thanks to Rand Paul bringing the issue up, read Holders response, I understand the circumstances.

Did you see how many times it took Ted Cruz to get Holder say it was unconstitutional?

Well what do you expect? Is Mr Cruz arrogant enough to think that Holder is going to word his responses exactly to what he wants them to be?

reply to post by eLPresidente


I would say it is more then apologetic, it is downright acceptance and approval of the administration actions.

Originally posted by thesmokingman

Are you serious? you still think a drone strike will never happen on US soil? I think you are the dog and pony show.

reply to post by eLPresidente

 

No need to be rude and call names. After all, if you were such a great american, you would respect my right to an opinion. Anyhow, I will tell you what, WHEN a US citizen is attacked by a drone on US soil, then we will talk. As of this moment, I would be correct thus far as no one has ever been......... fortunately...

So... you think.. they should think... they have the power to do it and when they do try to stop them? When they do "we will talk"? Talk about what? Where to hide?

Paul has the balls to something now about it before it even starts and the members that walked out or called it a farce should all loose their jobs. It seems most of them think overwriting the constitution or ignoring it is ok. It makes me sick.

We need more people like Paul and Cruze to stand up now before it's too late and we are all hiding in bunkers fearing for our lives. I sent his father money to run and stood on street corners with signs because I believed he would change things. Maybe Rand has a better chance and I'm glad to see he has the courage to stand up for "we the people".

Mcain said the government should be able to take out any terrorist no matter where they are and that the USA IS a combat zone. Well, most of us on this site would and could be called terrorists because we disagree with them and at some point we could be "taken out".

I think Rand Paul is a hero for the common people!

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
reply to post by burntheships

 

I think based upon recent events of domestic drone use we can both agree it is high time the youth of the world, born into this tech says, "no way dude". Of course, most USA'ers you speak with think it is fine and dandy. More time I guess.

CJ

You are right. First it starts with "we are only doing surveillance. Then it's "we are doing wire tapping to find the terrorists." Then it's "We took out a terrorists because he was talking to a dude in the middle East". Then it's on to "We had to take out Mr. and Misses Jones because they won't grow corn on their farm and it's hurting America".

When does it stop? It doesn't unless we stop it now. Rand Paul had a valid question which the government wouldn't give an honest answer which proves they had a different agenda all along.