Liberals: WHERE the HELL are you now?

[P@triot]

No difference between a drone and a sniper in my book. It's just another LE tool that I'm glad we have.

There is no difference between the tool. The difference is between who is controlling the tool and the due process behind the authorization of utilizing the tool.

So what's the difference between a sniper and a drone, military or civilian? I'm for both as long as the same rules apply to a drone that they would to a sniper. It's still a person controlling the drone.

Jesus - what isn't the difference? Can a sniper kill me from 10 miles away? Well, because you're a liberal, you can't answer that questions - but I'll do it for you. The answer is NO (the best snipers in the world have a limit of just a shred past 1 mile - and even then they are not likely to hit). Can a sniper follow me in an automobile at high speeds (no). Can a sniper follow me 24x7 without rest (no). Can a sniper kill everything in the immediate are around me - including innocent people (no). Can a missed sniper round kill innocents (not likely - about a trillion to 1 that a sniper round would share the same time & space as an innocent on a missed shot - while a hellfire missile is very likely to be devastating to bystanders). Should I continue?

But most importantly, you're trying really hard to avoid the real issue here - due process.

 

[P@triot]

I'm at the same place I've always been...use 'em but I want accountability and oversight.

I'm sorry, did you say "oversight and accountability"? You might want to check out this post from one of your close liberal pals and the subsequent response to it....

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...emselves-on-the-wmd-issue-39.html#post6925107

 

[Borillar]

When has a predator drone killed an American on American soil?

When has an enemy detonated a nuclear weapon on American soil? I guess that means it can't happen, uh? And since it is completely impossible (from the logic of your very twisted mind), then clearly we don't need any defense and we should immediately disband our entire military...

When is the administration planning on using drones domestically?

I don't know Borillar - when did the administration plan on illegally passing untraceable guns to the Mexican drug cartels?

When did the administration decide to smuggle deadly arms to Al Qaeda in Benghazi?

Feeling stupid yet? You seriously haven't realized that NONE of us are privy to the plans of the administration, and therefore asking what their plans are is completely nonsensical?



Because an F.B.I. sniper will NEVER shoot me unless:

A.) I pose an immediate threat to someone (which I control)

or

B.) I've at least had some form of due process / proper legal course which has caused them to approach me (such as the case in Ruby Ridge, where people wre WRONGFULLY shot but at least warrants had been issued. That is exponentially more than Obama and Holder are claiming is required by the president.

Would it make you feel warm and fuzzy to put police in harm's way rather than take out a bad guy by remote control?

Like Andrew Wilkow says, "with liberals, it's either central planning or nihilism"

I'm sorry, our only choice in your world is put police in harm's way or use predator drones to assinate American citizens without due process? Really?

Funny, seems like we literally have thousands of ways to keep law enforcement out of harm's way without the illegal assisnation of American citizens sans due process. But if you admitted that, it would mean you wouldn't be worshipping Obama (and we can't have that now, can we)?

All this BS is like asking the President when he quit beating his wife. He never did and has no intention of doing so. The question is only made in order to slime him by implication.

Both he and Eric Holder have claimed they hold full authority to do so and us such, reserve the right. If your deep man-love of Obama blinds you from this FACT, I can't help you. God Bless and good luck my lost little friend...

I believe that the administration has said that they do not have the authority to kill Americans not engaged in combat on American soil. So you don't need to phear the drones anymore. What will be the next unlikely thing the right will want us to phear? Death rays from our secret CIA moon base?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

This really illustrates how much Barack Obama hates Americans and loves muslims. When terrorists were being held without "due process" (which they are not entitled as the U.S. Constitution is not an international document - it applies to Americans only and only with regards to the U.S. government... an American in China is at the mercy of the Chinese government and has no rights) while he was a Senator, Barack Obama had a fuck'n hissy fit.

Yet, he says he has the right to kill actual Americans without due process. He is one sick fuck'n animal and it is very clear that he has his daddy's deep hatred for this country and its people.

The rights outlined in the Constitution are in no way limited to American citizens.

Your statement is so ignorant, it defies logic.

The U.S. Constitution applies to Americans only. It is not an international document. It does not apply to Mexicans. Canadians do not have a "right to bear arms" (just ask them). Ask Iran if they recognize their citizens "U.S. Constitutional rights".

It is strictly a U.S. document which applies to U.S. citizens only. Period.

Incorrect, as usual.

All persons in the United States are entitled to their civil liberties, even undocumented immigrants:

Appellants argue at the outset that undocumented aliens, because of their immigration status, are not "persons within the jurisdiction" of the State of Texas, and that they therefore have no right to the equal protection of Texas law. We reject this argument. Whatever his status under the immigration laws, an alien is surely a "person" in any ordinary sense of that term. Aliens, even aliens whose presence in this country is unlawful, have long been recognized as "persons" guaranteed due process of law by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.

Plyler v. Doe

Undocumented immigrants have the right to file suit in Federal court:

Alejandra Lopez, 19, is one of thousands of young Hispanic "Dreamers" who grew up in the US and have been authorised to live and work here under Barack Obama's deportation reprieve.

But Lopez, the main carer for three US citizens – her child and two younger brothers – has been forced to turn down job interviews because she has been denied a driving licence by her home state of Arizona.

She is one of five young undocumented immigrants from the state who filed a class action lawsuit on Wednesday challenging what they say is its unconstitutional and discriminatory policy of depriving them of a driving licence or other state identification.

Undocumented immigrants file lawsuit against Arizona over denied state IDs | World news | guardian.co.uk

And lawful resident aliens enjoy Second Amendment rights:

Enforcement of Massachusetts General Laws chapter 140,
sections 121-131P against Plaintiffs solely on the basis of their
permanent resident alien status is declared to be in violation of
the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and the
Defendants are hereby enjoined from denying Plaintiffs Fletcher and Pryal any firearm permits or licenses on that basis.

Fletcher v. Haas [1. Fletcher v. Haas (D. Mass. Mar. 30, 2012)

We can only hope the ignorance of the Constitution and its case law exhibited by the OP is not representative of all conservatives.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I haven't heard any rightwingers who supported the Patriot Act voice support for Obama's drone program;

that makes you people the hypocrites, doesn't it?

I haven't heard any left wing liberal who opposed the Patriot Act voice concern for Obama's drone program and his expanded use of the patriot act;

that makes you people the hypocrites, doesn't it?

Name someone. Name a liberal who opposed the Patriot Act but now supports Obama using drones on non-combatant Americans on American soil.

Name some.

 

[NYcarbineer]

There is no difference between the tool. The difference is between who is controlling the tool and the due process behind the authorization of utilizing the tool.

So what's the difference between a sniper and a drone, military or civilian? I'm for both as long as the same rules apply to a drone that they would to a sniper. It's still a person controlling the drone.

Jesus - what isn't the difference? Can a sniper kill me from 10 miles away? Well, because you're a liberal, you can't answer that questions - but I'll do it for you. The answer is NO (the best snipers in the world have a limit of just a shred past 1 mile - and even then they are not likely to hit). Can a sniper follow me in an automobile at high speeds (no). Can a sniper follow me 24x7 without rest (no). Can a sniper kill everything in the immediate are around me - including innocent people (no). Can a missed sniper round kill innocents (not likely - about a trillion to 1 that a sniper round would share the same time & space as an innocent on a missed shot - while a hellfire missile is very likely to be devastating to bystanders). Should I continue?

But most importantly, you're trying really hard to avoid the real issue here - due process.

If Americans had been flying the hijacked planes on 9/11, could we have shot them down before they hit their targets?

 

[SuMar]

After having one anuerism after another (or apparently pretending to) about the "Patriot Act" and about "enhanced interrogations" - I have yet to hear one liberal complain that both Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder believe the federal government has the authority to kill Americans without a trial.

Ted Cruz rips Eric Holder on constitutionality of domestic drone use ? Glenn Beck

Senator Mike Lee: ?Heaven help us all? if President can use drones on US soil ? Glenn Beck

WATCH: Glenn?s full interview with Senator Rand Paul ? Glenn Beck

And yet these are the same folks "concerned" about terrorist feelings and safety when it comes to America's interrogating practices.

 

[jgarden]

After having one anuerism after another (or apparently pretending to) about the "Patriot Act" and about "enhanced interrogations" - I have yet to hear one liberal complain that both Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder believe the federal government has the authority to kill Americans without a trial.

Ted Cruz rips Eric Holder on constitutionality of domestic drone use ? Glenn Beck

Senator Mike Lee: ?Heaven help us all? if President can use drones on US soil ? Glenn Beck

WATCH: Glenn?s full interview with Senator Rand Paul ? Glenn Beck

McCain, Graham assail Rand Paul on targeted killings policy
March 5, 2013.

Thirteen Republican senators – including Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell and the junior GOP senators from McCain’s and Graham’s home states -- joined Paul during his filibuster to show their support for his demand that President Barack Obama explicitly say whether he thinks he has the authority to order the killing of a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil who was a noncombatant and posed no imminent threat of an attack .....

Paul has delayed the confirmation of Obama’s CIA nominee John Brennan in order to dramatize his demand for an answer from Obama .....

Sen. John McCain voices criticism toward fellow Republican Senator Rand Paul for indicating that it was possible for the government to attack an American cafe with a drone strike .....

Graham scoffed at Paul’s question about whether Obama thinks he has the authority to kill a noncombatant American citizen on U.S. soil.

“I find the question offensive,” Graham said Thursday on the Senate floor. “As much I disagree with President Obama and as much as I support past presidents, I do not believe that question deserves an answer.” Paul’s question, the South Carolina Republican said, “cheapens the debate.”

Graham said flatly that Obama would not use a drone against a noncombatant sitting in a café somewhere in the United States.

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_new...il-rand-paul-on-targeted-killings-policy?lite

Liberals: WHERE the HELL are you now?

"Rottweiler" can also add Republican Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain to the list that think Rand Paul's 12 hour "filibuster" was nothing more than a "publicity stunt."

As Graham so candidly commented, drones were in use during the Bush Administration and nobody, including Rand or the Democrats, were demanding to know if President Bush had the authority to "order the killing of a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil who was a noncombatant and posed no imminent threat of an attack."

Only the conservatives are so gullible and simple-minded as to be taken in by this "dog and pony show" invented by Paul!

 

[P@triot]

I haven't heard any rightwingers who supported the Patriot Act voice support for Obama's drone program;

that makes you people the hypocrites, doesn't it?

I haven't heard any left wing liberal who opposed the Patriot Act voice concern for Obama's drone program and his expanded use of the patriot act;

that makes you people the hypocrites, doesn't it?

Name someone. Name a liberal who opposed the Patriot Act but now supports Obama using drones on non-combatant Americans on American soil.

Name some.

Ok... NYcarbineer (damn, that was easy)

 

[P@triot]

So what's the difference between a sniper and a drone, military or civilian? I'm for both as long as the same rules apply to a drone that they would to a sniper. It's still a person controlling the drone.

Jesus - what isn't the difference? Can a sniper kill me from 10 miles away? Well, because you're a liberal, you can't answer that questions - but I'll do it for you. The answer is NO (the best snipers in the world have a limit of just a shred past 1 mile - and even then they are not likely to hit). Can a sniper follow me in an automobile at high speeds (no). Can a sniper follow me 24x7 without rest (no). Can a sniper kill everything in the immediate are around me - including innocent people (no). Can a missed sniper round kill innocents (not likely - about a trillion to 1 that a sniper round would share the same time & space as an innocent on a missed shot - while a hellfire missile is very likely to be devastating to bystanders). Should I continue?

But most importantly, you're trying really hard to avoid the real issue here - due process.

If Americans had been flying the hijacked planes on 9/11, could we have shot them down before they hit their targets?

Yes. In much the same way as an officer doesn't require due process for a maniac shooting at people on a killing spree, nobody would require due process to shoot down those planes.

Since nobody is arguing how immediate threats are handled, why are you even bringing that up? Just looking to avoid the issue?

 

[LoneLaugher]

After having one anuerism after another (or apparently pretending to) about the "Patriot Act" and about "enhanced interrogations" - I have yet to hear one liberal complain that both Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder believe the federal government has the authority to kill Americans without a trial.

Ted Cruz rips Eric Holder on constitutionality of domestic drone use ? Glenn Beck

Senator Mike Lee: ?Heaven help us all? if President can use drones on US soil ? Glenn Beck

WATCH: Glenn?s full interview with Senator Rand Paul ? Glenn Beck

And yet these are the same folks "concerned" about terrorist feelings and safety when it comes to America's interrogating practices.

Idiot. Nobody is concerned with their feelings. Where do you fuckers get this shit?

 

[editec]

Liberals: WHERE the HELL are you now?

Same place they and their playmates, the so-calls Cons, have always been.

On their knees sucking off the MASTERS.

 

[Bfgrn]

Liberals: WHERE the HELL are you now?

Same place they and their playmates, the so-calls Cons, have always been.

On their knees sucking off the MASTERS.

Pope Ed above it all...

 

[Vast LWC]

As far as I know, the President runs both the military and the FBI.

Obviously there are several levels of command between, but the President is in fact the chief executive in both cases.

Therefore, if the president ordered someone killed as part of an FBI operation, due to imminent threat circumstances, but used a drone to do it, what exactly would be illegal about it?

That little thing called DUE PROCESS. You are seriously unfamiliar with this concept?

Look, the answer to this question is simple:


If Law Enforcement kills someone in the line of duty, and the death is justified due to imminent threat, then it is legal, whether done by drone or sniper.

However, if the military kills an American citizen on American soil, then it is illegal.



Now, that being said, there is such a thing as "justifiable homicide".

And if the military were to make an emergency strike on a target on American soil, in a case of extraordinary circumstances, like a nuclear or biological device, then the following investigation and trial would surely vindicate their actions, illegal or not.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I haven't heard any rightwingers who supported the Patriot Act voice support for Obama's drone program;

that makes you people the hypocrites, doesn't it?

I haven't heard any left wing liberal who opposed the Patriot Act voice concern for Obama's drone program and his expanded use of the patriot act;

that makes you people the hypocrites, doesn't it?

​