Stand with Rand and lets dump the Patriot Act!

[Statistikhengst]

The PA needs to be shredded.
But because it's Rand Paul, he'll be ignored

Surprising support from me.



Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

You see why I keep you around?

Lol. And I thought it was because of my dashing looks.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

KEVIN_KENNEDY SAID:

“How is it clear to oppose the use of drones to assassinate Americans without due process...”

Incorrect.

Congress has not amended the Authorization for Use of Military Force Act to require due process for American citizens in foreign countries and recognized combat zones seeking to commit acts of terror against the Untied States, nor has any court ruled that the drone strikes violate citizens' due process rights in like situations.

Consequently, the Administration is acting lawfully and in good faith pursuant to the AUMF to protect Americans from potential acts of terror; indeed, it's now incumbent upon Congress to act to define what is and what is not appropriate for the Executive when taking action against US citizens who have declared their intent to harm Americans.

As is the case with the PA, the NSA's surveillance programs, and drone strikes against American citizens – these laws, policies, and programs exist at the behest of the American people, authorized by Congress in the name of the American people, where these laws, policies, and programs can be ended solely by the American people.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

If we don't support somebody beside the Bushes and Clintons, that may be the only non choice we have.

The problem is that Rand isn't isn't a real choice either, because you can't trust him to hold to any position for more than a day.

 

[Statistikhengst]

If we don't support somebody beside the Bushes and Clintons, that may be the only non choice we have.

The problem is that Rand isn't isn't a real choice either, because you can't trust him to hold to any position for more than a day.

Ahhh, so, you noticed this, eh?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

KEVIN_KENNEDY SAID:

“How is it clear to oppose the use of drones to assassinate Americans without due process...”

Incorrect.

Congress has not amended the Authorization for Use of Military Force Act to require due process for American citizens in foreign countries and recognized combat zones seeking to commit acts of terror against the Untied States, nor has any court ruled that the drone strikes violate citizens' due process rights in like situations.

Consequently, the Administration is acting lawfully and in good faith pursuant to the AUMF to protect Americans from potential acts of terror; indeed, it's now incumbent upon Congress to act to define what is and what is not appropriate for the Executive when taking action against US citizens who have declared their intent to harm Americans.

As is the case with the PA, the NSA's surveillance programs, and drone strikes against American citizens – these laws, policies, and programs exist at the behest of the American people, authorized by Congress in the name of the American people, where these laws, policies, and programs can be ended solely by the American people.

Everything you said here is correct. I don't hold drone strikes against this president, even though some of the victims were children...we're dealing with an enemy that hides amongst children, but in light of the Nobel Peace Prize he received, I have to wonder if the panel will revisit its decision to give out an award in anticipation for what a peacemaker the recipient will be in the future.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

If we don't support somebody beside the Bushes and Clintons, that may be the only non choice we have.

The problem is that Rand isn't isn't a real choice either, because you can't trust him to hold to any position for more than a day.

Ahhh, so, you noticed this, eh?

I noticed it a few years back when he began taking positions that he had previously spoken out against. I turned against him when he voted for sanctions against Iran in I want to say 2012. I'm all for being pragmatic and putting forward the ideas in a palatable way, but not actively subverting them.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

KEVIN_KENNEDY SAID:

“How is it clear to oppose the use of drones to assassinate Americans without due process...”

Incorrect.

Congress has not amended the Authorization for Use of Military Force Act to require due process for American citizens in foreign countries and recognized combat zones seeking to commit acts of terror against the Untied States, nor has any court ruled that the drone strikes violate citizens' due process rights in like situations.

Consequently, the Administration is acting lawfully and in good faith pursuant to the AUMF to protect Americans from potential acts of terror; indeed, it's now incumbent upon Congress to act to define what is and what is not appropriate for the Executive when taking action against US citizens who have declared their intent to harm Americans.

As is the case with the PA, the NSA's surveillance programs, and drone strikes against American citizens – these laws, policies, and programs exist at the behest of the American people, authorized by Congress in the name of the American people, where these laws, policies, and programs can be ended solely by the American people.

Everything you said here is correct. I don't hold drone strikes against this president, even though some of the victims were children...we're dealing with an enemy that hides amongst children, but in light of the Nobel Peace Prize he received, I have to wonder if the panel will revisit its decision to give out an award in anticipation for what a peacemaker the recipient will be in the future.

How about the fact that the administration admitted they had no idea who they were actually targeting in the drone strike in question, do you hold that against him? How about the accounts we have where drone operators have stated that they have no idea who they're targeting? How about the fact that the Obama administration simply defines any adult male killed in a strike as a militant?

 

[hortysir]

"Stand with Rand and lets dump the Patriot Act!"

Paul is a republican, belonging to the same party that enacted the PA, where a republican president signed the Act into law, the party that now controls both Houses of Congress – are you truly this naïve and delusional to believe a republican Congress is going to 'repeal' the PA.

A democratic president with a Dem majority in both houses extended it, remember....and broadened it

 

[hortysir]

You, or Rand, have nothing to fear from the patriot act unless you are a terrorist of would-be terrorist.

The govt is not using the PA to listen to you and aunt martha talk about the family reunion.

Yeah, except we know that's exactly what they're doing. You may have heard of a court recently ruling that their doing so is illegal.

yes, sometimes mistakes are made. the fact remains that the PA may have saved YOUR life.

What's the old saying.....
He that would sacrifice liberty for security deserves neither??

 

[Statistikhengst]

"Stand with Rand and lets dump the Patriot Act!"

Paul is a republican, belonging to the same party that enacted the PA, where a republican president signed the Act into law, the party that now controls both Houses of Congress – are you truly this naïve and delusional to believe a republican Congress is going to 'repeal' the PA.

A democratic president with a Dem majority in both houses extended it, remember....and broadened it

Yes. This disturbs me greatly.

I was against the Patriot Act in the form in which it was passed in 2001, and back then, people called me a traitor. I am still against it in this form.

From the Patriot Act WIKI:

On October 23, 2001, Republican Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner introduced H.R. 3162 incorporating provisions from a previously sponsored House bill and a Senate bill also introduced earlier in the month.[4] The next day on October 24, 2001, the Act passed the House 357 to 66,[5] with Democrats comprising the overwhelming portion of dissent. The following day, on October 25, 2001, the Act passed the Senate by 98 to 1.[6]

Bush 43 signed that bill into law the very next day.

Again, the Bill was introduced on October 23rd, the next day, it was already passed.

The Bill was 340 pages long:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-107hr3162eh/pdf/BILLS-107hr3162eh.pdf

I bet that practically no one in the HOR or in the Senate actually read the goddamned thing, which is an absolute abomination in terms of civil liberties, the principle upon which our Union was founded.

That being said, who knows how many terror attacks have been averted because of the PA.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

KEVIN_KENNEDY SAID:

“How is it clear to oppose the use of drones to assassinate Americans without due process...”

Incorrect.

Congress has not amended the Authorization for Use of Military Force Act to require due process for American citizens in foreign countries and recognized combat zones seeking to commit acts of terror against the Untied States, nor has any court ruled that the drone strikes violate citizens' due process rights in like situations.

Consequently, the Administration is acting lawfully and in good faith pursuant to the AUMF to protect Americans from potential acts of terror; indeed, it's now incumbent upon Congress to act to define what is and what is not appropriate for the Executive when taking action against US citizens who have declared their intent to harm Americans.

As is the case with the PA, the NSA's surveillance programs, and drone strikes against American citizens – these laws, policies, and programs exist at the behest of the American people, authorized by Congress in the name of the American people, where these laws, policies, and programs can be ended solely by the American people.

Everything you said here is correct. I don't hold drone strikes against this president, even though some of the victims were children...we're dealing with an enemy that hides amongst children, but in light of the Nobel Peace Prize he received, I have to wonder if the panel will revisit its decision to give out an award in anticipation for what a peacemaker the recipient will be in the future.

How about the fact that the administration admitted they had no idea who they were actually targeting in the drone strike in question, do you hold that against him? How about the accounts we have where drone operators have stated that they have no idea who they're targeting? How about the fact that the Obama administration simply defines any adult male killed in a strike as a militant?

War is freakin messy! Do you really want to compare Obama's collateral death toll to the Decider's? I despise the Lying African thoroughly, but I'm fair minded and the things I despise about him all have merit. Obama is a bad man, but he's not the author of everything that goes wrong. Many of these decisions are being made in the DOD.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

The PA needs to be shredded.
But because it's Rand Paul, he'll be ignored

Surprising support from me.



Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

You see why I keep you around?

Lol. And I thought it was because of my dashing looks.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

I gave up the Lincoln migraine picture for you, do you think you could ditch the clown for me? I always thought of you as someone that doesn't go along with the crowd.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

You, or Rand, have nothing to fear from the patriot act unless you are a terrorist of would-be terrorist.

The govt is not using the PA to listen to you and aunt martha talk about the family reunion.

Yeah, except we know that's exactly what they're doing. You may have heard of a court recently ruling that their doing so is illegal.

yes, sometimes mistakes are made. the fact remains that the PA may have saved YOUR life.

What's the old saying.....
He that would sacrifice liberty for security deserves neither??

Exactly! And the "patriot" act is as poorly named as the "affordable care" act. Why do politicians call something what it isn't? And both sides do it.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

KEVIN_KENNEDY SAID:

“How is it clear to oppose the use of drones to assassinate Americans without due process...”

Incorrect.

Congress has not amended the Authorization for Use of Military Force Act to require due process for American citizens in foreign countries and recognized combat zones seeking to commit acts of terror against the Untied States, nor has any court ruled that the drone strikes violate citizens' due process rights in like situations.

Consequently, the Administration is acting lawfully and in good faith pursuant to the AUMF to protect Americans from potential acts of terror; indeed, it's now incumbent upon Congress to act to define what is and what is not appropriate for the Executive when taking action against US citizens who have declared their intent to harm Americans.

As is the case with the PA, the NSA's surveillance programs, and drone strikes against American citizens – these laws, policies, and programs exist at the behest of the American people, authorized by Congress in the name of the American people, where these laws, policies, and programs can be ended solely by the American people.

Everything you said here is correct. I don't hold drone strikes against this president, even though some of the victims were children...we're dealing with an enemy that hides amongst children, but in light of the Nobel Peace Prize he received, I have to wonder if the panel will revisit its decision to give out an award in anticipation for what a peacemaker the recipient will be in the future.

How about the fact that the administration admitted they had no idea who they were actually targeting in the drone strike in question, do you hold that against him? How about the accounts we have where drone operators have stated that they have no idea who they're targeting? How about the fact that the Obama administration simply defines any adult male killed in a strike as a militant?

War is freakin messy! Do you really want to compare Obama's collateral death toll to the Decider's? I despise the Lying African thoroughly, but I'm fair minded and the things I despise about him all have merit. Obama is a bad man, but he's not the author of everything that goes wrong. Many of these decisions are being made in the DOD.

Obama is responsible for his lawless administration. And referring to him as an "African" makes you a moron.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

KEVIN_KENNEDY SAID:

“How is it clear to oppose the use of drones to assassinate Americans without due process...”

Incorrect.

Congress has not amended the Authorization for Use of Military Force Act to require due process for American citizens in foreign countries and recognized combat zones seeking to commit acts of terror against the Untied States, nor has any court ruled that the drone strikes violate citizens' due process rights in like situations.

Consequently, the Administration is acting lawfully and in good faith pursuant to the AUMF to protect Americans from potential acts of terror; indeed, it's now incumbent upon Congress to act to define what is and what is not appropriate for the Executive when taking action against US citizens who have declared their intent to harm Americans.

As is the case with the PA, the NSA's surveillance programs, and drone strikes against American citizens – these laws, policies, and programs exist at the behest of the American people, authorized by Congress in the name of the American people, where these laws, policies, and programs can be ended solely by the American people.

Everything you said here is correct. I don't hold drone strikes against this president, even though some of the victims were children...we're dealing with an enemy that hides amongst children, but in light of the Nobel Peace Prize he received, I have to wonder if the panel will revisit its decision to give out an award in anticipation for what a peacemaker the recipient will be in the future.

How about the fact that the administration admitted they had no idea who they were actually targeting in the drone strike in question, do you hold that against him? How about the accounts we have where drone operators have stated that they have no idea who they're targeting? How about the fact that the Obama administration simply defines any adult male killed in a strike as a militant?

War is freakin messy! Do you really want to compare Obama's collateral death toll to the Decider's? I despise the Lying African thoroughly, but I'm fair minded and the things I despise about him all have merit. Obama is a bad man, but he's not the author of everything that goes wrong. Many of these decisions are being made in the DOD.

Obama is responsible for his lawless administration. And referring to him as an "African" makes you a moron.

He was born in Kenya. That makes him African. Duh.

 

[Wildman]

Why won't you join the isis and seek alah?

were you born this stupid or when you attended Gvmt. run skoolz, was your Dad a union leader ?

 

[Wildman]

I noticed it a few years back[/QUOTE]

Kevin_Kennedy said, "forgive me if I sit this one out."

i believe you just made yourself to be the forums biggest LIAR !

 

[Statistikhengst]

The PA needs to be shredded.
But because it's Rand Paul, he'll be ignored

Surprising support from me.



Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

You see why I keep you around?

Lol. And I thought it was because of my dashing looks.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

I gave up the Lincoln migraine picture for you, do you think you could ditch the clown for me? I always thought of you as someone that doesn't go along with the crowd.

Hell, no. Perry is about to announce!!!

It has nothing to do with "the crowd"!!

Oh, and that with the Lincolm migräne was advice to keep you from looking like this.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Hell, no. Perry is about to announce!!!

Oops!

 

[Statistikhengst]

Hell, no. Perry is about to announce!!!

Oops!

Yepp!! He's set for June 4th!!!