Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Holder: Drone Strikes Against Americans On U. S. Soil Are Legal
Topic Started: Mar 6 2013, 10:45 AM (1,119 Views)
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
If I explained I would be playing your game Colo and I did not start any insults towards you.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
campingken
No Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
We can only hope that Rand Paul is the Republican Presidential canidate in 2016.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
colo_crawdad
Mar 8 2013, 05:05 AM
That is great. It destroys all of Rand's and the extreme right''s arguments advanced earlier. Holder never said anything different than that in his second "letter." Rand's theatrics and rhetoric have become moot and worthless. Wat a waste of energy the filibuster was.
Why did it take the Whitehouse 13 hours to respond if it was so clear cut in their minds?

I doubt Rand went forth with a filibuster had the answer been clear to him or others watching. The president or Holder could have saved all the drama from playing out, and wasted the time of the senate, had they immediately cleared up any misconceptions surrounding Holder's earlier comments.

Without proof I would guess and I think it is reasonable to assume, that they were huddled to discuss what should been an easy response. were it not for the fact they had in fact meant something currently considered illegal. And then let the supreme court decide on appeal. In other words, another power grab and slap at the constitution. something becoming a habit for them. But decided the political cost was too high and backed off.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
If Rand had not filibustered we would not know whether Obie would or could use a drone to kill an American on American soil.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Neutral
Mar 9 2013, 04:02 AM
If Rand had not filibustered we would not know whether Obie would or could use a drone to kill an American on American soil.
Another good point.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mountainrivers
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Pat
Mar 9 2013, 04:03 AM
Neutral
Mar 9 2013, 04:02 AM
If Rand had not filibustered we would not know whether Obie would or could use a drone to kill an American on American soil.
Another good point.
This is Holder's first letter to Rand Paul. It seems to me that he explained the thinking very well and said it would be an extraordinary circumstance if drones were used. I think Paul is just playing to his far right constituency.

"[T]he US government has not carried out drone strikes in the United States and has no intention of doing so. As a policy matter moreover, we reject the use of military force where well-established law enforcement authorities in this country provide the best means for incapacitating a terrorist threat…The question you have posed is therefore entirely hypothetical, unlikely to occur, and one we hope no president will ever have to confront. It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States. For example, the president could conceivably have no choice but to authorize the military to use such force if necessary to protect the homeland in the circumstances like a catastrophic attack like the ones suffered on December 7, 1941, and September 11, 2001."
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
campingken
No Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Neutral,

What if "Obie" lied to Paul?. Keep your eyes toward the sky...LOL
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
I don't know what point you're trying to make.

If the answer was so obvious, why did the Obie admin respond? Now that is obvious.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mountainrivers
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Neutral
Mar 9 2013, 04:27 AM
I don't know what point you're trying to make.

If the answer was so obvious, why did the Obie admin respond? Now that is obvious.
Because not responding would have been both stupid and would have aroused even more suspicion among the fringers.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Wrong answer, the response made the question very legit.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis