Ontopic We The Sheeple - Rand Paul creates a scenario

[Domon]

I'm convinced United 93 was shot down or otherwise brought out of the sky, and the media/government decided to cover it up.

I'm fine with it, people on the plane were fucked anyway and putting the plane down where it wouldn't kill anyone else was the right thing to do. And there's plenty of people who won't get that, so covering it up is the right thing to do also. Choices suck.

So the government faked all the phone calls from the people on the plane to their loved ones, and the black box?

 

[Syrup Beaver]

Next thing someone will say that something other than a plane crash caused the towers to fall.

 

[gee]

So the government faked all the phone calls from the people on the plane to their loved ones, and the black box?

I make no claims that my opinion is a well thought out, researched opinion that I'm willing to defend. *shrug*

 

[APRIL]

to your canned response.



didn't bother reading the other articles I'd bet. . .

I had no reason to read the other articles; I don't care about this silly argument you three are having.

None of those channels are.

trudat, Fox is just the wooorrssstt, imo.

I'm convinced United 93 was shot down or otherwise brought out of the sky, and the media/government decided to cover it up.

I'm fine with it, people on the plane were fucked anyway and putting the plane down where it wouldn't kill anyone else was the right thing to do. And there's plenty of people who won't get that, so covering it up is the right thing to do also. Choices suck.

Agreed.

 

[Syrup Beaver]

trudat, Fox is just the wooorrssstt, imo.

Nyet, MSNBC would take those honours.

But just barely.

They're all liars and get even basic details horribly wrong.

 

[Mr. Argumentor]

 

[fly]

I didn't read the thread, but the thought of killing American citizens ANYWHERE without their day in court disgusts me. It's the fucking Constitution. If you don't like it, change it.

 

[Syrup Beaver]

I didn't read the thread, but the thought of killing American citizens ANYWHERE without their day in court disgusts me. It's the fucking Constitution. If you don't like it, change itleave.

Corrected.

 

[Mr. Argumentor]

Corrected.

Ifn you don't like it, yew kin just git out!
[/southpark]

 

[Domon]

I didn't read the thread, but the thought of killing American citizens ANYWHERE without their day in court disgusts me. It's the fucking Constitution. If you don't like it, change it.

Ive seen a lot more of the threats and the bad in the world than most people, and even I think thats bullshit.

Americans get a trial, no exceptions except clear exigent circumstances (felon shooting at cops, etc)

If some asshole wants to go join al qaeda and act in sedition against the united states? Treason, then death penalty.

If he's outside the US, and has been for more than 3 years acting as a combatant against us? Revoke his citizenship, then drone strike his ass.

 

[fly]

Corrected.

No. The Framers put a method into the Constitution to allow it to be adjusted. It intentionally has a very high bar. If you don't like that ability, then you should leave!

 

[fly]

Ive seen a lot more of the threats and the bad in the world than most people, and even I think thats bullshit.

Americans get a trial, no exceptions except clear exigent circumstances (felon shooting at cops, etc)

If some asshole wants to go join al qaeda and act in sedition against the united states? Treason, then death penalty.

If he's outside the US, and has been for more than 3 years acting as a combatant against us? Revoke his citizenship, then drone strike his ass.

I really believe that in like 50+ years, we're going to look back on this time with the same regret we do about Japanese interment camps. Those people thought they were doing good too.

 

[Syrup Beaver]

No. The Framers put a method into the Constitution to allow it to be adjusted. It intentionally has a very high bar. If you don't like that ability, then you should leave!

Bar isn't high enough based on what we have had.

 

[Sarcasmo]

Next thing someone will say that something other than a plane crash caused the towers to fall.

The plane crashes themselves didn't cause the towers to fall. The fires from the plane crashes caused the towers to fall.

 

[fly]

Bar isn't high enough based on what we have had.

Then change it. Using the Constitutionally approved method.

 

[Mr. Argumentor]

The plane crashes themselves didn't cause the towers to fall. The fires from the plane crashes caused the towers to fall.

ZOMG!!!! JET FUL DOESN'T BURN THAT HOT!!!!!!

 

[Coqui]

Corrected.

Then we need to get rid of all the amendments.

 

[Amstel]

finally, an answer.

White House, Holder respond to Rand Paul: ‘The answer is no’

March 7, 2013 | 1:21 pm | Modified: March 7, 2013 at 2:00 pm


Attorney General Eric Holder wrote Sen. Rand Paul,R-Ky., to confirm that President Obama does not have the authority to kill an American on U.S. soil in a non-combat situation, Obama’s spokesman announced today.


White House Press Secretary Jay Carney quoted from the letter that Holder sent to Paul today. “Does the president have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on an American soil?” Holder wrote, per Carney. “The answer is no.”

 

[fly]

I don't understand why they didn't say that from the start. I mean, its not like they can't say No and do it anyway later.

 

[JAXvillain]

I don't understand why they didn't say that from the start. I mean, its not like they can't say No and do it anyway later.

Maybe because it's explicitly illegal they didn't think it needed to be reiterated yet the drama queen GOP took it as an opportunity for a possible Obama smear so they ran with it?