Rand Paul, Drone Buster

“I rise today to begin to filibuster John Brennan’s nomination for the CIA. I will speak until I can no longer speak. I will speak as long as it takes, until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast that our Constitution is important, that your rights to trial by jury are precious, that no American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court, that Americans could be killed in a cafe in San Francisco or in a restaurant in Houston or at their home in Bowling Green, Ky., is an abomination. It is something that should not and cannot be tolerated in our country.”

This quote is taken from the ongoing filibuster of Senator Rand Paul that is taking place as I type. I must first applaud Senator Paul for doing a filibuster properly and standing, continually holding the senate floor as long as he can. This is a rarity in our modern government and a symbol iconically portrayed in the film "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington." The issue at hand is the confirmation of John Brennan as the head of the CIA and, the deeper issue, drone strikes on US soil.

Over the last year we have heard more and more about the US's use of drone strikes. We first heard of drone strikes as an overseas tactic against foreign terrorists. It was then expanded to include the possibility of drone strikes on US citizens overseas. Most recently it has been brought to the public's attention that policies allow for the use of drones on US soil and against US citizens suspected of terrorism.

When Rand Paul asked President Obama "Can you kill an American on American soil?" The President's answer was not the obvious "no" but Rand Paul quotes him as responding "I haven’t killed anyone yet... And I have no intention of killing Americans. But I might."

I wish to remind our President that, although he may have no intention of using drone strikes against American citizens, he is setting a precedent for all who follow after him. This undermining of American liberties must stop. We must be proactive in our protection of American liberties not just from the current administration but for all future generations.

Read more Rand Paul's Filibuster here:
ABC News
New York Times
Huffington Post

Join the Army, Give up your Voice

Being a member of our armed forces deserves a certain amount of respect. Making the choice to lay down your life for your country and all the innocent civilians that you will never know is an honorable thing. But joining the military has a lot of consequences, not just the potential for death. A man named Gary Stein is feeling some of those consequences as noted in this article by MSNBC.

I will keep this short.

Freedom of speech is one of the most valued principles in our country and yet our government would restrict this freedom from our service men and women. This man was not advocating rebellion or sedition. He was not rioting or protesting or refusing to serve despite his enlistment. He was not directly challenging a superior officer (the president may be the Commander in Chief but his comments were made on a moderately public forum presumably to be viewed by friends and relatives). Gary Stein honorably served his country for 9 years and he does not deserve this treatment for expressing his opinion on facebook.

I only hope that this is overturned on review because it sets a bad precedent if it's not.

This Should Make you Scared

While perusing the news today I came across this article on MSNBC. The title "5 Men Charged in 9/11 Attacks Could Face Death Penalty" made me do a double take considering it has been more than a decade since the 9/11 attacks. As I read on my horror only grew.

These five men, suspected of plotting and executing the attacks on 9/11 have been held since at least 2003 but charges were not even brought against them until 2008! In 2009 President Obama attempted to move the trial to a civil instead of military court but the charges were thrown out. Our government has continued to hold these men and only now have brought charges again, still in a military court. Where is the justice?

In the United States, authorities cannot legally hold you against your will without arresting you. Once you are arrested, they must bring you before a judge within 72 hours and formal charges must be set down. These men were held in Guantanamo Bay for 5 years before initial charges were brought. And even after the charges were dropped they were held an additional 2+ years until new charges were filed. During that time who knows what they were subjected to? Gitmo has always been rather infamous after all.

I wouldn't even be surprised if at least one of those men was innocent, caught up in the post 9/11 witch hunt. And now they will be put through a military trial in Gitmo, almost certainly found guilty, and in all odds executed without the truth being known to the American people. But what else can our government do? If, by some miracle, one or all of these men were found innocent the backlash would be tremendous. Our government would have to admit that they held foreign nationals for more than 9 years in that hell hole when they had done nothing wrong. What government could live with that shame? Let alone our proud, pompous, arrogant feds. (and yes I know that's redundant but it still doesn't paint them properly)

Maybe they are guilty, and if so I have very few reservations about seeing them executed. If they were guilty they could have and should have been tried and convicted years ago. I understand that the military has always taken fairly liberal license when it comes to issues of terrorism, but this is not the American way. But, then again, with the signing of the NDAA by President Obama I suppose it is.