Obama has been using those drones to "succesfully" kills those "bad guys" overseas. Now his administration will not deny that they may or might use them on US soil.

This could mean that those "speed enforced by aircraft" signs in Fairfax County will result in drones attacking speeding vehicles.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/05/politics/obama-drones-cia/index.html?c=us

and you thought only Republicans trampled your rights

Hellfire missles to reckless drivers.

Someone is FINALLY doing something about those pesky speeders. About time,

This video explains everything you need to know about them drones.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnoTG1sxGEk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Republicans known about rights and privacy. I never would of thought.

No Republican ever won the Nobel Peace Prize for conducting drone killings in a country we are not at war with.

Since Obama took power we've shut down ANSWER and all the anti-war protests. All the former pacifist sheep have now become bloodthirsty warmongers, just as our Dear Great Leader has directed them.

Please, Dear Leader, send in military support to Libya, Egypt, Yemen, and Syria now!! And let's get those drones up in the air in the USA to kill Americans that dare to question the authority of the Obamessiah!

P.S. Condolences on the loss of your close ally and fellow comrade Hugo.

Diehard Lib Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Since Obama took power we've shut down ANSWER and
> all the anti-war protests. All the former
> pacifist sheep have now become bloodthirsty
> warmongers, just as our Dear Great Leader has
> directed them.
>
> Please, Dear Leader, send in military support to
> Libya, Egypt, Yemen, and Syria now!! And let's
> get those drones up in the air in the USA to kill
> Americans that dare to question the authority of
> the Obamessiah!
>
> P.S. Condolences on the loss of your close ally
> and fellow comrade Hugo.

Someone is off their meds...

Holder backpedaled today...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Jsy01ljGcy0

Ok its not a drone but you get the idea.
Attachments:

stop posting this shit in Fairfax General you fucking twat

Where is the liberal outcry. If Bush had done this they would be calling for impeachment. Sending a drone to kill an American citizen in America. WTF is up with that. This is as bad as it gets.

Bush/Cheney = EVIL

Obama = Goodness and light.

Glad I could help.

Punishment without a trial Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Where is the liberal outcry. If Bush had done this
> they would be calling for impeachment. Sending a
> drone to kill an American citizen in America. WTF
> is up with that. This is as bad as it gets.


I don't know about you, but all the liberal blowhards (huffingtonpost and Daily Show) are praising Rand and his filibuster. So yeah, liberal are mad, maybe not mad enough.

exitpolls Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Punishment without a trial Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Where is the liberal outcry. If Bush had done
> this
> > they would be calling for impeachment. Sending
> a
> > drone to kill an American citizen in America.
> WTF
> > is up with that. This is as bad as it gets.
>
>
> I don't know about you, but all the liberal
> blowhards (huffingtonpost and Daily Show) are
> praising Rand and his filibuster. So yeah, liberal
> are mad, maybe not mad enough.

Yeah, all my liberal "friends" on Facebook are freaking out over this...while my conservative friends remain silent, but enjoy Obama getting it from his own party.

I absolutely support drones taking out people who, for example, don't use their turn signals. Of course, eventually such a program would pretty much obliterate the population in the state of Maryland. But that's a risk I'm willing to take. :-)

Technically, O-Bama has been "using drones" on American soil for years . All the O-bots that support him despite his continuation and expansion of repressive policies that his predecessors initiated prove this. Blindly following someone who follows the policies of others that you hate is an excellent example of drone behavior. Especially funny if it wasnt so sad is the blind support by black and hispanic voters while the continuing economic situation impacts them first and worst. O-Bama and Big Brother Holder have deported roughly twice the number of people than Bush ,most of whom were hispanic ,however many hispanics blindly support him while their families are torn apart before their eyes. Foreign wars were bad under Bush , but O-bot drones report that US foreign policy is fine now although fundamentally unchanged. None of this behavior suggests that intelligence is equally distributed. Maybe its his brownish color that proves so irresitable? Naw , couldnt be... That would be racist.

Oh look, another thread started by butthurt republitards. You still upset Obama did was Bush couldn't in killing Bin Laden? Just get over it already.

Oh thank you so much for reminding me. How could I forget that Obama went on a covert operation to Turkey and pulled the trigger? Obama is such a talented soldier.

Right is Wrong Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh look, another thread started by butthurt
> republitards. You still upset Obama did was Bush
> couldn't in killing Bin Laden? Just get over it
> already.


You know its absolutely amazing that the secret service allowed him to go on the raid that killed OBL. When did he have the time to train for it? Hell when did he go through BUDs to qualify for it and what other missions has he been on since Seal Team 6 are all seasoned operators.

I dont know about you but I would rather have a president I dunno be the President and not going on these raids.

If we used the drones to take out people driving slow in the fast lane, we may just spur a new glorious evolution in the homo sapien sapien.

I'll take sending a hundredthousand drones into North Korea over a hundred thousand troops any day.

THREAD MOVED, you nut nibbling chode licker

This is nothing new ask the Branch davidians. All they are doing is skipping the part where you make up criminal charges.

Move the thread back. This is just as relevant to FTC county as that old stabbing in Rose Hill post.

,

I can't wait until drones get miniguns and autocannons.

sumguy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is nothing new ask the Branch davidians. All
> they are doing is skipping the part where you make
> up criminal charges.


The BD's were modifying semi-automatic rifles to fully automatic. Of course, the evidence for this is all based on the federal investigators who combed through the rubble of the compound that they burned down, so you can take that for what it's worth (not much considering the rest of the lies that were put out there by Reno and her hoards).

OP sounds like a camel jockey lovin' hippy. The only good muslim is a dead one. If you love them so much, go move to Pakistan.

I don't see how anyone could support the Branch Davidians, Koresh was emotionally and sexually abusing children.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't see how anyone could support the Branch
> Davidians, Koresh was emotionally and sexually
> abusing children.

Maybe their supporters like emotionally and sexually abusing children?

Unfortunately all the witnesses were killed so we really don't know if those claims are true.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't see how anyone could support the Branch
> Davidians, Koresh was emotionally and sexually
> abusing children.

and certain catholic priests dont?

Another fabricated controversy spun by the GOP.

Why shouldn't they be used in the US if necessary? If some nut job is endangering the lives of others, and a drone is a better way to take him out vs. a sniper who may not have a clear shot, then SO WHAT!? Why shouldn't drones be used by law enforcement? Its not like that by using drones certain laws and practices are going to be thrown out the window.

Lastly, most people probably don't know that drones aren't just for killing, but can gather intelligence in the form of live video and survelence.

kevster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Another fabricated controversy spun by the GOP.
>
> Why shouldn't they be used in the US if necessary?
> If some nut job is endangering the lives of
> others, and a drone is a better way to take him
> out vs. a sniper who may not have a clear shot,
> then SO WHAT!? Why shouldn't drones be used by law
> enforcement? Its not like that by using drones
> certain laws and practices are going to be thrown
> out the window.
>
> Lastly, most people probably don't know that
> drones aren't just for killing, but can gather
> intelligence in the form of live video and
> survelence.


"Democrats: Killing Due Process Since the Reconstruction!"

kevster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Another fabricated controversy spun by the GOP.
>
> Why shouldn't they be used in the US if necessary?
> If some nut job is endangering the lives of
> others, and a drone is a better way to take him
> out vs. a sniper who may not have a clear shot,
> then SO WHAT!? Why shouldn't drones be used by law
> enforcement? Its not like that by using drones
> certain laws and practices are going to be thrown
> out the window.
>
> Lastly, most people probably don't know that
> drones aren't just for killing, but can gather
> intelligence in the form of live video and
> survelence.


Your post shows only that you're ignorant on what Paul was trying to get answers to. The Senator was trying to get the administration to explain when lethal drone strikes would be legal in the US against US citizens. Specifically, while it might (or might not) be OK to drone-smoke a US citizen sitting in a cafe in Afghanistan without due process, does the president think it is OK to drone-smoke the same US citizen sitting in a cafe in Fairfax without due process. Holder and Brennan would not directly answer that question. After the filibuster, Holder released a two sentence statement that basically said, "No, it is not legal."

Being the partisan shit4brains that you are, you don't realize the Paul was protecting your rights as much as anyone else's.

Good ol Democrats do away with the death penalty for criminals but okay with killing citizen with a hellfire missile before being convicted of a crime.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't see how anyone could support the Branch
> Davidians, Koresh was emotionally and sexually
> abusing children.


This was alleged. Never proven and the adults in the compound denied it. The local sheriff also investigated and never found evidence that this was true. I always figured you to be a better skeptic than that eesh.

That's the problem with allegataions is that they can never be proven when you kill everyone before you get them into court. And then, you get to put out whatever story you want and no one's there to refute you.

If Koresh was abusing kids, he deserved what he got. But the other people in the compound, including the fucking kids you seem so worried about were burned to death along with him by Reno's storm troopers. Kinda defeats the whole "lets protect the kids" agruement when you burn them up with flash gernades huh?

Jessie Jackson Juror Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> kevster Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
.....
>
> Being the partisan shit4brains that you are, you
> don't realize the Paul was protecting your rights
> as much as anyone else's.


And when did the administration imply that the rights of citizens was in question in regards to use of a drone? Below is a quote from Holders statement, where he (literly) said the use of drones theoretically could be used if another 9/11 happens. Next thing you know Rand Pauls blathering about the govt. taking out Jane Fonda if they wanted to...a complete overeach of reason and logic.



"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."

kevster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Another fabricated controversy spun by the GOP.
>
> Why shouldn't they be used in the US if necessary?
> If some nut job is endangering the lives of
> others, and a drone is a better way to take him
> out vs. a sniper who may not have a clear shot,
> then SO WHAT!? Why shouldn't drones be used by law
> enforcement? Its not like that by using drones
> certain laws and practices are going to be thrown
> out the window.
>
> Lastly, most people probably don't know that
> drones aren't just for killing, but can gather
> intelligence in the form of live video and
> survelence.

20 dollars says that 6 years ago you were up in arms drones were being used over seas because Bush was doing it and not Obama. Let me guess youre also against water boarding.

Heres another tip for you police dont snipe threats unless they have eyes on target and its an active shooter. They do everything possible to not shot people despite what TV leads you to believe.

We get it Obama is infallible and as long as hes in charge you will support anything the government does

Liberal Logic 102 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We get it Obama is infallible and as long as hes
> in charge you will support anything the government
> does

Like your fellow conservitards did with Dubya after 9/11? Oh, cruel hypocrisy.

Reality: Conservative's Enemy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Liberal Logic 102 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > We get it Obama is infallible and as long as
> hes
> > in charge you will support anything the
> government
> > does
>
> Like your fellow conservitards did with Dubya
> after 9/11? Oh, cruel hypocrisy.


Hmmm......it appears that half of those "conservitards" were in fact, Democrats.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists

This whole issue of using drones over the US against US civilians, has been deemed "entirely hypothetical" by Eric Holder.

The only example of where a drone strike was ever executed against a US citizen, albeit in Yemen, was against an AQAP operative, Anwar al-Awlaki. He was born in New Mexico, moved to England post 9-11. A short time thereafter he traveled to Yemen never to return. This guy had a very long history of jihad against the US including contact with 9-11 hijackers.


Here is an example of what a US citizen has to do in order to become targeted

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTSmYeH0yGs

Can anybody explain to me the underlying threat in this seemingly benign invitation to join Islam at the 10:26 point of the video?

Any American citizen the US govt is considering taking out with a drone strike has probably done more than enough to deserve it.

I have you now.

Vexxxed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hmmm......it appears that half of those
> "conservitards" were in fact, Democrats.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use
> _of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists

So what you're saying is that in a time of say, a certain security crisis; that even though we weren't in charge, we decided it was best to put our differences aside to achieve something?

Kinda like what the conservitards of today are NOT doing, right? Kinda not like how the Republican congressman have been dragging their feet when it comes to say, a certain budgetary crisis? Oh, cruel hypocrisy.

TheNorthman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This whole issue of using drones over the US
> against US civilians, has been deemed "entirely
> hypothetical" by Eric Holder.
>
> The only example of where a drone strike was ever
> executed against a US citizen, albeit in Yemen,
> was against an AQAP operative, Anwar al-Awlaki. He
> was born in New Mexico, moved to England post
> 9-11. A short time thereafter he traveled to Yemen
> never to return. This guy had a very long history
> of jihad against the US including contact with
> 9-11 hijackers.


Wrong, they killed his son in a later attack. He was 16 at the time. He was killed while eating dinner at an outdoor cafe.

Not So Fast Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Wrong, they killed his son in a later attack. He
> was 16 at the time. He was killed while eating
> dinner at an outdoor cafe.


You're right. They did kill him shortly after. That decision may come back to haunt us too.

Edit: It's worth noting that he was not the stated target of that strike.

I have you now.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/08/2013 06:28PM by TheNorthman.

There is an easy way around this whole problem. Just establish a secret court to strip the US citizenship from anyone that the administration wants to eliminate. Then they can blast away without the controversy of targeting a "citizen".

TheNorthman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This whole issue of using drones over the US
> against US civilians, has been deemed "entirely
> hypothetical" by Eric Holder.
>
> The only example of where a drone strike was ever
> executed against a US citizen, albeit in Yemen,
> was against an AQAP operative, Anwar al-Awlaki. He
> was born in New Mexico, moved to England post
> 9-11. A short time thereafter he traveled to Yemen
> never to return. This guy had a very long history
> of jihad against the US including contact with
> 9-11 hijackers.
>
>
> Here is an example of what a US citizen has to do
> in order to become targeted
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTSmYeH0yGs
>
> Can anybody explain to me the underlying threat
> in this
> seemingly benign invitation to join Islam at the
> 10:26 point of the video?
>
> Any American citizen the US govt is considering
> taking out with a drone strike has probably done
> more than enough to deserve it.


Uh huh. Too bad that damn 5th amendment gets in the way. Are the only rights guaranteed to the citizens of this country that you liberal idiots find in the constitution the one where you get to kill your unborn baby and the one that allows homos to marry? Geez, what a bunch of dumbfucks. Little nazis worshipping their messiah in the WH. Pathetic


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution


.
Attachments:

Ha!!! Damn bitch what's wrong with you?

I couldn't care less about Obama, Bush, Romney or any other politician.

By the way, nice meme there boss. One question though; was that suppose to have said "another useless idiot on FFU"?

Who's the idiot now?

I have you now.

Reality: Conservative's Enemy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vexxxed Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Hmmm......it appears that half of those
> > "conservitards" were in fact, Democrats.
> >
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use
>
> > _of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists
>
> So what you're saying is that in a time of say, a
> certain security crisis; that even though we
> weren't in charge, we decided it was best to put
> our differences aside to achieve something?
>
> Kinda like what the conservitards of today are NOT
> doing, right? Kinda not like how the Republican
> congressman have been dragging their feet when it
> comes to say, a certain budgetary crisis? Oh,
> cruel hypocrisy.

Is this some sort of analogy where Obama has flown some jets into the WTC and the Pentagon and crashed one in a field...........all full of people?

What budgetary crisis? The one where ALL the government deems itself above the people in spending more money than we give them?

TheNorthman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Any American citizen the US govt is considering
> taking out with a drone strike has probably done
> more than enough to deserve it.

There are in fact instances where it would be appropriate over seas. However the hypocracy of a government that is against water boarding, wants to give terrorists civilian trials in NY, but they left the door open for drone strikes on American citizens on American soil is absurd.

Its a much larger picture that has been painted by holder and the administration over the last several months of the government can do whatever it wants according to them. Only after getting caught red handed trying to sneak that through have the backtracked after the public out lash.

Just like Holder doesnt believe I should be able to have a gun, I dont believe he should have a drone. In all honesty Im hard pressed to even think of a situation where that would even be appropriate considering the overwhelming resources we have located through out the country that could deal with the treat. I would have less of a problem with cutting a seal team lose on a terrorist cell in the US than a drone firing rockets at an apartment building or a car on the road.

The fact that it took Holder this long and this kind of public pressure to answer a simple question that should have just been No from day 1 is scary.

Reality: Conservative's Enemy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vexxxed Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Hmmm......it appears that half of those
> > "conservitards" were in fact, Democrats.
> >
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use
>
> > _of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists
>
> So what you're saying is that in a time of say, a
> certain security crisis; that even though we
> weren't in charge, we decided it was best to put
> our differences aside to achieve something?
>
> Kinda like what the conservitards of today are NOT
> doing, right? Kinda not like how the Republican
> congressman have been dragging their feet when it
> comes to say, a certain budgetary crisis? Oh,
> cruel hypocrisy.


You have some interesting revisionist history. The Liberals at the time voted for it because they thought it was the right thing to do. Obama is the one who refuses to come together. Compromise doesnt mean doing whatever he says. Hes also had 4 years to work on the economy including 2 where he could have done whatever he wanted yet it didnt seem that important to him. Now hes throwing a temper tantrum because people are going to see that the cuts will do nothing.

The GOP isnt going along with him because his solutions have been spend more tax more thats it. Thats not the right approach and they are doing the right thing. They also already gave him a tax increase in the last debt limit debate and got nothing in return, now theyre supposed to do the same thing again well it doesnt work like that. They tried to work with him on Obamacare, he didnt care what they had to say. But keep drinking the koolaid and dont let actual facts get in the way

Hopefully the drones will sneak up on Mike Cutts. That guy is always up to no good. The damn liberal judges still keep that idiot on the streets.

TheNorthman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ha!!! Damn bitch what's wrong with you?
>
> I couldn't care less about Obama, Bush, Romney or
> any other politician.
>
> By the way, nice meme there boss. One question
> though; was that suppose to have said "another
> useless idiot on FFU"?
>
> Who's the idiot now?


Gee, you are a fucking genius aren't ya. Yep, sharp as a bowling ball. LOL

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot

Could The Use Of Flying Death Robots Be Hurting America's Reputation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05UGYjB4Tyo&feature=player_detailpage

This Just in Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This could mean that those "speed enforced by
> aircraft" signs in Fairfax County will result in
> drones attacking speeding vehicles.

I've always said speeder should be taken out by drones!

FOX News is really dumbing down all the republicans if they believe something like this would happen.

That comment was about stupid as an entire Rush or Hannity show.

Soon we'll have robots to patrol the street. Of course, they'll be programmed to handle crime nonviolently until the police arrive. But there'll be exceptions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtOWNw--azY