Rand Paul Fights for Conservative Principles — And Wins

Arnold Ahlert is a former NY Post op-ed columnist currently contributing to JewishWorldReview.com, HumanEvents.com and CanadaFreePress.com. He may be reached at atahlert@comcast.net.


On Wednesday, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul valiantly opposed the nomination of John Brennan for CIA Director, engaging in a lone filibuster for nearly 13 hours. Though Brennan was ultimately approved Thursday, Paul’s courageous stand brought much-needed attention to the Obama administration’s refusal to rule out carrying out drone strikes against U.S. citizens on American soil. As a result of a frenzy of public engagement on the issue, much supportive of Paul, Attorney General Eric Holder was forced to release a statement late Thursday declaring that President Obama indeed had no authority to use drone strikes against citizens in the U.S. Such a retreat represents a significant victory for the effort to stymie Obama administration overreach and blatant disregard for constitutional authority. Moreover, Sen. Paul should be commended for demonstrating what conservatives can accomplish when they passionately fight and stand on principle.

While the general subject of Paul’s epic effort was abuse of executive power and the Obama administration’s civil liberty policies, his main focus was U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder’s disturbing letter responding to Paul’s question of whether, under certain circumstances, drone strikes could be carried out against U.S. citizens on American soil. “As members of this Administration have previously indicated, the U.S. government has not carried out drone strikes in the United States and has no intention of doing so,” Holder wrote. He continued:

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 for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States[.]

Paul was rightly unsettled by Holder’s pronouncement that he “hoped” such a scenario would never arise and declaration that such an event did not face constitutional obstacles. The opening paragraph of his historic effort, the 9th longest speech in Senate history, set the tone for his rebuttal:

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, Kentucky, is an abomination. It is something that should not and cannot be tolerated in our country. I don’t rise to oppose John Brennan’s nomination simply for the person. I rise today for the principle.

Paul began his marathon session at 11:47 a.m. Wednesday and continued until 12:39 a.m. Thursday morning. At various times he was joined by fellow Republican Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), Mitch McConnell (R-KY), and Mike Lee (R-UT). Yet a key moment occurred in the fifth hour after the filibuster began, when Democratic Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) announced on Twitter that he was headed to the Senate floor to join his Republican colleague. When he got there, Wyden admitted that he intended to “vote for Mr. Brennan on the floor,” but he also concluded that “the executive branch should not be allowed to conduct such a serious and far-reaching program by themselves without any scrutiny, because that’s not how American democracy works. That’s not what our system is about.”

At 4:45 p.m. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) asked if Paul knew when he would end his filibuster so Brennan’s nomination could be brought to a vote. Paul responded that he would stop “if the president or the attorney general will clarify that they will not kill Americans on American soil.” Just after 7 p.m. Paul asked for Democrats’ consent to vote on a non-binding resolution opposing the killing of U.S. citizens on American soil. When Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) proposed a committee hearing in lieu of a vote, Paul continued talking, reminding his listeners that he voted to approve the nominations of Secretary of State John Kerry and Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel. “But I will not sit quietly and let [the president] shred the Constitution…I would be here if it were a Republican president doing this,” he contended. “Really the great irony of this is that President Obama’s opinion on this is an extension of George Bush’s opinion.”

The greater insult to the American people was arguably the indifference expressed by some Democrats. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) referred to the filibuster as “background noise.” Nancy Pelosi refused to watch Paul, contending that “there are certain things that fall into the category of ‘life is too short,’” even as she expressed the hope that “Democrats will use the filibuster sometime as well in that way.” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) called Democrats out. “I agree that one of the saddest things we’ve seen during the eight hours that Rand Paul has been filibustering is the crickets chirping from the other side of the aisle, with the exception of Ron Wyden, and I appreciate his coming down,” Cruz said Wednesday on Mark Levin’s radio show. “But with that exception, where were the Democrats? How can they not be every bit as outraged as all of the rest of us are?”

Democrats may have been reticent to offer support, but several leftist Americans are not. Christopher Anders, Senior Legislative Council at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in Washington, D.C., indicated that Paul’s concerns transcend political ideology. “The information Senator Paul is looking for goes to the very core of what the US is and who Americans are as a people,” Anders told Breitbart.com. He further noted that the standards this administration apparently considers viable “are not standards recognized by any court in the land, any court anywhere in the world.”

Jon Stewart, the liberal-minded host of “The Daily Show,” praised Paul as well. “I can’t say that I agree with Rand Paul about everything, but as issues go, drone oversight is certainly one worth kicking up a fuss for,” said Stewart. Liberal actor John Cusack also supported Paul, even as he tweeted about the lack of support from Senate Democrats. Radical leftist and former Obama administration Green Jobs Czar Van Jones called Paul a “hero” who was “sticking up for civil liberties.” Even the rabidly leftist group Code Pink supported the Senator, offering supportive tweets during his filibuster, and following up with a visit to his office yesterday to thank him.

In stark contrast, the reliably clueless John McCain (R-AZ) took to the Senate floor yesterday to criticize Paul, contending the premise of his filibuster was “simply false.” “I watched some of that, quote, debate, unquote, yesterday,” McCain said. “I saw colleagues who know better come to the floor and voice some of this same concern, which is totally unfounded.”

He piled on even further. “If Mr. Paul wants to be taken seriously he needs to do more than pull political stunts that fire up impressionable libertarian kids in their college dorms. He needs to know what he’s talking about,” added McCain, quoting extensively from a Wall Street Journal editorial that also slammed Paul. “Calm down, Senator,” it said. “Mr. Holder is right, even if he doesn’t explain the law very well. The U.S. government cannot randomly target American citizens on U.S. soil or anywhere else. What it can do under the laws of war is target an ‘enemy combatant’ anywhere at anytime, including on U.S. soil. This includes a U.S. citizen who is also an enemy combatant.”

Both McCain and the Journal editors miss the central point of Paul’s argument: absent due process of some sort, who gets to define an American citizen as an enemy combatant?

Yet McCain doubled down on his fecklessness, characterizing the filibuster itself as a bad precedent. “What we say yesterday is going to give ammunition to those critics who say that the rules of the Senate are being abused. I hope that my colleagues on this side of the aisle will take in that information,” he said. 

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) also criticized his fellow Republicans for supporting Paul. “To my Republican colleagues, I don’t remember any of you coming down here suggesting that President Bush was going to kill anybody with a drone, do you?” Graham said. “They had a drone program back then, all of a sudden this drone program has gotten every Republican so spun up. What are we up to here?”

What lawmakers are “up to” is finding a clear procedure for targeting American citizens on American soil. One that isn’t left in the hands of a cabal of politicians whose process and decision-making are preformed in total secrecy. Yet Sens. McCain and Graham appear satisfied that the executive branch is entitled to abrogate citizens’ constitutional right of Due Process without the least bit of transparency or obligation on the part of the government to explicitly state  the legal justification for such an extreme measure.

Paul responded forcefully to the attacks, blasting McCain and Graham. “They think the whole world is a battlefield, including America, and that the laws of war should apply,” Paul said in an interview on Fox News. “The laws of war don’t involve due process, so when they ask you for an attorney you tell them to shut up. That’s not my understanding of the way America works. I don’t think the laws of war apply to America, I think the Bill of Rights do and I think it’s a disservice to our soldiers that our senators up there arguing that the Bill of Rights aren’t important.”

In the end, it was Paul who was vindicated. Shortly before the final vote on Brennan’s nomination yesterday, the Kentucky Senator received a three-sentence letter from Eric Holder. “It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: ‘Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?’ The answer to that question is no,” Holder wrote.

Both the filibuster and Holder’s latest assertion should build momentum behind bipartisan legislation proposed last month in the House by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) and Ted Poe (R-TX). Their bill would require warrants in order to perform several types of drone surveillance, and prohibit the arming of drones in U.S. airspace. “As we enter this uncharted world of drone technology, Congress must be proactive and establish boundaries for drone use that safeguard the constitutional rights of Americans,” Poe said in a statement last month.

Rand Paul deserves a great deal of praise for bringing together Americans of all political stripes. He gets additional points for wresting critical information from an Obama administration that has made a regular practice of stonewalling questions it does not wish to answer, which it attempted to do in this case. Paul’s bold effort provides the model of the future of the conservative movement and what can be accomplished when those on the right forcefully and engagingly champion the cause.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

  • ObamaYoMoma

    I salute Rand Paul for being right in his filibuster, but is he like his Daddy? Indeed, does he believe in the ludicrous idea that America's so-called "interventionist" foreign policy creates terrorists like his father promotes?

    Never mind the fact that jihad and terrorism and jihadists and terrorists are not the same thing as is widely promoted, but were deliberately conflated together post 9/11 as being the same thing in order to take the focus off of Islam. As jihad in stark contrast to terrorism is holy fighting in the cause of Allah to make Islam supreme and unlike terrorism is both violent and non-violent, with the non-violent variety relative to the violent variety taking place astronomically far more prevalently today. Indeed, jihad has always been part and parcel of Islam and jihadists have been waging jihad in the cause of Allah perpetually since the days that Muhammad was still rampaging the infidels and long before America ever came into existence. Hence, if someone is dumb enough to believe that America's so-called "interventionist" foreign policy creates terrorism and terrorists, then that someone is a paranoid mentally incompetent self-hating moron!

    • Madfoot

      It's called "blowback" and it is an official term in the intelligence community. While the terrorist threat is a serious one, certain actions will breed resentment or be used as propaganda against the US; the tricky part is balancing a proactive national defense with also winning the propaganda war abroad. Because ultimately, if the people of the Middle East hate al Qaeda and turn against them, then that's worth a lot more than any well-placed drone strike.

      Ron Paul was never part of the "blame America first crowd", which is what you seem to believe. He is just a realist.

      • JacksonPearson

        The best propaganda war has been keeping the truth and facts out front, and shining light on the perpetrators. Yes, our problem have been the "anti war," Code Pinkos, or "blame America first crowd," Sad to say, we have many politicians on their Washington soap boxes preaching that Islam is a religion of peace…and that it's been hijacked by a small minority of radicals, of which is very far from the truth. Islam Have been at war with civilization ever since Muhammad signed the Pledge at Aqaba in 620AD. IMO, ALL of congress have fallen into the political correct spider web of Islamic taqiyya and kitman deceit.

        One of the most a grievous acts at the present time by Obama, is appointing John Brennan as director of the CIA. Brennan is a Muslim convert. Muslims have one, and only one loyalty and that's to Allah and his messenger, and NOT to the United States.

        • EarlyBird

          But Jackson, you're talking about "shining light" on Islam to Americans It's like the guy with a "Free Tibet" bumper stick in Los Angeles: does the guy driving think that message is being received by the Chinese government?

          Islamic people know how evil the terrorists are. The problem is that either a.) they are actively rooting for them or, b.) just think that they are the lesser of two evils, the worse evil to become Westernized.

          They are horrified by the idea of becoming an "immoral" Western nation. Its worse than death to them. We need to convince them that we have no desire to take over their governments and culture. Which means we need to stay out of their business to the greatest degree possible. Once they realize we are not a threat to them, they will stop looking to extremism to "protect" them, and the arguments of extremists will wither.

          • JacksonPearson

            Well, the message is slowly and cumber-sonly getting out there,.it is making it through the politically correct mine fields.

            Our problem have been with upper government having the MSM print their thoughts on the front page, in bold type, of which have been distortions about Islam. IMO, it all started with Pres. G.W/ Bush and 9/11, whereas he stated that Islam is a religion of peace that's been hijacked by a small group.of radicals. Nothing could be further from the truth.

            You have to understand, that we can't afford to stay out of their business, because they've declared war on us, forever. We can easily stop, but they can't. Protecting and pillow talking to evil will never satisfy them, or end good for us.

          • patriothere

            Meanwhile a REAL threat to the US, North Korea, has just reignited the korean war.

          • EarlyBird

            Oddly, all the God-fearing, red white and blue patriots on this board are wetting their pants over a band of rag heads, and wanting to get into a war with Iran.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            …with nuclear weapons and no common sense when it comest to radioactive fallout.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "But Jackson, you're talking about "shining light" on Islam to Americans It's like the guy with a "Free Tibet" bumper stick in Los Angeles…"

            How is that?

            "…does the guy driving think that message is being received by the Chinese government?"

            Collectively the message is received but the situations are not even parallel. The Tibetans want national independence, not global dominance for their totalitarian religion. You need to understand that when you present arguments you must focus on salients unless you want to deceive people.

            "Islamic people know how evil the terrorists are."

            OK. That's a broad statement if I ever heard one. 1.5 billion people have reached consensus, have they?

            "The problem is that either a.) they are actively rooting for them or, "

            Rooting for what we call evil while they call it "justice in the name of allah."

            "b.) just think that they are the lesser of two evils, the worse evil to become Westernized."

            Because they believe the same false things but see the tactical failure of terrorism. That's comforting.

            The other factor is that since Islam is coercive, most "Muslims" don't' actually believe Islamic ideology. Those are your "peaceful Muslims."

            "They are horrified by the idea of becoming an "immoral" Western nation. Its worse than death to them. "

            You don't know what you're talking about. Which "they" do you speak of?

            "We need to convince them that we have no desire to take over their governments and culture."

            The ones that do have those concerns are primarily reacting to lies. They think we already have taken over. Every time something goes wrong, some jihadi promotes the theory of Western origin for present day and historical problems they face.

            "Which means we need to stay out of their business to the greatest degree possible. "

            Limit ourselves to defense and shut down international trade and cultural exchange. OK then. We'll allow oil tankers and we'll allow them to immigrate in to the West, but don't you dare do anything to offend them. How will we know when they are offended? The site of blood and smell of smoke.

            "Once they realize we are not a threat to them, they will stop looking to extremism to "protect" them, and the arguments of extremists will wither."

            You're summarizing the Carter Clinton 0'Bama approach. So how did that work out so far? If their arguments were ever based on facts, they'd wither at that moment.

            That's what we're working on. That's what you oppose.

          • EarlyBird

            But you want us to invade, occupy and transform Iran into Connecticut, so you are clearly talking out your a$$.

          • Drakken

            We don't need to occupy Iran, just do a lot of urban renewal and call it a day.

          • EarlyBird

            Tell that to Objective Facts Matter (perhaps the most ironic handle on this entire board). The guy has been advocating for a Iraq redux, but just done "right," which means quick and cheap…!

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Tell what? Why not fight the way we win, when we fight with generals in charge, and diplomats stay out of it.

            If we had fought WW2 the way we are fighting now, we'd have lost that too.

          • EarlyBird

            Roger, the fighting is the easy part. We could flatten Iran in the course of a week. Imagine if all we had to do to win in Iraq or Afghanistan was win the military conflict. We'd have forgotten about those two, week-long wars by now.

            The question is what comes afterward? Your comparisons to WWII ae idiotic. Objective Facts wants us to invade, occupy and transform the whole of Iranian society. Yeah, I like that fantasy too. It would be easier to build Disneyland on Mars.

            Get this: even if it was possible, we'd bankrupt the United States in the process. Yes, spending on wars also bankrupts as much as spending on those lefty pet projects like schools, freeways, bridges, Medicare and the like.

          • patriothere

            He believes in the murder of children.

            Roger 169p · 23 hours ago
            The Almighty gives life and it's His place to take it away. You can't show those Egyptians were perfect and didn't deserve it.

            Th account shows God gave them several times to do the right thing

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            I believe it's God's call.
            And for a hack paid troll I'm surprised you keep endorsing my comment by using it over and over. Do your handlers know this?

            6 minutes ago @ Breitbart.com – Protests to greet Ahma… · 1 reply · 0 points
            I'm like jesus, I'm gonna chase you money changers out of the temple and out of town and of course out of this forum. Me and ohsoquiet and a few other REAL AMERICANS who are being PAID to be here like you Israeli PR men. I'm here to chase you filth out.

          • EarlyBird

            Patriot,

            I've found in this insane asylum, to ask specifically what they want to do in regard to the supposed existential threat of 1.5 billion Muslims, and when pressed, I've received genuine calls for committing a Holocaust against them, completely undoing our Constitution to outlaw Islam, dropping nuclear weapons on Afghanistan, etc.

            This is how fascism flourishes, with genuine ignoramuses and bigots fed a steady diet of hysterical, lying propaganda. Roger is among those fascist idiots.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            This is how people act when they have an enemy that wants us dead.

            The same thing happened during WW2 to Japanese citizens. Only the Japanese were allowed back after the threat was over.

            You ignore the surah 9 mandates. http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/9/
            9:5 Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

          • patriothere

            Diplomats bring peace and save lives. In war, everybody loses.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            In a false peace the evil is given time to grow and solidify. That's why Neville Chamberlain was mistaken.

          • EarlyBird

            Right. Because every conflict is always 1939, every bad guy is Hitler, and everyone who'd rather not get into an unnecessary global conflagration is Chamberlain.

            Got it.

            It's no surprise that the fringe right is so focused on WWII, considering that's how America became so militarized. War has sadly become our national culture. We're getting much better at waging war than building things, getting educated, making real wealth, making peace, art, culture, etc.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You are a fool, you realize that. Every conflict where political reasons overruled military ones were disaster, even back to the Roman legions that didn't stand and fight against the vandals advancing on Rome.

            Civilizations die, we just need to make sure it's islamic cultire and not western culture that dies next. A natural death from within caused by any number of things from inbreeding http://europenews.dk/en/node/34368

            To aids since they have issues regarding marriage. http://www.wluml.org/node/3365

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "But you want us to invade, occupy and transform Iran into Connecticut, so you are clearly talking out your a$$."

            I'm sure you'll quote me on that too as soon as you arrive back from your "observation post" on Mars. Not that you addressed a single thing that I actually did write. But you still have loads of fun, now don't you?

          • Glennd1

            Uh oh, you've stumbled into idiot-land and don't realize it. I applaud your informed view of the world, but if you expect to be able to have a fact based discussion about what's what in the Muslim world here, you also probably go to the barber shop for ice cream.

            I think the single thing these thugs here can't grasp is the scope and breadth of the Muslim world. Over 1 billion people, as many or more than there are Catholics in the world. Just consider the social, cultural and political differences among the world's Catholics and one can start to see how difficult it is to say "Muslim's are this or are that" conclusively.

            But I'm not an apologist for Islam. The plain fact is that there are hundreds of millions of Muslims who support Islamism, and tolerate some level of armed struggle to get there. Opinion polls show that. But one would be wise to remember that there are several hundred million who don't. It's also true that the hard core armed and violent types are a small percentage, but that does not mean Islamism isn't something to pay serious attention to.

            What you also will find no tolerance for here is any consideration of the U.S.'s provocative and immoral acts. or any consideration of another perspective on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – or even factually accurate discussions of the history as people like Shlomo Ben Ami or Benny Morris see it.

            Here, Muslims are blood thirsty maniacs, hell bent on destroying the West – every last one of them is part of it either overtly, or covertly. The worst part? By being so extreme, they marginalize a very important dialog that should be occurring about the nature of Islamism. Instead, they make themselves easy targets for accusations of bigotry or worse.

            Take the example of Pam Geller and Robert Spencer. Spencer was once a trusted intellectual, calling the 'balls and strikes' of Islam and Jihad forthrightly, but very carefully and in a tone that was civil. However, by connecting with Pam Geller, he's allowed himself to be painted as a bigot – which I don't believe he is. But Geller's "Savages" campaign, which was an overtly dishonest and inaccurate attempt to conflate Islamism with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in other words a hard core Zionist piece of agit prop, has marginalized Spencer now too. I always knew Geller was a hateful bigot, and I actually warned Spencer to stay away from her and other cesspools of hatred like WND two years back via email – but he dismissed me as a leftist fool.

            Spencer has made himself irrelevant. Horowitz is not seen as anything other than a Zionist apologist and Islam hater, which is sad when both of them have fine minds and the ability to make sober, serious arguments and commentary. But all this has been sacrificed on the altar of a bloodlust that destroys their credibility, and none here can see it. No matter what. You could diagram the sentences in Geller's Savages ad for them and they wouldn't see it, they would say, yes, Muslims are savages.

            So, don't come here expecting civility – you are way down the 'rabbit hole' here and the looking glass is decidedly Zionist colored.

          • Drakken

            So Glen, please point out to the unenlightened here, where islam is and goes, and it's not a problem? Please point out to us, why rape in European countries is expressly a muslim problem? And not a eurocentric one? As for Gellar? I would love for you to point out to the rest of us where she is wrong? You can't, because her language hurts your precious sensibilities and she gives you a case of the vapors because she spoke naughty about a certain false religion. Somewhere in life you came to the conclusion that all people and religions are equal, when it is clear they are not and never will be. Do yourself a huge favor Glen, quit using the race and bigot card, for they clearly have zero meaning because you folks on the left have abused it to the point it has no meaning anymore.

          • Glennd1

            Hi Dufus.

            1. I believe Islamism is a cultural and political force that we must reject. Nothing I've ever said on this site contradicts that. What I don't believe is that the U.S. should support Israel. What I don't believe is that our being provocative in the region for 50+ years has helped us at all. But I don't sympathize with the Muslims and Islamism at all. I'd like to just leave them to themselves. If we stop making ourselves a target, they will go back to killing each other.

            2. Geller is wrong when she conflates the Palestinian-Israeli conflict with Islamism and Jihad, calling all opponents of Israel's colonization and expulsion of the indigenous people's of Palestine, "savages". Trying to conflate our struggle against the Salafism of Al Qaeda with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is simply a lie. And calling all who engage in resistance against Israel "savages" is bigoted and wrong.

            I call you a bigot because you say many bigoted things, Drakken. You have had comments censored here by the adminstrator for being bigoted. When you call all Muslims savages, you are being a bigot. As for your other assertions about what I think about the world and religions, you have no idea what you are talking about – you are just making stuff up in your head that you think sounds good without any factual basis.

            Please, "Gunny", deal with reality. If you say bigoted things, you are a bigot. And whether you actually commanded an infantry unit or not in combat doesn't make a darn bit of difference to that truth.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            Glennd1,

            If you are against brutal occupations, then get your butt OUT of North America.

            Your continued brutal and racist occupation of Native American land is a bit hypocritical.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            I believe Islamism is a cultural and political force that we must reject.

            In other words, you believe in myths, fantasies, and fairy tales, which explain a lot about your unhinged perceptions.

            What I don't believe is that the U.S. should support Israel.

            Exactly why? In other word, you swallow piss poor Islamic taqiyya like its manna from heaven and you also hate Jews too, which makes it even easier for you to swallow.

            What I don't believe is that our being provocative in the region for 50 years has helped us at all.

            Stop being redundant, you have made it adequately clear that you are a self-hating loon.

            If we stop making ourselves a target, they will go back to killing each other.

            I hate to rain on your clueless parade, but despite your hilarious fantasies about the USA being provocative, which is utterly absurd, Muslims are the slaves of Allah and are commanded to take over the world via the imposition of sharia to make Islam supreme. Furthermore, that jihad to make Islam supreme has been ongoing perpetually since shortly after the Hijra in 622 CE and long before the USA ever became provocative or was even discovered for that matter. Indeed, the Barbary Coast Wars we fought in the early 1800's was part of that same ongoing perpetual jihad back then that somehow you idiotically blame on America.

            Geller is wrong when she conflates the Palestinian-Israeli conflict with Islamism and Jihad

            No…she's a 100 percent correct because all Muslims are jihadists since a Muslim can't be a Muslim and not be a jihadists at the same time since the two are inseparable. Indeed, there is only one mainstream orthodox Islam and Islamism, i.e. radical Islam, is a perversion of reality and a factual myth. To assume that the so-called Palestinians, which are the proxies of the Islamic world, are alone different from the rest of the Muslim population of jihadists because they are fighting a jihad against the Jews in which you obviously hate is absurd. By the way, it's not just Israel that is fighting a jihad, but every country in the world that borders an Islamic country is under assault from jihad. Yet in the case of Israel, they are better able to resist than most.

            calling all opponents of Israel's colonization and expulsion of the indigenous people's of Palestine, "savages"

            By the way, your portrayal of history is a complete and utter farce better known as taqiyya created to dupe gullible self-hating useful idiots.

            And calling all who engage in resistance against Israel "savages" is bigoted and wrong.

            By the way, "resistance" is just another word for jihad in Islamic parlance.

            When you call all Muslims savages, you are being a bigot.

            It's only bigoted if it isn't true and meant to vilify, however, in this case he is absolutely 100 percent correct, as all Muslims are indeed jihadists, which makes them savages in my book. In fact, an individual can't be a Muslim and not be a jihadist at the same time, as the complete, total, and unconditional submission to the will of Allah is the first and foremost requirement of Islam. Hence, if an individual stops being a jihadist, then that individual at the same time also ceases being a Muslim. That individual would then be deemed a blasphemous apostate in which case Islam dictates that individual be put to death. The instance that individual ceases being a jihadist, that individual also ceases being a Muslim.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            I think the single thing these thugs here can't grasp is the scope and breadth of the Muslim world. Over 1 billion people, as many or more than there are Catholics in the world. Just consider the social, cultural and political differences among the world's Catholics and one can start to see how difficult it is to say "Muslim's are this or are that" conclusively.

            Your idiotic and insane moral equivalence of Islam with the Catholic religion unequivocally indicates that you are a thoroughly ill informed moonbat. I hate to rain on your idiotic parade of stupidity, but Islam isn't a religion at all in the Christian-Judeo Western sense. Instead, Islam is an extremely rabid and very aggressive form of totalitarianism that aims to take over the world to make Islam supreme via the imposition of sharia. Talk about not having a clue even after all these years. Loon you take the cake. Damn!

            But I'm not an apologist for Islam.

            No…not at all and not very much! However, you are also an incredibly unhinged/suicidal comedienne.

            The plain fact is that there are hundreds of millions of Muslims who support Islamism,

            There isn't another form of Islamism or what is more commonly referred to as being radical Islam, as that would be exceedingly sacrilegious and blasphemous. There is only mainstream orthodox Islam, and all Muslims are jihadists, either violent jihadists as in AQ or otherwise non-violent jihadists that pursue jihad via stealth and deception. Mass Muslim immigration of Muslims to the West is an example of this latter type of jihad that you are oblivious to. Meanwhile, all Muslims that don't adhere to the tenets of sharia per their individual submissions to the will of Allah are deemed to be blasphemous apostates and summarily executed per the dictates of Islam. Yeah right…Islam is a lot like the Catholic religion and Muslims are also almost identical to Christians, at least in your incredibly naive and idiotic mind. Roll eyes. No wonder you are so confused!

            But one would be wise to remember that there are several hundred million who don't.

            And they are still breathing, alive, and living, uhm…go buy a clue! And where are they? Actually astronomically far more Muslims in the world are non-violent jihadists pursuing jihad via stealth and deception. These are the Muslims that like a gullible useful idiot you naively assume to be "peaceful" and "moderate" Muslims. Nevertheless, I hate to keep raining on your moronic parade again and again, but either a Muslim is a jihadist or a blasphemous apostate, and if that person is the latter then that person must be executed per the dictates of Islam. In other words, a person can't be what many in the West naively assume to be a "peaceful" and "moderate" Muslim without also being at the same time a blasphemous apostate that must be executed per the dictates of Islam. Indeed, you are incredibly gullible and ill informed.

            It's also true that the hard core armed and violent types are a small percentage, but that does not mean Islamism isn't something to pay serious attention to.

            Uhm….they are all hardcore since unconditional submission to the will of Allah, i.e., sharia, is the first and foremost requirement of Mainstream Orthodox Islam as opposed to Islamism, which only exist in the minds of flakes, kooks, loons, moonbats, weirdoes, and self-hating morons. But you are correct in this regard; the population of violent jihadists relative to the population of the non-violent variety makes up only a tiny percentage of the total population of Muslims, which again and redundantly consist entirely of violent and non-violent jihadists, as any Muslim who isn't a jihadists is instead a blasphemous apostate that per the dictates of Islam must be executed. Indeed, you can't be a Muslim if you are not also a jihadists at the same time, as the two are inseparable.

            –continued

          • Glennd1

            You just keep saying the same things over and over again – it doesn't make them anymore true. You are the one who doesn't get it. I didn't draw any moral equivalence to Catholicism, what I was doing was trying to get you to see that vast breadth of Islam. Islam itself has morphed and changed over centuries. Do you know, for example, that for a long time Shia clerics were not interested in governing? They left politics to a separate sphere?

            You also just miss the conflict that is going on in Muslim societies about violent Jihad. You are correct that there is a threat, but to claim that all Muslims are hell bent on violent Jihad on the west is ignorant. For example, do you know that 78% of Muslim Americans believe that suicide bombing and other forms of violence against civilian targets to defend Islam from its enemies can never be justified? Here a link to those survey results from Pew Research – a non-partisan research firm. http://www.pewforum.org/Politics-and-Elections/Li

            But you don't base your opinions on facts. While you are correct about the nature of Muslim scripture, and there is real support for that kind of fanaticism in some parts of the Muslim world, you can't just claim they are all "savages" or hell bent on our destruction and not be laughed at. You are a joke. You are a guy with the screen name "ObamaYoMama" – do you see how absurd you are?

          • ObamaYoMoma

            You just keep saying the same things over and over again

            But only to correct your delusions and fantasies in which you repeat and replay incessantly and redundantly.

            I didn't draw any moral equivalence to Catholicism

            Are you delusional? It's obvious that you are. In fact, you admit to it in your very next sentence and then go on to cite myths and fantasies about Islam that are all garbage. Very apparently, you believe in garbage, which is not surprising.

            Islam itself has morphed and changed over centuries.

            If you understood anything about Islam you would also understand that it's impossible for Islam to ever evolve, morph, or change over millennium, more or less centuries. You don't have the first clue about Islam, as you have swallowed taqiyya like a gullible useful idiot meant to deceive you lock, stock, and barrel.

            Do you know, for example, that for a long time Shia clerics were not interested in governing? They left politics to a separate sphere?

            Do you understand how gullible and unhinged you are? Obviously not!

            You also just miss the conflict that is going on in Muslim societies about violent Jihad

            The only conflict regarding violent jihad going on in Islamic societies is the debate of which is the better strategy to use between violent jihad and non-violent jihad. Of course, since there are astronomically far more non-violent jihadists relative to violent jihadists, the non-violent jihadists are dominating that debate.

            Needless to say I fear the non-violent varieties of jihad, such as mass Muslim immigration to the West, far more than I fear the violent jihadists. Indeed, the Cold War was said to be cold because it took place for the most part clandestinely behind the scenes via stealth and deception. It's the same strategy with non-violent jihad, which is pursued clandestinely via stealth and deception. Muslims are very adept at exploiting the ignorance's of gullible useful idiot leftwing moonbats like you.

            Indeed, look at Europe, thanks to Leftism in the second half of this century many European countries will become majority Muslim countries and sharia states, because Leftism is a recipe for self-destruction. Closely examine how the infidel Coptic Christian dhimmis are treated in Egypt today, because that will be how the new minority Euroloons will be treated in those European countries that become sharia states when that inevitability reaches fruition later on this century. Yet, that is exactly what you wish upon Israeli Jews today…go figure.

            You are correct that there is a threat, but to claim that all Muslims are hell bent on violent Jihad on the west is ignorant.

            You don't have the first clue about Islam. Yet, you have the audacity to call me and other experts that do ignorant. That indicates that you are a hopeless basket case.

            Moreover, that is not what I said. Go read my posts again. I've said quite the opposite. That jihad and terrorism are two very distinct and different manifestations. That terrorism always and only involves extreme violence directed at non-combatant civilians, but that jihad, on the other hand, not only utilizes extreme violence directed against non-combatant civilians and military combatants, but that it also takes place primarily non-violently via stealth and deception as well. As the vast overwhelming amount of jihad that takes place today is non-violent. In addition, terrorism is motivated by any number of political causes and reasons. Meanwhile, jihad is holy fighting in the cause of Allah to make Islam supreme via the imposition of sharia. Jihadists are not terrorists. Instead, they are soldiers of Allah and should be viewed in that respect.

            –continued

          • ObamaYoMoma

            For example, do you know that 78% of Muslim Americans believe that suicide bombing and other forms of violence against civilian targets to defend Islam from its enemies can never be justified?

            Put yourself in their shoes…you invaded another country under false pretenses via deception, would you come clean on their surveys? Muslims are obliged to deceive infidels, because they are obligated, per the will of Allah in which they unconditionally submitted, to pursue jihad to make Islam supreme and to subjugate those infidels into dhimmitude via the eventual imposition of sharia.

            Indeed, point to just one Islamic majority country that is not an Islamic totalitarian hellhole. Point to just one Islamic majority country that doesn't harshly oppress and brutally discriminate the unfortunate infidels that are subjugated into dhimmitude in that country. Point to just one population of Muslim immigrants out of the millions that actually assimilated and integrated and matriculated into contributing and productive members of their newly adoptive host societies instead of forming Muslim enclaves that in time morph into Muslim no-go zones ruled by Sharia as tiny Islamic statelets within the larger host states. Apparently, you are just extremely gullible and unaware or otherwise oblivious to reality.

            But you don't base your opinions on facts.

            Excuse me, unlike you all my opinions are based only on facts and reality! In FACT, you wouldn't recognize a FACT if it stared you in the face and spit in your eye.

            you can't just claim they are all "savages" or hell bent on our destruction and not be laughed at.

            Laughed at by what, leftwing self-hating loons like you that not only hate and despise capitalism and freedom and blame all the world's ills on America, a capitalist country, but also at the same time believe in the Marxist fantasy of a social utopia where the benevolent government provides all the people's needs in exchange for surrendering their freedoms.

            Nevertheless, the FACT of the matter is the first and foremost requisite of Islam is total, complete, and unconditional submission to the will of Allah, i.e., sharia, where apostasy is punished by death. Hence, all Muslims are jihadists and if they are not jihadists then that means they are apostates in which case they must be executed per the dictates of Islam.

            In FACT, jihad unlike terrorism in which jihad isn't, is pursued both violently and non-violently, but primarily non-violently, as the astronomical majority of Muslims relative to the violent jihadists are non-violent jihadists that pursue jihad via stealth and deception. As a matter of FACT, the word Islam in Arabic means "submission" and the world Muslim in Arabic means "one who submits." Indeed, Muslims are the slaves and soldiers of Allah.

            What other religions in the world require total, complete, and unconditional submission to the will of God and punishes apostasy by death? The answer is none of them. Which means that Islam is not a religion, at least in the Western Christian-Judeo sense of the word. Instead, it's a very rabid form of totalitarianism that seeks to take over the world and control all aspects of life down to the minutest details.

            You are a joke. You are a guy with the screen name "ObamaYoMama" – do you see how absurd you are?

            Yeah…I'm a joke making a mockery out of your idol. And you are a self-hating leftwing loon. The difference though is I am sane and clear-eyed and you are far from it.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            What you also will find no tolerance for here is any consideration of the U.S.'s provocative and immoral acts. or any consideration of another perspective on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – or even factually accurate discussions of the history as people like Shlomo Ben Ami or Benny Morris see it.

            Provocative and immoral acts? Damn you are even more mentally incompetent than I first gave you credit for being. By the way, Benny Morris has repudiated many of his past stances, but that is something you delusional leftwing moonbats conveniently like to ignore. Nevertheless, the sole reason behind the jihad being waged by the Islamic world against Israel via their patsies the so-called Palestinians is because the Israelis happen to be Jews, i.e., unbelievers/infidels and also because Israel is a democratic state that embraces freedom and equality for all people that happens to be located right in the very heart of Islam. Indeed, Israel could satisfy every idiotic demand made by the so-called Palestinians, but that would never satisfy the Islamic world until the Jewish unbelieving infidels were made to be subjugated dhimmis in their own country. I was wondering what it is you were swallowing that made you so incredibly unhinged? Now I know, it is Islamic taqiyya that you gobble up like its some sort of manna from heaven.

            By being so extreme, they marginalize a very important dialog that should be occurring about the nature of Islamism.

            Yeah lets have a dialog about the nature of so-called imaginary Islamism. Boom your now dead! You definitely don't get it. What a loon! No wonder you side with the so-called Palestinians and swallow all sorts of absurd taqiyya and the more absurd and flakier the better. Talk about confused; you are more than just a little confused.

            With respect to your perception and opinions of Spencer, Geller, and Horowitz, it only demonstrates and proves unequivocally that you are totally unhinged and remarkably mentally incompetent. By the way, Spencer dismissed you as a leftist fool because you are a leftist fool, an exceedingly inept one at that.

            Spencer has made himself irrelevant.

            Maybe irrelevant to you, but that's a good thing in Spencer's book since you are incredibly unhinged and self-hating. Man…I'm sorry I wasted my time! You are a hopeless lost cause.

          • Drakken

            Bravo Sir! You have more patience than I do to try to tell the facts to Glenn the leftist/progressive. It amazes me that brutal facts are shown, and they just ignore reality and rely on wishful kumbaya thinking as their narrative. Reality is going to be a very painful lesson to learn to Glenn and company.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            It wasn't patience. I didn't really understand how mentally incompetent he was until after I read his nonsense. Had I realized earlier I would have blown that loon off like Spencer.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            "The plain fact is that there are hundreds of millions of Muslims who support Islamism, and tolerate some level of armed struggle to get there. Opinion polls show that. But one would be wise to remember that there are several hundred million who don't. "

            How about the Muslims who oppose the Islamists who have hijacked Islam and commit Crimes Against Humanity fight the reactionary Islamofascist forces who have brought so much ill repute to Islam?

            The US should not have to fight Islamofascism. MUSLIMS must.

            The US should not have had to go into Pakistan to take down OBL, Pakistan should have.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            Dude…I hate to be the one to break the bad news to you, but all Muslims are jihadists, either violent jihadists like AQ or non-violent jihadists that pursue jihad via stealth and deception, as the unconditional submission to the will of Allah is the first and foremost requirement of Islam. Hence, the presence of so-called "moderate" Muslims is a myth proposed by only leftwing useful idiots. As all Muslims are either jihadists, i.e., violent or non-violent jihadists, or otherwise they aren't Muslims at all, but blasphemous apostates instead, in which case they must be executed per the dictates of Islam.

            Hence, the objectives of the Bush administration's nation-building missions in Afghanistan and Iraq were not only ludicrous but impossible as well, and of course that is why they both inevitably failed and turned into the two biggest strategic blunders ever in American history.

            Nevertheless, delusional Republicans and Dhimmicrats are still promoting them as great victories despite the obvious reality. It's amazing!

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            The US can't succeed in "nation building" in Afghanistan, Iraq.

            Only the few sane secular citizens of those two islamist basket cases can do that.

          • EarlyBird

            Wow! Screw Up, you're doing it again: making sense!

      • ObamaYoMoma

        It's called "blowback" and it is an official term in the intelligence community. While the terrorist threat is a serious one, certain actions will breed resentment or be used as propaganda against the US; the tricky part is balancing a proactive national defense with also winning the propaganda war abroad. Because ultimately, if the people of the Middle East hate al Qaeda and turn against them, then that's worth a lot more than any well-placed drone strike.

        Oh no…not the infamous ludicrous "blowback" theory developed by that infamous self-hating loon that Ron Paul like the moron he is latched onto? Reread my post, especially that last sentence!

        "Official"…while that makes it strong! Give me a break you unhinged loon! So according to you and other self-hating kooks and mesmerize Ron Paul acolytes, despite the history of Islam, America's interventionist foreign policy creates terrorism and terrorists, even though Islam has been waging a jihad perpetually against all infidels since shortly after the Hirja in 622 CE, when Muhammad transformed Islam from a would be religion to a very draconian and aggressive form of totalitarianism that aims to take over the world. Whatever it is you guys are sniffing please send me some of that bad stuff at br549@dumbass.com. Thanks for wasting my time with you and Ron Paul's gullible idiotic nonsense! Talk about brain washed! Man….

        Because ultimately, if the people of the Middle East hate al Qaeda and turn against them, then that's worth a lot more than any well-placed drone strike.

        You don't have the first clue about the people in the Middle East. The people in the Middle East that are the Muslims are jihadists that hate unbelievers, i.e., infidels, per the dictates of mainstream orthodox Islam, as jihad not only happens violently as in 9/11 but also non-violently by stealth and deception. In other words, Muslims are our enemies and the eternal enemies of all infidels in the world. In fact, astronomically far more jihad is manifested non-violently by stealth and deception than via violence. However, like all inculcated self-hating loons you only focus on the violent jihad because like a mental incompetent you believe it to be terrorism caused by America's "interventionist" foreign policies per that idiot Ron Paul and other moronic self-haters that are all unhinged kooks!

        Further, that statement was also the moronic premise of GWB, another self-hating leftwing moonbat, when he set America on the course to remake the Middle East and the Islamic world into a democratic bastion of freedom and prosperity ala Woodrow Wilson, another infamous self-hating leftwing loon. I hate to rain on all you moronic self-hater's parade, but Islam is not a religion like you unhinged moonbats stupidly assume, instead its a very draconian form of totalitarianism as all religious aspects of Islam were abrogated, i.e., cancelled out, by the latter verses of the Koran issued by Muhammad after the Hirja that had the effect of transforming Islam from initially being a religion into becoming a very draconian and aggressive form of totalitarianism that aims to subjugate the world under Sharia or Islamic law. And that you unhinged moonbats is the fundamental reason why the nation-building missions in Iraq and Afghanistan inevitably turned into the two biggest strategic blunders ever in American history. Hence, you can go on believing kooks like Ron Paul and blaming America like a self-hater, but you losers don't have the first clue about the history of Islam or what it is the USA and the free world is actually up against. Thank God you self-hating kooks were marginalized during the Cold War with Communism because we would have lost that war like we are today.

        Ron Paul was never part of the "blame America first crowd", which is what you seem to believe. He is just a realist.

        Give me a break…that self-hating kook Ron Paul is one of its loudest advocates and a card carrying member, yet you apparently were taken in by that kook lock, stock, and barrel! How gullible you are!

        Meanwhile, can anyone tell me if Rand Paul is another moronic self-hating kook like his Dad? Is he a chip off the old block or not? Does anyone actually know or is he keeping it a secret?

        • EarlyBird

          Wow, you're an angry, ignorant freak.

          Madfoot was using a very widely used term in the intelligence community. Yes, we can do stupid things in the process of attempting to do smart things, and this can result in "blow back." If we, for instance, wipe out a hundred people in a rest home in the process of trying to get a couple of terrorists, the "blowback" can be that we have now added to our number of enemies who now hate us for what we did to the old people. Get it?

          No, moron, but Muslims the world over are not all robots set on "kill." They, like you and me, actually respond to different circumstances differently.

          By simply acknowledging that our actions have consequences, that makes one a "self-hating kook," an "unhinged loon," etc.? Grow up, you idiot.

          • Drakken

            Early nonsense, as usual, the intellegence community is divided into two camps,the first camp, which is in charge now, wants to appease the muslims in the hope they will like us, the other camp is being marginalized for now, wants to bring fire and brimstone to the savages, I'm in the second camp for that is what works, and after 20 years of working the middle/far east and Africa, I can tell you the muslim is either at your feet or at your throat, always keep them at your feet, but hey you go ahead and sing kumbay with them and try towin their hearts and minds and lets see how that works out for ya. As for me, when they fear you, they respect you. But good luck with the COEXIST sticker on your prius.

          • EarlyBird

            Rambo, even marines in the field, taking fire, want to avoid "blowback." They want to blow up the truck carrying Taliban, not accidentally blow up a school bus, because the latter hurts their mission, aka creates "blowback."

            This is not a difficult concept, nor is this a video game where we're shooting mindless zombies. There are actually Muslims who are not attempting to kill us.

          • Drakken

            Since you were never in the Marines as I was,and that is Gunney to you by the way, spare me the effing nonsense, no such thing as blowback dumbazz, if you had been in combat, you would know that, since you haven't, let me splain it to you, when you level a village because your getting shot at from it, it is a message to the next village not to do the same thing, and it works. See the thing is, your going at this the wrong way, your thinking, that they think just like us, when it is clear they don't. They aren't afraid to sacrifice thousands, when we get a splinter, people have a meltdown. That is why we are losing azzcrackistan because the ROE is killing those poor troops for looking wrong at hadji. In hindsight, we should have let the Russians have it, they are better at pacification than we are.

          • EarlyBird

            Hate to break this to you, but the whole of Afghanistan is not in a constant firefight. And hate to further break this to you, but our kill 'em all approach in Vietnam is part of what pushed so many S. Vietnamese into the arms of the communists.

            Shouldn't you be off chain-watching snuff films or something, Killer?

          • Drakken

            Again you don't know what your talking about, if we used the killemall approach in Vietnam, we would have won. Political micromanaging is what lost Vietnam and it is what is losing in azzcrackistan. The ROE is so restrictive that we are losing our folks in favor of theirs, pizz poor strategy. Hmmm maybe you should get off your lazy azz and come play in the sandbox instead of talking about something you know nothing about. Shouldn't you be throwing daisies at the Mrines with a COEXIST sticker on that prius of yours? Daisy?

          • Walt

            You're absolutely correct Gunny! Corruption at the highest levels of successive S. Vietnam governments is what created so many Viet Cong, who were there and active before we ever became engaged. And our stupid ROEs over time (Macnamara), such as having to ask permission of the local 'warlord' before we could engage or run a patrol was ludicrous at best. And the Chu Hoi program proved that time after time. (CPO, USN, RVN 67-68)

          • Glennd1

            Have you ever asked why there wasn't the political will for total war in Vietnam and Afghanistan? We had it in WWII when we firebombed Tokyo and Dresden – critics were dismissed at the time. Perhaps the cause of defending a tiny, irrelevant nation from communism didn't arouse the same passion in the American people? Perhaps we were sold a bill of goods about what we could do with limited amounts of troops because policy makers knew that they could never get the force levels they really needed to win if they actually asked for them?

            Afghanistan is a perfect case in point. Every serious military strategist out there told us that we'd need about 500k troops on the ground to take, clear and hold the territory required to effectively eliminate the Taliban. It would also have taken very serious levels of air and armor. The cost would have been 5 fold or more. Casualties would be much higher. Civilian deaths would necessarily skyrocket. After 12-15 months we could have killed or captured the lions share (mostly killed).

            Do you think the American people would have voted for that? Do you think congress would have voted for it? Do you think wiping out the Taliban was/is worth 2,3 – 4 trillion dollars? The question answers itself.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            Perhaps we were sold a bill of goods about what we could do with limited amounts of troops because policy makers knew that they could never get the force levels they really needed to win if they actually asked for them?

            Uhm….how are you going to win in Afghanistan? The people are Muslims. In other words, they are our eternal enemies forever. Not to mention that Western style democracy that embraces freedom and liberalism is seen as an abomination in Islam that must absolutely be obliterated. The truth is it was always impossible for us to win since the very beginning. Hence, the mission in Afghanistan should have been limited to ONLY the eradication of OBL and AQ in response to 9/11 and that should have been accomplished as fast and as brutally as possible to leave behind deterrence, so that the Islamic world would see and understand what happens inevitably when you F— with America!

            Afghanistan is a perfect case in point. Every serious military strategist out there told us that we'd need about 500k troops on the ground to take, clear and hold the territory required to effectively eliminate the Taliban.

            Man…you swallow all kinds of unhinged garbage. Indeed, the more unhinged it is, the more you swallow it. Even if GWB had acceded to those idiotic recommendations, we still would have lost the war, because the war is based on a false premise that is utterly untrue and absolutely absurd. Indeed, you can't win something based on myths and misconceptions. We had no business invading Afghanistan and Iraq for the reasons we did, because our elites like you still today totally misunderstood what we were up against and what we are fighting. In other words, they were all utterly incompetent the same way you are only not as much.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "Hate to break this to you, but the whole of Afghanistan is not in a constant firefight. And hate to further break this to you, but our kill 'em all approach in Vietnam is part of what pushed so many S. Vietnamese into the arms of the communists."

            Discourse with you is really nearly pointless.

          • EarlyBird

            Shouldn't you be off planning the invasion of Iran?

            Step 1: A Magical War Happens…!

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Would it end the dance towards nuclear armament there?

          • EarlyBird

            Not air strikes by themselves, and another invasion would bankrupt the US.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You sure do try to control the terms of the debate here.

            I don't advocate either, and those two choices aren't our only choices. For you to pretend they are means you ignore all of history.

            And our enemy decides a lot, we don't have all the time in the world to decide artificial things as you pretend.

            Just as Japan took our choices away at Pearl Harbor when Iran gets the bomb all of a sudden we'll realize that it would have been cheaper now, while they're still not nuking anyone.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            Roger, why is Navy so afraid of me? Is it becuase I destroyed his site?

            You really give it to him on your twiter page.

            thanks!!!
            https://twitter.com/RogerRussellFig

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            If he's afraid of you, why are you posting here instead of at his site to put him in his place?You're a coward.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            Because Navy poops his pants and deletes me as soon as I comment. The guy needs to grow a pair. But it's ok, I already humiliated and destroyed his site.

            Why are you afraid of pissed off pirate?

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            If that were true you would be posting there instead of hiding from him,Coward.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            I do like that Navy lets everyone call you a gay stalker on his website. Kudos Navy.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You are scared of him. Or you would be saying that to his face over there.

            Coward.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            You say it for me on your twitter, thanks.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Still using that fake account?

            What a coward, still hiding behind someone else's name and photo?
            Why am I not shocked? Your profile pic you're using now is me having dinner with people you have no reason to know anything about.

            What a perverted stalker.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            You don't like my redneck profile picture? Too bad. They like eating that redneck Dairy Queen crap while talking about redneck internet stalking.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            This may come as a shock to you. But anyone that has fed children will understand this. When you take kids out for a treat you take them where there is food they enjoy.

            Ice cream is a treat that they enjoy.
            And it's not your picture, it's one you borrowed off my facebook page since you're a sick sexually twisted stalker.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            Those kids are soon going to be as fat and disgusting as the "adults" taking them to Dairy Queen.

            You aren't fooling anybody. those big, fat , pigs took those kids to Dairy Queen for only one reason. so that they can pig out on cheap, crap, redneck food.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            So will you want to chop their heads off too?

            You're just a sick stalker troll.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            Only one head I really want. the gay, virgin, internet stalker.

            I feel sorry for those kids. They will be fat as hell in a few years.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Poor little muslim friendly troll. Doesn't it bother you to come here and lower yourself into this sick tormented persona you've trapped yourself in?

            Wouldn't you rather be basking in adoration at your local mosque and talking to the men about borrowing their goat or something?

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            Are those kids stuffiing themselves full of redneck food right now.

            Getting ready for their jobs at Walmart when they are fat 18 year old slobs.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Are you still out in the barnyard looking for a slow goat that can't run from you?

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            Start listening to Michelle Obama, and stop making your children fat slobs, stupid rednecks.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Says you the medical marijuana man?

          • onepornqueen

            Sexual harassment laws apply to guys, too, Saul.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            He's just a sick sexually perverted stalker troll.

            What can you expect.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            Look who came to defend his gay friend.
            https://twitter.com/RogerRussellFig

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Look who set up a fake account impersonating me.

            And doing very badly at it. The first account was suspended and why do you think this one will be up for very long?

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            Your second account has been up for over a week. A long week of gay twitting to Navy.

            Plus, you probablty have other gay twitter accounts I don't know about.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Still pretending. Still ashamed of who you are and hiding behind the pics and name of someone else.

            How pathetic.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            It's your account. Own it.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            No, it's not. And you know that since you set it up like all the gay dating site profiles you set up in my name without my knowledge or permission.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            Yes, it's yours. And if you hate it so much, why do you keep it up?

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Still pretending?

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            I noticed that Dana Loesch blocked your twitter account yesterday.

            Why?

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Why do you pretend it's my twitter account?

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            You have a gay twitter. Own it.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            No, I have a sexually deviant stalker that impersonates me on twitter.You own it, you control it and you think that it makes 'me' look bad?

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            You own it, and Dana Loesch hates you.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            No, Dana hates you. You are such a coward you hide behind my face and name.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            Dana doesn't know me. But she hates your face and name, that's for sure.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Wow, isn't it sad that even when you hide behind someone else's face and name you're still hated?

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            PeNot my face and name. She hates you.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            She knows what matters, you are who you are.And she doesn't know me. She has dealt with you.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            She see you, and knows it's you.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            It's not me she's hearing.And why is it you are so proud of everyone hating you and yet still aren't brave enough to show your own face?

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            Navy must be too busy terying to save what is left of his failed site, becuase I was sure he would have banned you from his twiter by now.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Is that what is bothering you? The fact you can't get to him?That you're too much a coward to show your face on his site?

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            I guess he is too scarfed to face your remarks about me on twiter, just like he is too scared to not delete me on his failed site.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            I guess he recognizes your brand of ugly and even hiding behind my likeness is enough to fool him.And you're just too scared of him to say so at his site.Coward.

          • EarlyBird

            Roger, you're coming in very late to the debate between OFM and me.

            HE is the one advocating a full scale invasion, occupation and attempted transformation of Iranian government and society. Those are the "terms of the debate."

            I am the one saying that the only thing for sure that would accomplish is the bankrupting of the US.

            If you're not advocating full scale war on Iran, then why the constant references to WWII? What would you do?

            What would you do? Specifically?

            You are aware, aren't you, that the US has led a sanctions regime which has crippled the Iranian economy, right? That what we're doing is one step short of a full blockade? You and others write as if the world is helping Iran get nukes.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You're very eager to explain away your positions.
            You've made yourself clear and I address each one with my comments as you post them. You can go ahead and pretend that the debate with you and OFM stops because I point out the flaws in your thinking. I don't really much care.

            But don't pretend you're the deep and careful thinker here.
            And when you speak to defend the Iranian regime, think of Neda.

          • EarlyBird

            Roger, you actually haven't addressed my points one bit. Here they are:

            1.) Even a nuclear armed Iran would not be an existential threat.
            2.) We could not take care of their nuclear weapons program only with air strikes, and even IDF generals have admitted as much.
            3.) To invade, occupy and attempt to transform Iran, as OFM has advocated, would not only be another Iraq style disaster, but it could genuinely signal the end of the US financially.

            I'd be willing to be debated. Hint: "You're a lefty, anti-American, immoral, pro-terrorist Marxist" or variants, is not debate.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            1) they would be. They have an agenda and Israel is a big target, can Iran stop radioactive fallout?
            2) Israel is slowing down the program with sticky bombs and computer viruses. Don't pretend those are our only choices.
            3)To go in without wanting to win would be disaster, to go in WW2 style and clearing the countryside by taking out every armed person pointing a gun at us might work better, it has in the past.

            You're not willing to debate, you just stall until you can score with a nonsensical comment like a drive by troll.

            Why do you defend Iran, are they funding you here? I notice you're using a guest sign in to comment, are you that ashamed of your comment thread?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Roger, you're coming in very late to the debate between OFM and me. HE is the one advocating a full scale invasion, occupation and attempted transformation of Iranian government and society. Those are the "terms of the debate."

            Quote me psychotic liar.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            That's one of the 'advantages' of being a troll, facts are never really an issue. (sarcasm)

          • patriothere

            You advocate the murder of children.

            Roger 169p · 23 hours ago
            The Almighty gives life and it's His place to take it away. You can't show those Egyptians were perfect and didn't deserve it.

            Th account shows God gave them several times to do the right thing

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            I advocate letting God make that call.Unlike your sharia with car bombs and suicide vests.

          • patriothere

            Meanwhile north korea has nukes and restarted the korean war. The US is going to be completely off guard because they have been chasing imaginary threats in the middle east.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Meanwhile you're an admitted paid hack and can't be taken seriously.

            What cleric from iran pays you? Trista Parsi perhaps?
            6 minutes ago @ Breitbart.com – Protests to greet Ahma… · 1 reply · 0 points
            I'm like jesus, I'm gonna chase you money changers out of the temple and out of town and of course out of this forum. Me and ohsoquiet and a few other REAL AMERICANS who are being PAID to be here like you Israeli PR men. I'm here to chase you filth out.

          • Alinsky Hero USA
          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Still impersonating me without my consent?

            You are such a coward, why do you always hide behind other names and faces? Are you so ashamed of yours?

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            I'm ashamed of your twitter photo.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You're ashamed of a lot of things, one probably being that you're too much a coward to post on navy's site.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            Why does Navy let everyone call you a gay virgin on his site? I noticed that you started asking that same question on his site, and he just ignored you and continues to let them call you gay and a virgin everyday.

            Kudos to Navy.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Why do you pretend to be anything but a coward?

            Why? You just are a nothing that can't actually face him. Did he make you see yourself for the reality of what you really are?

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            Navy is too scared to have me comment on his site, but he sure does love when you are called a gay virgin over and over again.

            Why?

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Navy used to laugh at you, now he doesn't even remember you existed.Any other lies for me to laugh at? You're just a little girlie coward who can't stand facing reality.What's wrong with that? Accept who you are.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            Navy remembers me. He has nightmares about me every night.

            But then he wakes up and laughs at all the comments made about you being a gay virgin on his site.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Does he? I doubt it.You were a minor player done badly. Coggy and Wee have faded into the night and nobody even remembers them.You're a has been at Navy's even if you weren't such a sissy coward.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            Navy's site is long forgotten. I destroyed it. You and a couple of other conservative losers still go on, nobody else.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You couldn't destroy paper airplanes.Why do you persist in being a buzzing gnat?

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            I humiliated John Brady, ran off all his commenters, including Cowboy Logic, and now he has nothing. Just a gay virgin.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You give yourself more credit than you deserve. But then trolls seldom bother with facts.

            And yet you're a coward afraid to post there. That says everything.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            No one expects one of you conservative losers to admit the fact that I destroyed Navy's site.

            Now Obama has won a beutiful second term, our country is getting back on track, and conservatives are crying in their pillows.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You didn't. He has 30-75 posts on every story now that you're too scared to go whimper and snivel over there.

            Coward.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            HAHAAH, nice BS

            He has 3 commenters at the MOST for each post.

            Just because you post 75 times to wee, doesn't make that failed site any better.

            Lying POS try getting a life.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            It's not. You can't tell the truth any more than you can post over there or show your own face.

            Coward.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            That site is a wasteland. you make 72 comment a post, and that's all he has. A gay virgin with nothing to say.

            I won.

            History can't be changed by your BS.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            And do you have a site with more?

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            I have what that faled site was built to do. I have a Presdent I admire, and a country going in the right direction. Navy has only his forgotten website that anyone could make.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You're just a coward and too afraid to go there.

          • JacksonPearson

            There's no such thing, or person as a "moderate Muslim" PERIOD
            Why, because the Qur'an won't allow them to be. Anything else other being Muslim Sunni or Shiite is being an infidel. How you say…right here:

            First, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan concisely portrays the inherently warlike agenda of mosques by quoting a renowned Islamic poet:
            “The minarets are our bayonets, the domes our helmets, the mosques our barracks, and the faithful our army.”

            Second, Egypt's new president Morsi stated:
            "The Koran is Our Constitution, the Prophet is Our Leader, Jihad is Our Path, and Death in the Name of Allah is Our Goal."

            Third, “These descriptions are very ugly. It is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam, and that’s it.”
            — Turkey’s Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "Rambo, even marines in the field, taking fire, want to avoid "blowback." They want to blow up the truck carrying Taliban, not accidentally blow up a school bus, because the latter hurts their mission, aka creates "blowback." "

            Even Marines in the field read the politicized manuals? We know.

            "This is not a difficult concept, nor is this a video game where we're shooting mindless zombies. There are actually Muslims who are not attempting to kill us."

            We know.

            Drakken: "I can tell you the muslim is either at your feet or at your throat"

            What do you think that means?

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            EarlyTurd, Too bad your pals didn't consider the Blowback from the 9/11 sneak attacks, 1988 bombing of Pan Am 103, 2005 London transport bombings, Islamofascist rants by osama bin laden.

          • EarlyBird

            Screw Up, do you see how ridiculous you make yourself out to be? Do you understand why nobody on this board takes you seriously?

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            But we do. You're the joke here.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            You take your fake book seriously.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            What's really bothering you? Are you ashamed your'e a little coward that cant' face anyone, that has to sneak around hiding behind everyone else's names and faces? That you haven't accomplished even a short book, even a sci-fi fiction that didn't take me long at all?

            You're just a nothing loser, that's why you lash out so much. How pathetic, is it the medical marijuana that gives you paranoia?

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            I hate gay virgins that pretend to have written real books, and that stalk men online 8 hours a day making no sense and spreading hate speech.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Do you just want to pretend so you can dream about this?

            7 hours ago @ Big Government – Occupy-Linked Hacker G… · 0 replies · 0 points
            Not chop, chop, just one single blade coming down fast.

            Your head will still be alive while it is in the basket, but you could never really be anymore brain dead than you are now..

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            Why didn't you write a book about a gay virgin that gets his head cut off?

            I would buy that.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            And why do I care what you would buy?

            You're a sick stalker type troll.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            Oh, that's right, you have never written anything worth buying.

            But I still think your next book should be about a gay stalker virgin that gets his head cut off, and how everyone is thrilled about it.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            And you have?

            See, you just want everyone to be a failure like you are.

            And 75-80% of the readers love my story and ask me for the sequel. No heads get chopped off, and no muslims get racially cleansed.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            &5-80% of your brother. No one else wants to read that s h i t.

            Chapter 1 – I'm a Virgin.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You may or may not be a virgin.
            Only the goats know for sure.

            But I'm not inclined to discuss anything not on topic for this forum with a sick stalker that wants to collect my head Daniel Pearl style.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            You only come on ID to talk to men online.

            You aren't fooling anybody.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            I come to discuss issues and ideas.You're the troll here that wants to discuss off topic personal information.

          • Alinsky Hero USA

            You stalk men, you don't even read the articles.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You stalk men and create impersonating profiles.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "Wow, you're an angry, ignorant freak."

            For you to say that only highlights your own ignorance.

            "Madfoot was using a very widely used term in the intelligence community. Yes, we can do stupid things in the process of attempting to do smart things, and this can result in "blow back." If we, for instance, wipe out a hundred people in a rest home in the process of trying to get a couple of terrorists, the "blowback" can be that we have now added to our number of enemies who now hate us for what we did to the old people. Get it? "

            Blowback as a theory of the origins of Islamic terror is pure BS. End of discussion vis-a-vis blowback induced Islamic terror. Anyone who thinks the discussion is not over, is showing their ignorance of the relevant history.

            "No, moron, but Muslims the world over are not all robots set on "kill." They, like you and me, actually respond to different circumstances differently."

            I suspect you're misquoting him just as you misquote everyone else.

            "By simply acknowledging that our actions have consequences, that makes one a "self-hating kook," an "unhinged loon," etc.? Grow up, you idiot."

            Denial of blowback as the origins of Islamic terror is not denial of other real or imagined scenarios. Read in context. Read with comprehension. If you're always being misunderstood, maybe it's your fault. Do you think we argue with you because you're some kind of lone ranger fighting for the truth that nobody "gets?"

            Reading comprehension. Work on it. If you don't understand the point, it's OK to ask questions unless you're a blatant troll. That's how you out yourself. You misunderstand everyone and pretend you're somehow the wise one. It's actually funny.

          • EarlyBird

            Yep, that is the basic philosophy of FPM's leading intellectual: "end of discussion."

          • Drakken

            The problem is early, is that you think that you know so much more than anyone else, when it is clear as day, you know jack about anything relating to warfare and what muslims actually do.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            EarlTurd knows what Islamofascists say and do.

            He just ignores reality and operates on what he is fed by the Politburo.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "Yep, that is the basic philosophy of FPM's leading intellectual: "end of discussion.""

            With you yes. Get used to it unless you grow up. I'm not holding my breath on that possibility.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            Wow, you're an angry, ignorant freak.

            I'm angry, ignorant, and a freak because I'm not a gullible useful idiot and because I don't buy into the ludicrous theory of "blowback" cooked up by a wacko leftwing self-hating college professor and promoted by mentally incompetent kooks like Ron Paul and John Brennan? Yeah right!

            Madfoot was using a very widely used term in the intelligence community.

            And according to you "blowback" is more than just a moronic wacko theory developed by a self-hating college professor because our intelligence community, which like our state department, is comprised of a bunch of moronic self-hating leftwing loons like John Brennan that like a gullible useful idiot believes that jihad is a holy struggle instead of a war against all unbelievers to make Islam supreme, buys into that garbage. Meanwhile, if "blowback" was legitimate, WWII would have created millions of terrorists and the Vietnamese people would be blowing up building after building in the USA on a regular basis. You ever hear of deterrence, on the other hand?

            Yes, we can do stupid things in the process of attempting to do smart things, and this can result in "blow back."

            Okay you self-hating moonbat…please explain the perpetual jihad you are oblivious of waged by jihadists against all infidels that has been taking place continuously since the Hijra in 622 CE? Is it all the fault of the USA's foreign policy since way back in 622 CE? Really?

            Your problem is you don't have the first clue about Islam and the history of Islam because like a gullible useful idiot you simply swallowed lock, stock, and barrel all the garbage sold by leftwing shysters and moronic self-hating kooks you could swallow, and that garbage pacified your measly curiosity, even though it's all moronic gobbledygook.

            I hate to rain on your oblivious and gullible parade but Muslims aren't terrorists. They are jihadists and they are ALL fighting a holy war against unbelievers in the cause of Allah to make Islam supreme. Now our politically correct leftwing dominated society conveniently labels them terrorists to take the focus off of Islam, but jihad and terrorism are actually two very different and distinct manifestations altogether. Indeed, jihad is always and only in the cause of Allah, while terrorism, on the other hand, is perpetrated for all kinds of different political reasons and causes, and unlike terrorism jihad also takes place both violently and non-violently by stealth and deception. In fact, astronomically far more jihad takes place today non-violently vs. violently, but thanks to political correctness and useful idiot loons like Ron Paul and John Brennan, it takes place completely unopposed and for the most part unnoticed. Look at the thousands of Muslim no-go zones ruled by sharia as tiny Islamic statelets within the larger states sprinkled throughout Western Europe; do you think that happened all by accident?

            It's also convenient for our leftwing dominated society to deliberately mislabel them terrorists instead of jihadists, because terrorists aren't enemy combatants and can therefore be taken care of in the courts, whereas jihadists, on the other hand, by definition are enemy combatants and therefore must be handled in the same manner we previously disposed of enemy combatants in the past, that is by war.

            If we, for instance, wipe out a hundred people in a rest home in the process of trying to get a couple of terrorists, the "blowback" can be that we have now added to our number of enemies who now hate us for what we did to the old people. Get it?

            No I don't get crap! And your example is moronic since it is the terrorist's fault in your example instead of the USA's. So you're also morally confused as well. Anyway…you are as mega self-hating and moronic as that unhinged mentally incompetent kook Ron Paul. Muslims aren't terrorists you moonbat! They aren't fighting because of real or imagined unjustified collateral damage. That's utterly ridiculous and totally absurd! They are jihadists instead waging jihad perpetually against all unbelievers in the cause of Allah to make Islam supreme, and that jihad, by the way, has been ongoing perpetually since long before even the New World, in which the USA is the most prominent country, was ever discovered. Go buy a clue! Talk about lost in space!

            –continued

          • EarlyBird

            Calm down.

            You go to great pains to differentiate between jihadists and terrorists, then immediately conflate the two. You have decided that all of the world's 1.5 billion Muslims are at best jihadists – if not active terrorists – and that any way you slice it, any Muslim is an existential threat to the US. If that is not how you feel, I'd be happy to be corrected, specifically.

            But the question is begged: "what to do about it"? You're clearly calling for aggressive military action. Where, When, How – and most importantly – to accomplish exactly What?

            Specifics, please.

            These are not trick questions.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            You go to great pains to differentiate between jihadists and terrorists, then immediately conflate the two.

            Specifically where? When?

            You're clearly calling for aggressive military action.

            Not only does your reading comprehension suck to high heaven, but also you are wrong. With the exceptions of doing what it takes to disarm Pakistan of nukes and ensuring that Iran never gets its grubby hands on nukes, I propose that the non-Islamic world not only outlaw Islam and ban and reverse mass Muslim immigration ASAP, but also that the non-Islamic world also isolate the Islamic world. Without the production of the non-Islamic world in which the Islamic world is dependent upon, the Islamic world would soon fall into crushing poverty. Then it should be allowed to rot in poverty until Islam becomes discredited and takes its rightful place in the ash heap of history alongside Communism, Nazism, Fascism, and other discredited forms of totalitarianism in which Islam is.

            Finally, a self-hating moonbat like you may think I'm a flake because you are so off the wall loony, but I forgot more about Islam than you will ever come close to knowing, and I'm sorry but anyone who always blames America first as you do, is a self-hating loon in my book. Maybe if you stopped obsessively always blaming America first for all the world's ills and instead looked for other reasons and underlying causes, you would also learn the truth. Of course, overcoming your paranoia and hatred of capitalism would also help clear up the fog as well.

          • EarlyBird

            "They are jihadists and they are ALL fighting a holy war against unbelievers in the cause of Allah to make Islam supreme."

            You're saying that all Muslims – all 1.5 billion of them – are either terrorists or would-be terrorists, and all are an existential threat which must be met in the most dramatic, emergency terms. Here's how we know this:

            "I propose that the non-Islamic world not only outlaw Islam and ban and reverse mass Muslim immigration ASAP…"

            So LITERALLY you are proposing that we annihilate the entire 1st Amendment, not JUST for Muslim immigrants to America, but American citizens themselves. That we forcibly deport any Muslim immigrant in America for the "crime" of being Muslim.

            You cowardly, fascist POS! Democracy is for grown ups. If you need a government to tuck you in to bed at night and tell you the Boogey Man is dead, if you're so ready to shred your fellow Americans' Constitutional rights the moment you get scared, then you don't deserve your rights as an American. Go to North Korea you America-hating, drooling Neanderthal. You effing child!

          • ObamaYoMoma

            You're saying that all Muslims – all 1.5 billion of them – are either terrorists or would-be terrorists, and all are an existential threat which must be met in the most dramatic, emergency terms. Here's how we know this:

            That is not what I'm saying at all. What's the matter, you can't understand simple English?

            Jihad and terrorism are two very distinct and different manifestations and jihad is not terrorism. For instance, terrorism is always only extremely violent and directed at civilian non-combatant targets, but jihad, on the other hand, not only utilizes extreme violence directed at soft civilian non-combatant targets and also military combatant targets as well, it is also primarily pursued by non-violent means via stealth and deception. In fact, the vast overwhelming amount of jihad taking place in the world today is happening non-violently in a clandestine manner via stealth and deception. Moreover, terrorism is motivated by various political causes and reasons, whereas jihad is holy fighting in the cause of Allah to make Islam supreme via the imposition of sharia. Indeed, Muslim jihadists in stark contrast to terrorists are soldiers of Allah and not terrorists.

            In fact, I fear mass Muslim immigration to the West the most, since it is really non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad, as all Muslims are jihadists. Muslims aren't migrating to the West to assimilate and integrate. Instead, they are migrating to eventually dominate and subjugate via the eventual imposition of sharia. In fact, in the second half of this century many European countries will become Islamic sharia states and the new minority Euroloon infidels will become subjugated dhimmis and will be treated exactly like the Christian Copts are brutally treated today in Egypt that are also subjugated dhimmis.

            So LITERALLY you are proposing that we annihilate the entire 1st Amendment, not JUST for Muslim immigrants to America, but American citizens themselves. That we forcibly deport any Muslim immigrant in America for the "crime" of being Muslim.

            I'll ask you the same question I asked another moonbat on this site: What other religions in the world besides Islam requires total, complete, and unconditional submission to the will of God and punishes apostasy by death? The answer is none of them. Which means that Islam is not a religion, at least in the Western Christian-Judeo sense of the word, instead it's a very rabid form of totalitarianism that seeks to take over the world and control all aspects of life down to the minutest details.

            In reality, Islam is a very aggressive and rabid form of draconian totalitarianism and you can see it in that all Islamic majority countries in the world today are Islamic totalitarian monstrosities. You can see it in the fact that all subjugated infidels rendered into harsh and degrading dhimmitude living in Islamic countries today are brutally oppressed and ruthlessly discriminated against. You can see it in the fact that no matter where mass Muslim immigration is taking place, the Muslims are not only refusing to assimilate and integrate, but they are also forming Muslim no-go zones ruled by sharia as tiny Islamic statelets within the larger host states.

            In Islamic civilization Islam is considered to be a religion, but in our post modern Western Christian-Judeo civilization Islam is a monstrosity of totalitarianism and barbarianism, and it should be recognized ASAP for what it really is!

            You cowardly, fascist POS! Democracy is for grown ups. If you need a government to tuck you in to bed at night and tell you the Boogey Man is dead, if you're so ready to shred your fellow Americans' Constitutional rights the moment you get scared, then you don't deserve your rights as an American. Go to North Korea you America-hating, drooling Neanderthal. You effing child!

            Go take your meds and get into your straight jacket you moonbat.

          • EarlyBird

            You fascist shi*head, go crawl under your bed. The Muslims are coming!

            By the way, I think stupid, willfully ignorant, xenophobic Bubbas are far more dangerous at this time and place to American civilization than the average Muslim in America. I wish to outlaw your existence.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            They are, and you're too stupid to realize it.

            Surah 9, the driving force they can't let go of….
            http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/9/
            9:14 Fight them! Allah will chastise them at your hands, and He will lay them low and give you victory over them, and He will heal the breasts of folk who are believers.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "I wish to outlaw your existence."

            I'll remember that quote.

          • EarlyBird

            A round up from this play pen, okay?

            We've got ObamaYoMama advocating for the whole-sale destruction of freedom of religion for Muslim Americans and the wholesale deportment of any Muslim immigrant, not just from the US but the West. Kristallnacht, anyone?

            We've got Objective Facts advocating for an Iraq Redux in Iran, because of course, Iraq went so well.

            We've got DraKKKen pretending to be a hardened war veteran who has faced the "savages" demanding that we smash our "mailed fist" everywhere we perceive a threat.

            We've got lil' Roger chirping in, darkly talking about treating Iran like we did Japan in WWII – but pretending he's not some how talking about the wholesale destruction of that country, because his Bible told him that Iran will absolutely, positively ignited Armageddon the moment it gets a bomb.

            This insane asylum is a playground for fascist, bigoted, dysfunctional middle aged men engaging in war fantasies.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            We've got ObamaYoMama advocating for the whole-sale destruction of freedom of religion for Muslim Americans and the wholesale deportment of any Muslim immigrant, not just from the US but the West. Kristallnacht, anyone?

            Only gullible useful idiot unhinged loons consider Islam to be a religion when its not. Islam is a very aggressive and rabid form of totalitarianism that aims to take over the world via the imposition of Sharia and Muslims are its soldiers. In the Cold War if we had imported Communists the same way we are importing Muslims and sharia at the same time, we would all be slaves working in Gulags in Siberia comrade. If we continue to import Muslim jihadists, we will end up where the Euroloons will end up soon, that is subjugated dhimmis harshly oppressed and brutally discriminated against.

          • EarlyBird

            Duh…duh…duh…

            Go away, gnat!

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Talking to yourself?
            I certainly hope so, you're just annoying.

            Is this where you defend Iran again? (and again and again….)

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "A round up from this play pen, okay? "

            We don't care about your play pen reports. You stay in your pen and we'll talk to people who can follow the conversations.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            No, moron, but Muslims the world over are not all robots set on "kill." They, like you and me, actually respond to different circumstances differently.

            Moron? You want to see one? Go look in a mirror! The first and foremost requirement of Islam is for all Muslims to totally, completely, and unconditionally "submit" to the will of Allah, i.e., sharia, under the penalty of death. Hence, all Muslims are jihadists, either violent jihadists like AQ or non-violent jihadists that wage jihad subtly via stealth and deception by pretending to be so-called "moderate" Muslims and your friends to dupe gullible useful idiot infidels like you. The object of jihad is not to kill all unbelievers. The object instead is to make Islam supreme. In fact, according to sharia there can be no peace on earth until the entire world belongs to Islam. Any Muslim, on the other hand, that doesn't strictly adhere to the tenets of Islam is otherwise an apostate that per the dictates of Islam must be executed.

            By simply acknowledging that our actions have consequences, that makes one a "self-hating kook," an "unhinged loon," etc.? Grow up, you idiot.

            Thankfully…I'm not an unhinged mentally deficient self-hating useful idiot kook like you and that moronic loon Ron Paul. Thus forgive me if like Ronaldus Magnus I believe in a strong military and the creation of deterrence through overwhelming brute force. I also don't swallow ludicrous theories drummed up by quacks, weirdoes, and unhinged kooks like you either.

            Why don't you stop listening to false prophets of doom like that moron Ron Paul and study Islam and the history of Islam instead, you might learn something other than the moronic garbage you swallowed lock, stock, and barrel?

          • Glennd1

            A guy who uses the screen name "ObamaYoMoma" and speaks of "Ronaldus Magnus" is de facto an idiot. You announce it with every regurgitated radio talk show host sound bite you bleat. And I'll prove it if you'll dare to actually be influenced by facts.

            What country did Ronald Reagan attack after our Marine barracks in Lebanon was bombed by Hezbollah? And after our CIA station chief was kidnapped and killed? Answer: None. He realized we would be far better off by not meddling there and making a target of ourselves. And yet you call on his authority for our idiotically provocative and destabilizing policies towards the mideast? I mean, what did Reagan do, drop some bombs on Qaddaffi after his military supported the downing of an airplane with lots of Americans on it? Did he invade Libya?

            Do you realize what a buffoon you are? How completely made up your view of reality is and how utterly disconnected it is from an actual, occurring world that other sentient people recognize? I bet not…

          • ObamaYoMoma

            A guy who uses the screen name "ObamaYoMoma" and speaks of "Ronaldus Magnus" is de facto an idiot. You announce it with every regurgitated radio talk show host line your mouth emits. And I'll prove it if you dare to actually be influenced by facts.

            Yeah right…I learned everything I know about Islam and the history of Islam through listening to talk radio you self-hating unhinged delusional loon! Where are all you unhinged moonbats, kooks, weirdoes, and flakes coming from?

            What country did Ronald Reagan attack after our Marine barracks in Lebanon was bombed by Hezbollah? And after our CIA station chief was kidnapped and killed? Answer: None. He realized we would be far better of by not meddling there and making a target of ourselves. And yet you call on his authority for our idiotically provocative and destabilizing policies towards the mideast? I mean, what did Reagan do, arm the Iraqis, drop some bombs on Qaddaffi after his military supported the downing of an airplane with lots of Americans on it?.

            Ronald Reagan was a very smart man and he realized that if he were to defeat the USSR after Jimmy Carter incompetently built them up to unprecedented levels, which at the time was by far our biggest nemesis, that he better stay focus only on defeating the Soviets or else they would only grow stronger like they did under Jimmy Carter and other basket case presidents. Hence, he exerted all of America's power and focus on taking down the Soviets, which he did successfully. On the other hand, had he listened to self-hating losers like you moonbats, we would all be working slave labor in Siberia today.

            Now, later on Reagan bombed the crap out of Gaddafi and also destroyed the Iranian navy in Operation Praying Mantis, but those are inconvenient facts that like a moronic loon you are oblivious to. Moreover, he shelled the hell out of Syrian and Hezbollah strong holds upon exiting from Lebanon. Thus, the notion that Reagan folded like a cheap tent upon exit of Lebanon is a myth that only self-hating losers could put forth and relish.

            Moreover, unlike our moronic presidents and congress critters today, the Reagan Policy in the Iran – Iraq War was to aid both sides of the jihad in order to make the war last as long as possible because Reagan instinctively knew that all Muslims are our enemies. Now contrast Reagan's policies with those that advocate jumping into every jihad in the Islamic world like useful idiots today and that are also dumb enough to call the reawakening of Islam in the Middle East an Arab Spring in response to our failed efforts to remake the Islamic World into a bastion of freedom and democracy, when Islam is not even a religion in the Western sense, but a very rabid and aggressive form of totalitarianism that intends to take over the world. Now like a self-hating moonbat you may advocate retreating from defending ourselves from the scourge of Islam, because you have been inculcated to believe that it is America's foreign policy that creates terrorism and terrorists, but the fact of the matter is the jihad being waged perpetually by Islam against all infidels in the cause of Allah to make Islam supreme has been ongoing continuously since the Hijra in 622 CE and will continue to manifest itself irrespective of your unhinged lunacy. As what you believe and stupidly perceive as terrorism and terrorists isn't terrorism and terrorists created by America's foreign policy. Instead, its jihad and jihadists created by Islam as all Muslims in the world are jihadists, either violent jihadists or non-violent jihadists that perpetrate jihad via stealth and deception. Otherwise, they are apostates that per the dictates of Islam must be executed, and furthermore again the jihad against all infidels has been waged perpetually since long before America ever came into existence. Yet like an unhinged loon you perceive jihad to be terrorism and jihadists to be terrorists drummed up by America's foreign policy because like the self-hating moonbat in which you are, you have swallowed the garbage being sold by self-hating kooks like Ron Paul and other hate America first morons.

            By the way, it is exceedingly obvious that what little knowledge you have of Reagan's legacy in the Middle East has been extrapolated from propaganda and other innuendo spewed by self-hating and mentally incompetent kooks.

            Do you realize what a buffoon you are?

            You need to go look in a mirror moron!

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            I'm not a fan of Ronald Reagan.

            The people who have made a saint of RR are deluded.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            So, do you worship at the alter of Jimmy Carter then?

          • EarlyBird

            It has to be one or the other? I happen to revere Reagan, but one cannot, while also not being a fan of Carter.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You revere Reagan while not being a fan of his?

            Talking out of both sides of your mouth again?
            That's why you're the joke here.

          • EarlyBird

            Rogie, try to follow along:

            I revere Reagan. Does that mean I can't also like Carter? If I like Carter does that mean I can't like Reagan?

            Does your mother know you're up late on a school night on a chatboard?

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Poor little early bird.

            Is this where you defend the iranian regime again?

          • Glennd1

            EB – The likes of Drakken will never look at a critical view of our activities. He's clearly a cheerleader for American militarism and soft imperialism. Interestingly, many people who travel where he has come back with a much more nuanced view of the resentments of the Muslims, Arabs and Africans against the U.S. and the West – but not him. He states his experience as though anyone doing the same as him would become an ignorant bigot too, but of course that's just his biased mind misfiring and telling him that it's reason.

            I wonder, Drakken, would you ever read a book like Legacy of Ashes? It was written solely based on the declassified records of the CIA since its inception in the late '40s to the late '80s. Anyone trumpeting the effectiveness or potential of our covert services, particularly the CIA should read this book as if a guy like Drakken actually did, he would shut his loud, deluded mouth something quick. You see, the accurate history of the CIA is one of blunder, failure, blowback and political corruption. While there are very brave people serving there, the agency is an abject failure and disgrace – that is if you base your views on facts.

            Drakken, if you haven't read Legacy of Ashes, nothing you say matters. When this kind of insight is combined with the recognition that the 4 wars we've fought after WWII were utter failures, in service to the kind of intervention you long for, it becomes clear that we need to seriously reconsider whether our interventionism is good for this country. You wan to sort the world's Muslims out? Go do so – but not on my behalf. Sure, they attack us, we stack them up like cordwood. Mercilessly, without regard to civilian casualties. I'm as vicious as anyone when it comes to fighting our actual enemies, but what never seems to occur to Drakken is what was he doing in those areas of the world for all those years? Why does the U.S. ring Iran with 18 military bases, for example?

            You won't get intelligent answers to any of that here, Early.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            Interestingly, many people who travel where he has come back with a much more nuanced view of the resentments of the Muslims, Arabs and Africans against the U.S. and the West – but not him

            Apparently, Drakken is not an unhinged self-hating loon and flake like you. Thus, he hasn't been inculcated to arbitrarily and automatically ascribe to the notion that all the world's ills are caused by America with its so-called "imperialist" and "interventionist" foreign policy. Instead, he digs a little deeper to understand the true underlying reasons behind their resentment, and in the case of Islam and the Islamic people it is they who are the aggressors, as they have been waging an aggressive unending jihad against all unbelievers in the world since 622 CE and long before the New World was even discovered and America came into existence.

            Indeed, can you point to just one Islamic majority country in the world where unbelievers, i.e., Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists, etc. aren't harshly discriminated against and ruthlessly oppressed as dhimmis? Can you point to just one non-Islamic country in the world that borders an Islamic country that isn't under assault by jihad? In regards to mass Muslim immigration to the West, which has been taking place continuously since the end of the Yom Kippur War in 1973, can you cite just one example out of the millions of Muslim immigrants that have migrated to the West that have actually assimilated and integrated before matriculating into becoming productive and contributing members of their new non-Islamic host societies instead of forming Muslim no-go zones ruled by Sharia as tiny Islamic statelets within their larger host states? Okay, put your money where your unhinged self-hating mouth is and please answer these simple and easy questions. Just need to check on how narrow-minded you actually are. Meanwhile, you wonder why people deem you an unhinged self-hating kook. It's because you obviously are!

            By the way, it's only Arab and African Muslims perpetrating violence. Other Arabs and Africans are not.

          • Drakken

            Your leftist, antiAmerican, it is always our fault, western Imperialism blame the conservatives for the muslims hating us, if we only gave in to the muslim world crazy stupidity on steroids only leads to greater slaughter later. I'll bet you got your azz handed to you a lot in high school didn't you? Pacifism in the the face of naked aggression only encourages it. As for your blowback theory and relavistic history lesson, complete utter leftist lies and nonsense. You think that if we just sacrificed Israel to islam and just leave the poor little islamic creatures alone, that the islamaniacs with leave us alone, they won't and history has proved me right, yet again, versus the crap that has filled your ears in school. I will take my personal experience over your I heard it from someone else bullsh*t anyday and twice on Sunday, versus your I feel therefore I am, please by all means do what I do, and prove me wrong, I god**mn dare you. The problem with pacifistic intelectual geniuses like you is that you love eating sausage, but for the life of you hypocrital pukes is that you don't want to know what and how they make the sausage for it would upset your precious sensibilities.

          • EarlyBird

            "You won't get intelligent answers to any of that here, Early."

            I learned that a few months ago when I stumbled onto this jaw-droppingly simple-minded hive of right-wingerism. Yes, indeed, it is a bunch of willfully ignorant, xenophobic, often unintelligent, hateful, bigoted, hysterical reactionaries.

            On any other board I would be considered a pretty solid conservative. But because I do not subscribe to "Obama is a Marxist Al Queda jihadist Manchurian Candidate sent by Satan to destroy America!" idiocy, and believe in such apostasies as the US Sec of Defense working for the US, not Israel, I'm a "self-hating liberal radical lefty…," etc.

            Just have fun messing with them by dropping accurate, unpleasant facts on them. It's like poking sticks at freaks in a side show.

            By they way, I read "Legacy of Ashes" this past summer, and boy what an education!

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            And then why are you here?
            Clearly you're out of your league and your talking points/propaganda isn's working out well.

          • EarlyBird

            Have you even attempted to offer any useful contribution to this discussion, Roger?

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            I'll think of Neda, then see if you're still advocating to leave the current regime in Iran again.

          • EarlyBird

            Imagine me advocating for NOT overthrowing another country's government by force! What next, that we shouldn't lock up American Muslims in concentration camps? Why, that must make me a pro-Sharia, anti-American Satanist!

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Imagine you defending a tyrannical regime that slaughters it's own people that is building a WMD to use on others and has even tested it successfully in N Korea. Yet you don't seem concerned. Why is that? Does Iran fund your comments here like it does patriot here?

      • Rifleman

        I notice muslims support the strong horse, the more brutal the leader, the more they respect them. That's not to say we have to be brutal, but appearing indecisive, and weak willed or weak stomached is far worse in their culture. They've read our books, studied our culture, and use them to play us. Ron Paul is one who fell for it.

        • EarlyBird

          They definitely rally around the strong horse. But let's understand that they often do so because they feel, rightly or wrongly, buffeted by strong outside forces.

          They really do "feel" that they are victims of Western imperialism, since particularly after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. The Cold War actually did result in both the Soviets and US and Western allies taking over their governments. When we saber rattle with Tehran, it gives Iranians a reason to rally around their strong horse, even though that horse is generally hated.

          We need to put ourselves in the economic (energy) situation to be as hands off in that part of the world as we can be. The less they feel we are manipulating or harming their region, the less the "strong horse" argument wins out. They start feeling less threatened, so reject having to live in a security state.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Of course not.
            They feel for someone to be strong it must be the will of allah. They bow to the will of allah when they follow a strong leader.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "Of course not. They feel for someone to be strong it must be the will of allah. They bow to the will of allah when they follow a strong leader."

            They're fatalistic. They only attack the strong man if they feel they can replace him, otherwise the rally around him because they are led to think that everyone must imitate Mo the warlord etc.

          • EarlyBird

            I don't disagree that they are fatalistic, and reflexively reach out to the strong man. They are a very immature society, and it has almost everything to do with their religion. But they are reacting to actual historic facts, (Objective ones!) too.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Like the fact that they have been squatting conquered territory since the 8th century?

          • EarlyBird

            Where?

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You have heard of the Byzantine Empire, haven't you?

          • EarlyBird

            What are you blathering about now. lil' Rog?

            If YOU want to play the left's game of ancient historical "Gotcha!" go for it, but that means I'm gonna have to up and leave my home in California and give it to Mexican indians, and you're going to have to leave your trailer park in the Florida wamps and give it back to the Seminoles.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Poor little birdy, What's wrong? Realize that you just got whomped and left in the dust? All of islam has been hostile and working for world wide caliphate, and treated everyone as if slavery was what they deserved since they came crawling out of the desert.

            Do you think that the islamic activists let the freed slaves have votes like the US did when they took over the south west?

            You're just a hack troll pretending sophistication. It's not working.

          • EarlyBird

            I'm so depressed, Roger. I am a "serious mind looking for other serious minds," and all I got was "whooped" by some knuckle-dragging backwoods nit wit who wants to commit a Holocaust against the world's Muslims, because that has something to do with Byzantine Empire.

            "Byzantine!" We're impressed!

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You're easy to whooop.

            And it all involved understanding historical events that are beginning to repeat themselves. That sounds way to knuckle dragging for a sophisticated fool like you to understand…

            And once again, you are pretending to know the enemy without admitting what drives them. http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/9/

            9:17 It is not for the idolaters to tend Allah's sanctuaries, bearing witness against themselves of disbelief. As for such, their works are vain and in the Fire they will abide.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "If YOU want to play the left's game of ancient historical "Gotcha!" go for it, but that means I'm gonna have to up and leave my home in California and give it to Mexican indians, and you're going to have to leave your trailer park in the Florida wamps and give it back to the Seminoles."

            Dude, we don't lie about it. They do. We want them to stop lying at the very least, or expect a lot more "Islam-o-phobia."

            And when they try to stop lying, they won't be inciting so much murder and maybe things will ratchet down. That's the most optimistic view anyone can have without departing completely from reality as you do.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "They are a very immature society, and it has almost everything to do with their religion. But they are reacting to actual historic facts, (Objective ones!) too."

            It blows me away how you can stumble across the most obvious clues and still fail to learn anything. You end up saying things that reveal your absolutely astonishing ignorance.

            Why don't you do a little research in to "Islamic history" and find out why non-Muslim historians recognize the oxymoron. Did you know that the Jews were never resident in Jerusalem? Did you know that all of the prophets of the Bible were Muslims? Did you know that the Jews corrupted all of the "Christian" (Western) history that contradicts Islamic texts?

            Did you know that Abraham built the Kabaa in Mecca? Did you know that Christopher Columbus was a stealth Muslim?

            You might as well be an Islamic historian. Islamic objectivity by definition means being resolved with their texts.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "They really do "feel" that they are victims of Western imperialism, since particularly after the fall of the Ottoman Empire."

            Do you know who the Ottomans were? Do you know who the Arabs are? The Arabs fought on our side in WWI against the Ottoman regime. They got what they asked for, except they never quite accepted that we wouldn't tolerate them creating dhimmis out of mon-Muslims in nations that we directly supported. And most of all, Jews MUST BE dhimmis, but they didn't quite put it like that until they thought they had the upper hand and milked us enough. Being able to play the West against the Soviets allowed them to develop an openly hostile plan that had not been possible between their betrayals of WWI and WWII.

            They are victims of their own ideology. It's really that simple.

          • EarlyBird

            No doubt they are their own worst enemies. Their obsession with past intervention further shows what hysterical children they are.

            Do I know who the Ottomans were? Um, yes. And? It was the remnants of that empire, which makes up much of the modern Arab world and N. Africa, where the West interfered. You write as if the West helped the Arabs get rid of the Turks out of kindness. The West did it to further their own power and for real politik reasons, and continued interfering and controlling governments there long after WWI for those same reasons.

            When the average Muslim or Persian Arab looks at why their societies are such disasters, right or wrongly they believe that it has to do with a long and brutal history of Western interference. It's why we need to stay out of their as much as possible.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            The correct answer would be the invading muslims who destroyed the Byzantine Empire and forced all to bow to islam or live like slaves until the Brits slapped them around.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "The correct answer would be the invading muslims who destroyed the Byzantine Empire and forced all to bow to islam or live like slaves until the Brits slapped them around."

            He started out by claiming that the Arabs were victimized by the West in WWI. But now it's clear we didn't have the right motives according to early bird so this justifies jihad to this day.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Aren't we infidels just so mean to them?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "No doubt they are their own worst enemies. Their obsession with past intervention further shows what hysterical children they are."

            Now add the fact that they are obsessed about a contrived past where they are always the innocent victims and their god commands them to get even.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "Do I know who the Ottomans were? Um, yes. And? It was the remnants of that empire, which makes up much of the modern Arab world and N. Africa, where the West interfered. You write as if the West helped the Arabs get rid of the Turks out of kindness."

            So the most salient point is that you determined our motives, as a civilization, were not founded on kindness? That's your effort to wiggle your way out of the contradiction? The Arabs are victims of the West because we helped them throw off Islamic Turkish masters and then did not have the right motive in doing so? How long did it take the Arabs to realize that was justification for breaking every agreement they make with us as soon as it suits them?

            "The West did it to further their own power and for real politik reasons"

            Red herring. Motive is not relevant. And you're wrong you lunatic…unless how you're saying that the whole war was really designed to trick the poor Muslims.

            Why did the war expand in to the middle east? Lay it out genius. The Turks joined Germany and threatened access to India. So "the West" (Germany conspiring with the UK) started a fake war to trick the Turks in to declaring a jihad against the UK in order to…what did you say again?

            "The West did it to further their own power and for real politik reasons, and continued interfering and controlling governments there long after WWI for those same reasons."

            All the Turks had to do was stay neutral. They'd have fooled those crazy European imperialists. The reason we stayed there "long after" is because they stabbed us in the back and so did the Germans eventually.

            "When the average Muslim or Persian Arab looks at why their societies are such disasters, right or wrongly they believe that it has to do with a long and brutal history of Western interference."

            Gloss over the question of whether it's true. We're not the belligerents against Muslims. Christians and Westerners have tried to give them a wide berth ever since seeing how they reacted to the Catholic crusades.

            "It's why we need to stay out of their as much as possible."

            That might be true but you're the last guy to ask about how to make those judgments as to what we can allow.

      • Drakken

        Madfoot, there is no winning of hearts and minds of the muslim world period! The only thing those bloody savages understand and respect is the mailed fist, the muslims resent us infidels no matter what we do. so trying to be nice to them is complete idiotic thankless indevour. Always remember, the muslim is either at your feet or at your throat, there is no middle ground, why do you think that the jihadist of the middle east don't eff with Russians? You ask how do I know this for a fact? I have over 20 years experience dealing with these inbred savages and knows what works and what doesn't.

        • EarlyBird

          Well, Rambo, the Russians sure were effed with by Muslim separatist Chechens. They sure were effed with by mujahedeen in Afghanistan.

          Even the "mailed fist" wants to be accurate in its smashing.

    • Rifleman

      Fighting back always makes an enemy mad, and surrender makes them happy.

      • EarlyBird

        He's not suggesting we don't fight our enemies. He's talking about doing so smartly. Take as an example WWII.

        Towards the end, the Germans knew they could surrender to the Brits and Americans and they would be treated decently. They knew the Soviets, on the other hand, would systematically brutalize them and rape the girls and women in the neighborhood.

        As a result, at the end, often the hardest part for the Brits and Americans was to manage the huge number of surrendering Germans. The Soviets, on the other hand, faced Germans soldiers and civilians who fought to the bitter end, and the Soviets lost a lot more soldiers than they needed to.

        I know this is a very incomplete analogy to the Islamist enemy. But I think you get the notion of "blowback" and wanting to avoid it.

        • Drakken

          The anology to the Russians is incompetent at best and wishful thinking at worst, the muslims when they fear us, respect us. You ever ask yurself why the Russians are never bombed or assinated in the muslim world? Because the muslims bloody well fear them, with good reason. Because you kill one of theirs, they kill your whole family as I learned that very valuable lesson in Beruit in 83 when hezbollah with Irans support kidnapped 4 of theirs and killed one. The Russians came in unanounced and snatched 8 hezzbollah big wigs and butchered one and his family in front of the main mosque with a message that said they have 8 hours to release their fellow Russians or this is what your going to get, guess what, 3 hours later, Russians released, lesson learned.

          • EarlyBird

            Chechnya. Afghanistan.

            What I'm saying is that while we fight our enemy lets not do it in a way that makes victory harder for us to achieve. This is a basic, accepted military and intelligence concept. Even Patton understood this, Killer.

          • Drakken

            Fighting muslims and a western oreitated army are two different things shortbus, always think as the enemy does, not by our own western standards. and so called morals. You certainly don't understand military or intelligence concepts and it shows.

          • EarlyBird

            Oooh. That's right you were off killing Muslims for "twenty years" in the Middle East. Maybe you need to share your war-fighting wisdom with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, cuz they're apparently weak wristed pansies.

          • Drakken

            Hmmmmm, where did you serve again? Oh that is right, you didn't. You remained nice and cosy at home with moma while better men than yourself served. So shortbus until you have been there and done that and have the scars and tshirt, then go ahead and run that suck of yours. You speak as a couch potato quarterback with no knowledge of what you speak, funny really, because you represent the typical low information voter. So if you have the nuts to do what I do, join us PMC's and do what we do.

          • EarlyBird

            USAF, MAC, medical airlift, mostly in Incirlik, Turkey. mLike me, you were not in combat, you macho Jarhead.

          • Drakken

            As an 0369, I would beg to bloody differ REMF.

          • Glennd1

            Okay, so you've served in combat in a serious way – I appreciate your service. And you are a bigoted, ignorant jerk – both could be true you know. You could have served this country bravely and have your head up your backside, yes? I mean, it's possible, isn't it?

            I know more than a few military folks – my entire family is riddled with them – many who've seen action and none of them speak like you. I have two friends who are recently active Green Berets and they both are deeply concerned about what we were doing in Afghanistan and Iraq.

            But let's try and take you seriously, just for a second. So, you know the region well, let's focus on Bin Laden's claimed reason for targeting the U.S. He made very clear it was about the basing of U.S. troops on holy, Muslim land – Saudi Arabia. He offered to fight Iraq after it invaded Kuwait, on behalf of the Saudi Royalty. He actually was so full of brio after "defeating" the Soviets that he believed he could form an army out of his core of mujahideen to defend Saudi Arabia. To him, the basing of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia was unthinkable. He also warned at the time that once we came, we would never leave and he as assured that he was wrong about that. And yet over 20 years later, we are still there.

            What guys like you will never grant is that Bin Laden was a deeply, legitimately religious man. A Saudi billionaire princeling who chose to drink Afghani water for 25 years and was wounded in combat 4 times. He had a legitimacy as a moral leader and a warrior, something that had not been seen in a long time. There are very few Muslims in the world who will not tell you that basing "infidel" troops in Saudi Arabia is legitimately seen as an insult by them. Of course, this does fall into the larger context of Jihad, but when you and your ilk do this, you then conveniently forget about our highly provocative actions. It's like you go blind.

            So tell me, Mr. World Weary Warrior, what is it about that account of things you don't agree with? That account is as per Michael Scheuer, former head of the CIA Bin Laden unit for a long time. Our conflict with the Muslim world is due largely to our interventions. If you really are the person you claim to be, then you of all people know that we are sticking our noses into an alarming number of places around the world. Do you really think that this approach enhances our security?

            Can you at least grant that those who differ from you may do so in good will and after much thought and knowledge seeking? You always breeze through here as though you are the end all, be all, cuz you were in combat. If you want to have actual conversations with real people, you need to stop it and actually listen and respond to the facts presented and the reasoning used. Or just go watch yourself scream in the mirror instead – but really, your "approach" is anti-intellectual and vicious. Wake up.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Sounds like you want to pretend he's a jerk so you're not alone.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            That account is as per Michael Scheuer, former head of the CIA Bin Laden unit for a long time. Our conflict with the Muslim world is due largely to our interventions.

            One of the reasons we really stepped in it in Afghanistan and Iraq is because our CIA and State Department are filled with unhinged and thoroughly mentally incompetent self-hating loons like Michael Scheuer and John Brennan. When the Radical Marxist Left hijacked and co-opted the federal government, the USA sadly turned into a basket case. When the USA goes down, which is probably inevitable now thanks to Obama, it won't be a mystery what caused it.

            If you really are the person you claim to be, then you of all people know that we are sticking our noses into an alarming number of places around the world. Do you really think that this approach enhances our security?

            Could it be any clearer that you are exceedingly narrow-minded and self-hating? Whatever it is, it is always America's "interventionist" and "imperialist" foreign policy no matter what. Of course, capitalist can only be evil and devious, not to mention exceedingly greedy…right?

          • EarlyBird

            You are a genuine curiosity. Everyone who you find fault with is a "self hating loon," a Radical Marxist Left winger?

            How do you even make it through the day? I don't believe you believe the nonsense you spew. You can't possibly have such a radical, bizzare, simple minded world view.

            Is the guy who cuts you off in traffic Radical Marxist Leftist who hates America? How about that cold you caught last month. Was it a communist cold? What color is your sky, you psychopath?

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You manage to make it through the day and you have a lot of bizarre unrealistic views.

          • EarlyBird

            Rambo, you may have been in the infantry, but that hardly means you were in combat.

            You were in the Marines when they were perhaps at their worst, meaning in the late '70s and '80s, post-Vietnam when they had to accept the stupidest, most unemployable guys they could get. They sure scored with you.

          • EarlyBird

            And by the way, dips**t, I know you weren't in combat, because those who are don't talk about "mailed fists" and committing mass war everywhere that they don't like. My marine uncle was in combat in Korea, and trust me, he doesn't talk like war is a video game.

            Sorry you didn't get your war when you were in, but were doing "security" (your previous description) on some dusty base some place.

        • Rifleman

          In WW2 the Germans generally treated British and American POWs well, unlike the Japanese. We show enemies a lot more restraint than we did in WW2, and they are well aware of that fact (or they wouldn't be using human shields). We level a house where we used to ( and many still do) level the whole town, and we've long passed the point where unreasonable restraint encourages the enemy to fight rather than surrender. You can minimize "blowback" but you're not going to avoid it.

          • EarlyBird

            "You can minimize "blowback" but you're not going to avoid it."

            I completely agree, Rifleman.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Did the Byzantines find a way to avoid blowback too?

            Survival is our primary goal.

          • EarlyBird

            "Survival is our primary goal."

            Exactly, Roger. History is filled with once great nations, super powers, who allowed themselves to get dragged into every hot zone everywhere, extending their power everywhere, out of both pride and fear. And they simply bled themselves to death, financially. That's what happened with Spain, Portugal, Rome, England and on and on.

            To survive we have to be smart. We have to be temperamentally conservative.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            And unlike the Byzantine Empire we have to understand they are the enemy and treat them accordingly.

          • EarlyBird

            Specifically how? By doing what?

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Specifically don't you understand 'survive'? Can you explain what part of that term is confusing or 'fuzzy' for you?

          • EarlyBird

            Sorry, Rogie, but I don't play that game. Who doesn't want to "survive"? The question is how?

            If you can't be specific, you are lying.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Sorry birdy boy. Either you play that game or die. That's what happened to the Byzantine Empire. Why do you want us not to take this threat seriously? Is it the same reason you ignore the people like Neda and want us to ignore the Iranian regimes aggressive hostilities?

          • EarlyBird

            Still can't really spit out What to do about this supposed existential threat of radical Muslims, can you? Hey at least the othe goons let us know what they want to do.

            Perhaps you are an intellectual coward.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You can't really spit out how we're to live with hostility that demands our submission or death?

            Hey, at least the other goons understand they wont' bow to mecca.

            Perhaps you're smart enough to know treachery and are on the receiving end of propaganda funding.

          • patriothere

            Roger 169p · 23 hours ago
            The Almighty gives life and it's His place to take it away. You can't show those Egyptians were perfect and didn't deserve it.

            Th account shows God gave them several times to do the right thing

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Still endorsing my comment?Do your handlers know this?

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Yes, sadly we live in an imperfect world. God didn't want that.But it's still His call. He never commands suicide bombs in market places like allah seems to.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You still like that comment, don' you?It just has that ring of truth still, even after 500 cut and pastes.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Down to just cutting and pasting today? Is the iranian computer running slow or something?Did you download more games off the free site I gave you? http://www.stuxnet.com/games

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Yes, and it's still true too.

          • Glennd1

            You are trapped by the word blowback. Use consequences. Unintended consequences. Knock-on effects. Derivative effects. The history of U.S. foreign policy and covert/militaristic adventurism is a litany of failures – and people here blathering on just don't know it. I cited a book elsewhere on this absurd thread, Legacy of Ashes. It's an account of the CIA since its founding – according to its own declassified documents. They've been wrong about just about every new, big threat and issue we've faced. Their covert and other acts of subterfuge have failed spectacularly and lethally to ourselves and others consistently.

            It's really shocking to read the account end to end. We Americans live in a bubble of delusion about who we are in the world, post-WWII, and particularly post-Cold War. Americans often wonder why the world hates us – and trust me, they do (just imagine how you'd feel if Iran sent a guy like Drakken to your country to "save you", lol – his blindness is truly world class) – it's because of what we do. And still we are admired in real ways, but our inability to see the error of our interventionist ways may lead to our destruction.

            Just sayin'…

          • Drakken

            The only delusion going on around here is you, you think that you accept the arabist narrative of a bunch of left leaning Saudi blood money funded garbage that it is kosher and gospel? Garbage in, garbage out. Clearly you know nothing other than what so called experts and accepted military doctrine tell you, when it is as clear as day the accepted military and diplomatic doctrine is a complete failure.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            The CIA and FBI and FAA and Congress dropped the ball on 9/11.

            There is plenty of blame to go around.

            The greatest mistake is thinking that Islamists have the same values as the West.

            Is a group that encourages their people to go on suicide martyrdom missions going to be deterred by Mutual Assure Destruction?

          • EarlyBird

            Screw Up, he's hardly talking about 9/11, though that too was a spectacular failure. He's talking about the entire American intelligence enterprise since WWII.

            Not only does it fail in its primary mission which is spying and finding out what's happening in the world, but the CIA has committed so many coups, assassinations and destabilization campaigns, often in the name of US security but fundamentally about some radical sense of "Americanism," that we've done terrible things which have hurt us ("blowback").

            It is simply childish to see the mullahs in Iran in '79 and say they hate us 'cause we're Westerners. The question is why the US so specifically and so intently? Do you know anything about the US overthrowing Mossadegh and installing the Shah? It's like France overthrowing Eisenhower, shredding the US Constitution and installing Saddam Hussein, and then keeping him in power for 30 years.

            That is just one of many stories of US interference in the Middle East.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Jamie Gorelick didn't help. Carter hobbling it didn't help.

            Notice a trend here? Liberals tie their hands and then complain when things go bad.

          • EarlyBird

            Actually, beginning with the OSS, every president has tried desperately to get more control over that agency, which has gone rogue many times before and after Carter. The problem was not that the CIA was not free enough to do what it saw fit, but far too free, and incompetent, and constantly pulling stunts that surprised and embarrassed American presidents. That includes Republicans.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            And once again I could repeat my comment and it would still be correct.

            You just rant and rave and pretend to have the credibility to pull it off.

            Yeah, good luck with that.
            Clip the CIA's wings and see how we'll get blindsided again like 9/11.

          • EarlyBird

            You're moustache makes you look silly, Rog. Not everyone can pull one off. Reconsider, okay?

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Resorting to personal attacks since you aren't able to keep up with the debate?

            Is this where you start calling me a dirty Jew?

  • http://www.adinakutnicki.com AdinaK

    Obama and surrogates are LITERALLY gunning for American patriots, albeit using "legal" cover to do so, and this coming from serial lawbreakers – http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/11/03/the-thuggish-

    And while Rome wasn't built in a duty, so too will Obama & gang have to tread carefully. But the struggle is far from over, in fact, it is full steam ahead.
    And one would think that that the revolutionaries in charge have their hands full, with jihad, here, there and everywhere on American soil, but no matter – http://adinakutnicki.com/2013/03/08/jihad-here-th

    Paul's heads up for Hagel should be mentioned too. What's up with THAT??

    Adina Kutnicki, Israel http://adinakutnicki.com/about/

  • Winston

    Rand Paul did a good think for Constitutional conservatives. But, if you didn't notice, Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham were critical of Paul's filibuster. So, there's still infighting amongst those in the Republican Party and it must stop or get rid of the Washington GOP elites. This is one Constitutional conservative Christian who will NOT cast a vote for any Republican elitist who has ties to the Bildergers and any other globalist group.

  • Adam

    McCain and Graham are old school politicians who just had dinner with Obama and afterwards decided to throw Rand under the bus. Perhaps his filibuster undermined whatever deals they agreed to. Rand Paul offered a glimmer of hope for the future of this country. It was wonderful to watch.

    • ObamaYoMoma

      McCain and Graham are two of the biggest mental incompetents in the Republican Party, but can someone tell me if Rand Paul is a self-hating kook like his dad? That's what I want to know.

      • Atlas_Collins

        Do you care more about a nation that isn't the United States? That's what I want to know.

        • EarlyBird

          He cares more about Israel than the United States.

          • Ghostwriter

            At least Israel isn't screaming for our deaths every chance they get,EarlyBirdbrain. Much of the Muslim world does THAT on a regular basis.

          • EarlyBird

            Your comment is correct, but a complete non-sequitor. Criticism of the Israel First lobby isn't applause for radical Muslims.

        • ObamaYoMoma

          What I want to know is did you take your anti-Semitic Jew hating meds today?

          • EarlyBird

            You're stupid.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            That answers his question.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            Ouch…truth hurts!

  • davarino

    McCain and Graham!!!! Nothing like friendly fire in the heat of battle. Its no wander McCain would do such a thing, hell he shot Palin in the back as well, but Graham? Jesus, when will the repubs wake up? I am sick of these two and the rest of the wishy washy republicans. I voted for Mitt this last time just cause I didnt want Obama, but thats it. Now I wish I voted for Ron Paul. I dont agree with everything he stands for, but at least he knows exactly what he believes and fought hard for it. At least he had a spine and told it like it is, and thats what I like about Rand Paul. He has guts, unlike the two that went up to the White House to conspire against him. Its no wander McCain would do such a thing. Hell, he worked with Ted Kennedy……………….WHAT? I dont care if McCain was a war hero. Big deal, he's done. He has gone senile, along with the rest of the weak kneed repubs

    Thanks Rand Paul

    • EarlyBird

      McCain didn't shoot Palin in the back; he gave her a career, much to his ever lasting shame. That air head was absolutely useless as AK governor, and even the Republicans there realized immediately she was WAY in over her head, and hated the actual job of governance.

      Palin is nothing but a self-promoting, bomb-throwing demagogue nit wit, whose dad told her at a young age that all she needs to get ahead in life is self confidence. He forgot to mention that she may actually need to learn facts and skills. She not only doesn't know, but doesn't care to learn, anything about American government or the world. That she rose so far is an indictment of how low my beloved GOP has sunk. I will never forgive McCain for so cynically and recklessly picking her to be his stand in for the presidency. Palin is the ultimate hack. She made Obama look like a senior statesman by the time he got the White House.

      • Drakken

        Well if Palin was so dumb and a hack as you say? They why aren't you a Governor,Congress critter, or senator of the sad state of CA then? Hmmm?????

        • EarlyBird

          Drakken, even you are smarter and more knowledgeable than Palin. She's a disgrace.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            She a remarkable woman that has succeeded far beyond what you've managed.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Says the coward afraid to face navy? You're so much the little girly man.And you're lousy at that too. Why not just admit you're a nothing, a loser and go hide like you want to do.

          • EarlyBird

            "She a remarkable woman that has succeeded far beyond what you've managed."

            If Palin was a 300 lb. brilliant conservative intellectual, you wouldn't know her name. That Palin is cute and gives you wood while she tosses of one-liners and winks, she's "a remarkable woman."

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            If she was 300 lbs and accomplished I'd give her the same support.
            The fact she takes care of herself is nice, but the way she cleaned out the corruption in Alaska and got the natural gas pipeline built was what convinced me.

            You just can't see past skin or skin color, like more typical liberals.

          • EarlyBird

            Her own Republican supporters in the AK government were astonished at how unprepared, how lacking in basic knowledge, she was in how government works. They had to spend mnay precious hours explaining how basic procedures worked, how bills were passed, etc.

            She was way out of her depth, but worst, didn't care to learn. She hunkered down with her "cabinet," high school friends and acolytes, and dug in and treated EVERYONE like her enemy because she was embarrassed. She hated the job of actual governance.

            She is the classic person who is great at getting jobs and terrible at doing them. She hated being AK governor and that's why she quit, citing some bizarre fantasies of being "hounded out of office," never saying by whom, and never once answering questions again about why she quit her state. And her daughter is a skank.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You must mean the McCain goons that didn't let her out to actually campaign, the same ones that were shocked whenever she would speak and electrify the audience.

            McCain didn't fight to win, of course they didn't like the barracuda.

          • patriothere

            Obama has accomplished more than you will ever accomplish.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Yes, all that destruction will take a lot longer to repair too.

      • Rifleman

        Palin already had a successful career, and her e-mails proved she was conscientious and capable. She's proven she's a team player often enough, unlike most of her critics, and she's a 'nit-wit' like Reagan was, which is to say she's also a lot smarter than the her critics. She'd certainly make a much better president than rino media brown noser mccain.

        • EarlyBird

          Palin had a successful career in politics, not governance. BIG difference. She was totally unremarkable mayor of a meth-addled, ugly little backwater in AK, before getting the governorship. In both campaigns she showed her willingness to say anything, exploit any issue, to get the vote, even when the issues had nothing to do with the office she was running for. As an example, she railed against abortion while running for the mayorship, something which is entirely outside the realm of that office.

          Reagan had been a very successful governor for 8 years of one of the largest and most complicated US states before he got into the White House, where he again kicked ass. Please don't Palin and Reagn in the same sentence. He's a hero, she's an awful, hate-worthy witch.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Palin works hard, takes care of her family and depends on no one but her husband.

            For you to rip on her shows you're a small minded woman hater. Is it only capable women that intimidate you?

          • EarlyBird

            Like I said, Rog. She's a brilliant demagogue and self promoter. That she is taken so seriously by any real conservative is frightening. Or rather, proof that person is not a conservative (or a "serious mind") but just a right wing cultural chauvinist. Like the late '70s lefties for whom everything was personal identity, that's exactly what Palin traffics in. "Real Americans…," meaning white, Wal-mart shopping, church going, hunting, truck driving, hopefully a bit of a twang in their voice.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Wasn't it a liberal that said "I can see Russia from my house!"
            And isn't it liberals that aren't smart enough to realize it wasn't Palin?

            So, who's the dummy here? Not conservatives.

          • EarlyBird

            Uh… Palin said she could see Russia from her house.

            And being introduced out of the blue to Americans as a potential Veep cum President, she was asked what magazines she reads. You know, how/where do you get your information, view of the world. She said "all of them!" and complained that was "gotcha question. She always plays the victim.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            That was a SNL skit, she said they could see Russia from Alaska.

            There is a 'subtle' difference that you probably just aren't up to noticing.

          • patriothere

            And Obama doesn't work hard and take care of his family?

            What about here constituents? Does she take care of them? Because if she doesn't, she's not working hard.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Was that supposed to make sense? Or did the handler not proof read it?

      • davarino

        Wow, mention Palin and people's heads explode. I only mentioned her in passing, which wasnt the main issue and you made it the main issue. Out of all the nit wits we have in the repub party and you want to rail about Palin. She also said a lot of great things and people made up a lot of terrible things about her. My point was that he picked her and she revived his campaign from nothing, and then he hung her out to dry. This is what he does to other fellow repubs and I fear he got this back stabbing attitude from his buddy Ted Kennedy. He sides with this schmuck who conspired with the Russians while Reagan was in office trying to bring down the iron curtain. I noticed you focused all your ire at Palin and not the back stabbing McCain…..interesting. At least Palin has passion, just like Rand Paul, and that counts more in my books than a couple of back stabbing schmucks like McCain and Graham.

        • EarlyBird

          Palin and the worship of her is evidence of the total rot inside the GOP. She's absolutely disgusting.

          • davarino

            Who is worshiping Palin……ok forget this. Your obviously deranged and cant let go of your chew toy. Palin isnt even in the spot light, hasnt been mentioned in the media for a long time, but guys like you go nuts at the mention of her name. You must have been programed by the left through hipnoses to do their bidding whenever her name is spoken.

            "PALIN"……………..you going to start talking to yourself now? MUST KI11, MUST KI11

            I agree with you that maybe she might not have been the best PODUS or VP, but its over dude, let it go.

          • davarino

            psst. watch this. His only reply is going to be my misspelling of the word……..

          • EarlyBird

            Davarino, I admit to having a reaction verging on hatred for that woman. I did in fact make too much of her in regard to your post. It's just that I've never witnessed such a smug, destructive, manipulative, willfully ignorant demagogue as Palin. She's brilliant in some ways.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Watch Hillary some then. Only Palin wouldn't have a husband that had girls under his desk.

          • EarlyBird

            Oh I see, cuz in Rogie's little world, to hate Palin means one must LOVE Hillary Clinton, because everything is about political tribalism. It's sort of like when you pick baseball teams on the playground.

            You're brilliant. I can tell you're a "serious mind."

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            You did put down a standard, I just showed you how flawed it was.

            You walked right into that one, are all liberal hacks so stupid?

    • Drakken

      I would have given Gingrich my vote, because that Makiavellian SOB knows how to get things done and doesn't stand for roadblocks and knows how to make the hard decisions.

    • Rifleman

      Graham will get a few headlines, a little face time on TV, then quetly fold like a wet paper sack. I don't agree with Paul on drones, but he beats McCain or Graham any day.

  • Asher

    Indeed Rand Paul is a true Leader! He proves that there are still good men out there who are ready to take on Tyranny and expose the people who perpetrait it!

    • EarlyBird

      "Tyranny!" Yeah, a bit overheated.

  • tomc41

    Rand Paul accomplished nothing but a dog and pony show. Killing someone in a coffee shop in the US with a drone missile is very obvious. All that was said was that a drone and missile strike would not be used. There was no denial that American political enemies would not be assassinated, only that a drone strike would not be used. It would be much more easily deniable using some Chicago thug, which was not denied. Language counts.

    • http://www.clarespark.com clarespark

      I agree with tomc41. It was a stunt, calculated to advance Rand Paul's credibility with libertarians of both parties. I believe that such antics will condemn the Republican Party forever, and give the crucial issue of national security to the Democrats, who don't deserve it and don't understand the very conception. I posted blogs on the subject of the neo-isolationists yesterday, and here is the link: http://clarespark.com/2013/03/07/blogs-on-neo-iso…. those who believe that we are already living in a tyranny should have their heads examined.

      • Rifleman

        They need to choose their battles better, and fight them more effectively. Can't wait to read your neo-isolationism post tonight. It's a topic I've given much thought.

    • EarlyBird

      I don't think Paul was expecting that Americans could never be harmed by the federal government. I think he was making a point about the use of drones, and to demand publically from the WH that drones would never be used against Americans on US soil.

      I generally feel that explicitly limiting federal power is a good thing. Paul didn't change the world, but he made an important point. Good for him.

    • Sky Soldier

      @tomc41: It is clear that you have minimal knowledge and understanding of the sizes and killing capability of drone robotics. Today there are robotic flying drones the size of a mosquito which may be armed with killing power by injecting poison into their target… yes, even sitting in a "coffee shop". Now, please catch up with reality.

      • Rifleman

        They'd just pick you up sitting at the coffee shop, but it does sound like a happy ending for a hostage situation.

    • mlcblog

      I really disagree. He made a very important point. Got lots of attention and agreement from surprising places. Who would have thought Code Pink would ever agree? This is the way it's done. The war is of ideas, don't you know?

  • g_jochnowitz

    Rand Paul, like Ron Paul, is a de facto supporter of the Marxist-Islamic Alliance. http://www.jochnowitz.net/Essays/LeftAndRightUnit

    • Atlas_Collins

      Will you jewcentric bigots ever let go of your Ron Paul hate? Just because an American politician never groveled before the shoah-rollers and AIPAC enforcers doesn't make him a "loon."

      • Drakken

        Will you for chrsits sake STFU? Jesus! listening to a jew hating dumbazz like you grates on every last nerve!

      • Rifleman

        No, but St. Ronpaul's foreign policy ideas do make him a loon. Failure to worship doesn't equal hate, and I see neither bigotry nor hate in g_jochnowitz's post. He or she didn't even call Paul a knowing supporter, just a defacto supporter. Your post, on the other hand…

        • EarlyBird

          I would hardly want the entire Paulian foreign policy approach to be implemented, but dam* we could use a big dose of it in both parties.

  • Loyal Achates

    Hang on, drones are bad now? We've had article upon article at FPM saying they're great.

    • FPF

      Yes, drones are good when the US are engaged in a war outside the US soil. If it's allowed to kill US citizens within the US soil without a declared war, it's like the WH and the attorney general are acting as judges and executioners, which are against the Constitution. What do you say a president vowed to upheld the Constitution but despised that during his full term? Or the WH and attorney general are declaring war on all US citizens?

      • Loyal Achates

        So you condemn the killing of Anwar al-Aulaqi, then?

        • Drakken

          He didn't say that at all, traitors in foreign countries when they take up arms against the US deserve what they get, here in the US, citizens get Constitutional protections.

          • reader

            Legally, a person taking up arms against the US on the side of an enemy fighting force forfeits his or her US citizenship privileges. It's funny how compartmentalized the leftist ambulance chasers' minds are.

          • Loyal Achates

            Last I heard, US citizenship followed you, even overseas – and all US citizens were innocent until proven guilty. You bozos just make things up as you go along, like kids playing tag.

          • Rifleman

            Look up Operation Pastorius, or Ex parte Quinn, and learn better.

          • Drakken

            When you take up arms against the US, your citizenship is null and void and isn't going to save your azz. But thanks for playing.

          • EarlyBird

            In past wars, if a US citizen put on the uniform and swore allegiance to an enemy state, and waged war on the US, he was a target regardless of his citizenship (and maybe even revoked his citizenship by doing so).

            We may be in a "different kind of war" with non-state enemies, but that doesn't mean we have to lose that war by being tied up in knots about citizenship in cases as clear-cut as Aw-laki's. The man was fully in the "army" of our enemy, and openly swore his desire to kill and plotting to kill Americans.

            I understand we must be careful about these things, but I'm not going to lose sleep over Aw-laki. We need explicit, clear rules about these things though, rather than presidents writing and executing such policies in private.

          • Drakken

            Holy dog sh*t batman! Hell just froze over! I agreed with earlybird on a subject!

          • EarlyBird

            See, even you can be right about the occasional topic!

          • Drakken

            You got that azbackwards as usual REMF.

          • EarlyBird

            Golly, I was in the "rear with the gear," while DraKKKen was out killin' and fightin' and dyin' as he did MP work in Dubai. I bet you got that thousand yard stare and everything!

          • reader

            "US citizenship followed you, even overseas – and all US citizens were innocent until proven guilty."

            Are you 5 years old? Or you've graduated from a NYC public school?

  • FPF

    But why he voted to approve John Kerry and Chuck Hagel and what's his reason?

    • Rifleman

      Good question.

    • EarlyBird

      Because they are qualified, good American citizens?

      • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

        We must not be talking about the same people then.
        Kerry (If you do badly you'll end up in Iraq)
        Hagel (muslim brotherhood is good)

    • cathy

      Don't be deceived. When you consider tha Rand Paul voted for Islam appeasers Kerry and Hagel … the dog and pony show against Brennan had everything to do with drones. Rand Paul is no friend of Israel.

      • EarlyBird

        Why does he need to be a friend of Israel?

        • objectivefactsmatter

          "Why does he need to be a friend of Israel?"

          Why does he need to be a friend of Canada? Because anyone scheming against Canada or Israel probably has a loose screw or a leftist agenda. It's an effective litmus test of any politician because of the circumstances. Our biggest enemies hate Israel and spread lies about it and the West in general. When you support lying enemies, you become an enemy yourself.

          Get it? How many times must I explain this to you?

          Do you support Canadian sovereignty?

          • EarlyBird

            Fool, simply not being a tool of Israel des not make one anti-Israel. Read this repeatedly until you understand.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "Fool, simply not being a tool of Israel des not make one anti-Israel. Read this repeatedly until you understand."

            My understanding is not in question. In your mind, defending Western sovereigns makes you a tool of Israel. Attacking crucial American allies is A-OK to prove your NOT a tool.

            I understand your delusions perfectly.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Do you support Canadian sovereignty?

          • EarlyBird

            "Do you support Canadian sovereignty?"

            Yes. But I don't support Canada interfering with US politics and government to do its bidding.

            See, that's not so hard, is it?

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            So you have no use for diplomats and lobbyists?

          • EarlyBird

            Not foreign lobbyists. Nope.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Would you eject all ambassadors? That's what foreign lobbyists are.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "Not foreign lobbyists. Nope."

            Great. So what is your problem with American citizens who lobby on behalf of Israel to counter Arab Muslim Jihadi lobbyists. And if those citizens wish to openly communicate with people who agree with them, you have bigger problem with that than you do with foreign enemies who lie constantly about…nearly everything.

            Why don't you show me where you go and harass our actual foreign enemies?

            If jihadis start attacking Canada the way they attack Israel currently, you'll see even more collaboration between all of us.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "Yes."

            Great. We'll see.

            "But I don't support Canada interfering with US politics and government to do its bidding."

            We already protect them you ninny. Ever notice where Canada is on the globe? The world is round you know. The difference is that there is no large-scale multinational jihadi hot war in Canada. That's it. That and millions if not billions of dupes like you that do the bidding of Jew haters.

          • patriothere

            Our biggest enemy IS israel.

            Stay out of entangling alliances. That is a founding principle of America.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Our biggest enemy is a hostile forced style of life that lives by the instructions left in surah 9.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "Our biggest enemy IS israel."

            We know. It's in your holy texts.

            "Stay out of entangling alliances. That is a founding principle of America."

            And then came the industrial revolution. Try to keep up if you want to play in politics.

        • cathy

          EarlyBird
          Logic dictates. The Islamic nations surrounding the tiny democratic nation of Israel have threatened to wipe Her off the map

          However … bottom line. God says it; I believe it; and that settles it!

          Gensis 12:3
          I will bless those who bless you (Israel), and whoever curses you I will curse.

  • EarlyBird

    I worry that too many on this board are congratulating Paul for standing up to a Democratic president, rather than for standing up for liberty. I wonder how many on this board would be calling Rand Paul a commie pinko Islamist loving Marxist if he did his filibuster against a Republican president whose Attorney General had not been able to categorically state the WH's unwillingness to use drones against Americans on US soil.

    • reader

      Yeah, and if too many on this board were congratulating Paul for standing up for liberty, you'd be worried that too many of them were doing it just because they were Obama hating racists. We all know the schpill.

      • EarlyBird

        The only things I know for sure is that you'd be sliming Paul if he had filibustered a Republican on the exact issue, and that you're a fool.

        • reader

          The only things you know for sure is that you don't like most of the posters here. Beyond that you know very little. Sorry.

          • EarlyBird

            "Don't like"?!

            Dude, that's the understatment of the year. I have contempt for the rank stupidity, willful ignorance, hate, paranoia, civic illiteracy, xenophobia and reactionism posing as all-American patriotism on this board.

            I'm here just to observe, like seeing cage of angry chimps lashing out at a world they are incapable of understanding.

          • reader

            You're here because you're a troll. By the way, the "lashing out" bit is really funny at the end of that post. Well done.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "You're here because you're a troll. By the way, the "lashing out" bit is really funny at the end of that post. Well done."

            EarlyChimp does the whole "confession projection" thing all day long.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "Dude, that's the understatment of the year. I have contempt for the rank stupidity, willful ignorance, hate, paranoia, civic illiteracy, xenophobia and reactionism posing as all-American patriotism on this board. "

            ROFL at the troll.

            "I'm here just to observe, like seeing cage of angry chimps lashing out at a world they are incapable of understanding."

            Still laughing. Don't look now but somebody's typing comments too.

            Take your own advice and stick to observation, then maybe you'll have a chance to wake up to the reality of who the ignorant chimps are.

            Does the early chimp get the banana?

          • Drakken

            Being a REMF in the air force didn't teach you to be a self loathing, self hating, progressive, it must have been that bastion of critical thought at Berserkly. How tragic, a mind is a terrble thing to waste.

          • EarlyBird

            Drakken, I guess I should go easier on you considering you're a Medal of Honor winner. I mean, I may not have been as willing as you were to jump from a burning helicopter, braving a hail of enemy bullets to take out that jihadist machine gun nest by single handedly by throwing grenades when your M16 jammed, spearing the survivors with your bayonet when you ran out of grenades, and saving the whole platoon.

            The glory of it all!

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            I smell the attitude of an Occupy protester… Do you understand why those things helped keep you free to post here without wearing a burka?

  • Rifleman

    I agree with Sen. Rand Paul's opposition to Brennan's appointment, but see domestic drone strikes as a non issue that diverts from serious ones. They control the ground here, and if they want you, they'll knock, bust down your door, or burn your house down around you. If the situation ever did arise where a drone strike would be practical, we already know the administration's promises are worthless, and they think the law doesn't apply to them.

    The geographic location is irrelevant to whether military or criminal law applies. The Americans caught in Operation Pastorius were rightly tried by a military court.

    • EarlyBird

      I think what's interesting about the filibuster is that it raises the entire issue of drones on American soil, which are being used currently, most likely in violation of the Constitution, to spy on American citizens. We live in a brave new world, and some of the technology is scary.

      • Rifleman

        I agree with your last sentence, but the NSA has been spying on American citizens as long as its' been around.

        • EarlyBird

          Yeah, that's true. Some how the eye in the sky is so disturbing.

  • cathy

    It is all a dog and pony show to deceive the electorate … deceive the electorate by giving the impression there is an opposition to Obam in the senate! RINO Paul Rand realizes that Brennan will ultimately win the nomination with the yea votes of other RINO's.

    Think about it. Rand was one with the nomination of Kerry. He was one with the nomination of Hagel. He is one with Obama's plan to provide a path to citizenship for over 11 million "illegal" immigrants. He is one with Obamacare.

    “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.” – Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "“The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.” – Vladimir Ilyich Lenin"

      That's why Saudis are moving to control conservative media and the "conservative" politicians have been in their pockets for decades.

  • BLJ

    Way to go Rand Paul. You got my vote in 2016.

  • mlcblog

    McCain and Graham, such twits. Sad, though no surprise, really. True to form.

    Hopefully, Mr. Paul will set a precedent in this current time, and others will be moved to use the powerful tool of a filibustering marathon (this is at personal sacrifiice, at least of bodily comforts) to make their points, many of which will need to be made. We need all the energy we can get to throw into this fire!!

    Let the games begin/ continue!! We can win our country back, and Yes, tagalog, Mr. Paul is, like his Dad, no friend of Israel. However, we need unity and to learn to not separate over our differences.

  • EarlyBird

    How patriotic of you, rooting for the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Semper fail.

    • Drakken

      If that is what you got from my post? Your dumber than you sound.

      • EarlyBird

        DraKKKen, you're too stupid to even know when you're being messed with. How sad.

        • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

          And you're too stupid to know when people are trying to educate you.

          How sad.

          • EarlyBird

            I come here to get educated about how low the American right has sunk. I'm shocked nearly every day. Yes, it is a real tragedy.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            More of a tragedy for those trying to discuss it seriously around your blathering.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "I come here to get educated about how low the American right has sunk."

            You come here to confirm your delusional preexisting biases.

            "I'm shocked nearly every day."

            We can't help you because it's not even clear how well you can read.

            "Yes, it is a real tragedy."

            Indeed it is. Good luck with your recovery.

  • Flowerknife_us

    Rand Paul stuck his thumb right square in Obama's Eye!

    Without the filibuster- the President WOULD believe he has the right to kill an AMERICAN on AMERICAN soil without cause-warrant,-trial or jury.

    McShame should know better. He took an OATH as an officer to the Constitution. He should have been there defending it once again, Graham as well.

  • cathy

    Those who applaud the fillibuster of Rand Paul do not get it. There are so many reasons besides "drones" why Islamic appeasing John Brenner should not be CIA director.

    Revisiting ‘Jihad’ John Brennan
    January 7, 2013
    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/01/07/revisiting-j

    John Brennan is wrong man for CIA
    By Steven Emerson
    Published February 07, 2013
    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/02/07/john-br

    Obama advisor John Brennan speaks about the beauty of Islam
    May 10, 2010
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VQbAhqHoAo

  • Len_Powder

    Interesting that Obama has now backed down twice in rapid succession: first on the sequester and then on the drone strikes on US soil. What's the lesson? When Republicans stand up to him and defy his intimidation they actually can win some battles! Problem: Establishment Republicans prefer to continue losing and to have dinner with Obama. This problem will have to be resolved before 2014 or there won't be a Republican Party, which will probably be a blessing in the long run.

  • Len_Powder

    "It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States[.]"

    What could possibly necessitate drone strikes against terrorists on American soil? We can

    arrest them using local, state or federal law enforcement. We can use a sniper, a knife, a

    baseball bat, food poisoning, or any other techniques to kill the terrorist, so why resort

    to drone strikes with their potential for collateral damage? This debate is absurd and

    completely lacking in common sense! Is this what we have come to under this regime? Debating

    absurd hypotheticals that apply to Yemen but certainly not to the US?

  • pierce

    I find this man to be extremely interesting. He is committed to his causes. What I am trying to figure out is why Sen. Lindsey Graham, and Sen. John McCain took exception to Rand's filibuster. Perhaps Rand was not invited to the dinner President Obama had for those 8 Republican Senators.
    Regardless, there is something fishy going on in DC. I can remember back to the Bush years when the Dems did not approve of what GW was doing, and now they are doing the same exact thing.
    Oh well, ho hum.

  • Glennd1

    Any conservative here, clapping for Rand Paul, should be ashamed of themselves. His juvenile view of the constitution and the power of the CINC to use military force against armed combatants actually flies in the face of the best conservative and even some libertarian legal scholars out there. I won't make the case here – I'll let John Yoo and Richard Epstein, two amazing, leading legal minds from conservative and libertarian circles do so for me. Just click this link to the Ricochtet podcast over here, and select the one on "Day of the Drones". The issue isn't really even a close one. http://www.nationalreview.com/media/ricochet

    I'll use a real world example to show how inane this line of reasoning is. On 9/11 Bush sent fighter jets up after the remaining jet, flt 93, with the intent of shooting it down if it got close to a major target. Thankfully, the heroic passengers spared us that horrible choice, but if you actually try and trace the logic of Paul's commentary out, you'll see that in his view, perhaps the POTUS didn't have the right to do what he did. I mean, we did not know these were foreign born citizens hijacking our aircraft. On what authority did Bush act? What authority does the POTUS actually possess against attacks of that sort?

    Just imagine we knew the 9/11 terrorists were U.S. citizens. According to Rand Paul, Bush would have had no right to send up fighter jets to protect us from them. Whether it's drones or fighter jets is irrelevant, fyi. So, you folks are supporting a truly idiotic notion of POTUS/CINC authority. Wake up and deal with reality.

    • davarino

      Wrong, that wasnt his arguement. His beef is with a POTUS using drones on American citizens that are deemed terrorists, by him, that should be arrested instead of droned. The caveat of course, if you were listening to him, is that the "terrorist" has to be in the act of committing terror in order for the POTUS to use such force. So you only heard what you wanted to hear.

      • Glennd1

        Lol, you are a big a dope as he is. You are conflating a personal protection concept of law – imminent threat – with the constitutional authority of the CINC to conduct warfare against legitimate enemies of the U.S.

        The CINC has the authority under the constitution to deploy U.S. force anywhere in the world he's either authorized to do by congressional authorization, or to repel an attack that is underway. Not just imminent threat. He has the ability to deploy forces within the U.S. in either event. He is not allowed to use the military for law enforcement purposes. In fact, it was this justification that Lincoln used to legitimately use the Union Army against U.S. citizens in the Civil War.

        Murder is a crime – and all war is murder, so according to your logic, when an armed combatant of Al Qaeda who happens to be American is operating in the U.S., that combatant has all our constitution's protections? To be specific, you believe that if Anwar Al Awlaki snuck back into the United States, he isn't considered fair game as a military target? It's long been held in courts that once a U.S. citizen joins an armed struggle against the U.S. that they lose the protection of the constitution. Saboteurs in all wars have been treated this way – and some have been tried too. The fact is that we have both law enforcement military tools available against such a threat.

        Where you are hung up is on the use of the word terrorist. But of course, that classification does not earn you a slot on the kill list – dummy. The terrorist has to be covered by the use of force resolution passed by congress. From an imminent threat perspective, of course, POTUS can use any military force he deems necessary against a attacker of any sort – terrorist or not.

        Why does this shock you? Are you really so crazy that you think Tea Partiers are going to be added to the kill list? Are you that disconnected from reality?

  • fanlad

    Thanks for calling them out Rand Paul!
    So Americans are to sit down and shut up, and wait for the first responders to show up in every problematic situation, because our government has total control of the problem at hand, in life or death? Of course our government would never take advantage of a crisis, right? This is what gun control is all about right now, using a crisis to stomp on the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution.
    For the government to fear the people is liberty, for the people to fear the government is tyranny.

  • crackerjack

    I don't understand………….going by the patriot act ,the goverment may tap someones phone, hack his e-mails, observe him undercover. But when these mesures reveal an imminant danger of terroris activity, drones are not allowed as a means of response…..???? And what sense does this make?

  • slider 96

    This editorial is as full of hot wind as Rand pauls spectacle , which was based in a falsehood to begin with.
    Courageous ? No ludicrous .
    Conservative victory ? Are you kidding Ahlert???? Rand Paul is not a conservative , nor is the Tea Party .
    LOL…..you want to co-opt his CIRCUS ACT and call it a "victory " , go right ahead . Rand Pauls phony premise , aside from self-agrandizement was the notion the the Obama Admin . was contemplating drone attacks on Americans in America . I challenge ANYONE to find one memo , one statement , speech or suggestion from ANYONE ,advocating such . Did Rand Paul actually have to hear someone say ' NO ' to assuade his phony fears ?

  • slider 96

    Besides that , since the filibuster 's purpose alleged that Brennan somehow did advocate such a thing , which then was extrapolated to include the Obama Admin , and eventually Obama himself , WHY then did Paul even believe that "No " that was finally given , as to soothe a little child in a tantrum ? So then Rand Paul gives his vote to the bogeyman Brennan anyway ?
    And I'm sure note was taken of the few fools who joined him . Then of course , those same non-conservative but phony members denigrate the Republcans who attended a the dinner with POTUS as if they were looking for a free meal , when the rest of the entire country saw it for what is actually was- an attempt to be civil to one another and break the impasse . So much so ,that Obama's chief detractors ,criticized Rand Pauls phony circus act .

  • slider 96

    I thought it a great opportunity to have the Tea Party mentality exposed in a tangible way , to the apathetic , the uninformed and uninitiated ,and the rest of the Nation , the foolishness and waste of Govt time , the obstructionism , fear mongering, and paranoid ignorance that the Tea Party embraces .
    Want to call Rand Paul one of your own ? You can have him , although one should investigate what else comes with that package .

    • davarino

      Hmmm, not interested in the Bill of Rights? Figures, most lefties dont care about that section.

  • Glennd1

    "suttle" – Says it all, doesn't it? Drakken is referring to things like the Marine barracks in Beirut or Kobar Towers or our CIA station chief being taken hostage through to 9/11. But of course, since his geo-political calculations are set on tilt, he takes his narrow lens of experience and projects that on the world. The Russians were very busy in their client states, friendly territory mostly, aside from Afghanistan – and setting aside the Chechens.

    But even then, his hatred just turns his thinking brain off. What about the Moscow Opera house attack? The Breslan school massacre? And many, many other attacks? Just pick up a paper. You see, when a mind has so given into its bigotry and hatred as Drakken's has, facts just bounce off of it. Any data that doesn't support is presumed "truth" gets discarded. At some point, like where Drakken is, it can actually function as a form of mental retardation. You can see it in his commentary, all bluster and know it all, 'been there, done that' just like many soldiers – who I know quite a few of.

    Most soldiers are nothing like Drakken. He would have you believe his salty, world weary "wisdom" is hard won insight when in fact, many people who've walked the same path he has aren't full of hateful bigotry. I bet Drakken was a bigot long before he went to the region. Just sayin'…

    • EarlyBird

      He just loves the idea of mass slaughter, that's all. He's an animal.

      • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

        That would be the muslim activists.
        You sure to overlook a lot of subjective facts.

        • EarlyBird

          He doesnt' really make a distinction, Roger. Like most people on this board, to DraKKKen, any Muslim is a terrorist or would be terrorist who needs to be destroyed. If you want to argue with more nuance on his behalf, go for it, but he's a big boy now and can probably take care of his own words.

          He'll tell you that he's been fighting Muslim "savages" for 20 years and has felt their hot breath on this neck. He's a hardened Muslim killer, that DraKKKen!

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Birdy boy, you need to read surah 9. Then tell us why you think any loyal muslim would support a secular government over sharia.

            And then come back and explain that to us.

          • EarlyBird

            I dont give a f**k what kind of government they practice in their neighborhood. I don't care about you and your wife's sex life, either. I am concerned about actual threats emanating out of the Muslim world and dealing with them smartly and strategically.

            You make a list of problems the US has to deal with, ranked in order of severity, and let us know where radical Islam lands on that list and what we should do about it in the context of physical and fiscal reality, and get back to us.

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Then you're a fool.

            9:20 Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant.

            A Baptist doing this would be performing missionary service. But what does a muslim think of? (Jihad)

            9:29 Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.

        • patriothere

          How do you have any moral ground when you advocate the murder of children.

          Roger 169p · 23 hours ago
          The Almighty gives life and it's His place to take it away. You can't show those Egyptians were perfect and didn't deserve it.

          Th account shows God gave them several times to do the right thing

          • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

            Why is it wrong to let God make that call?I don't advocate anything less.

  • 11bravo

    Rand Paul will be an even bigger blight on the conservative/libertarian political landscape than his father was. Face it! All the kookiness is on the public record. It will be dragged up for the next 20 yrs – he will never escape it. He will be tarred by his fathers views too.
    Pro gay marriage
    Pro abortion
    Pro legal drugs
    What republican will ever be elected president with those views?
    He can try to back track, explain his way out of things, say he has changed his views…It will not work.
    The MSM and the dems will encourage him on just like they did his father. The result will be the same. Someone needs to explain to him in sober terms; You blew it! Your past actions have rendered you radio-active to most thinking Rebublicans – religious right – social conservatives – and mainstream republican voters. All that is left for you…is about what your Dad got 5% on a good day.
    Ron and Rand have/had their place in the big picture, it just isn't EVER going to be the Presidency – and we all know it.

  • SHIRLEY

    Rand Paul was so right to not stop talking till he got answer
    we all know obama and Holder both liar's
    you have to cross your t's dot your i and get it in writing
    just as paul held them accoutable for.
    dam shame McCain couldnt find his guts to stand behind him

    McCain and Graham had been on sunday programs claming to defend what
    we have not been told about the attack.we have yet to receive any word
    back from either one them
    but they let the vote go threw.that should tell us all that McCain and Graham
    or horn blowers with no sound.

    if you cant back your ass stop going on the programs and lieing.
    Rand Paul not only backed his but all of ours as well.
    sit down McCain let a real AMERICAN show you how to stand up for USA!

  • tanstaafl

    "Sic semper tyrannus."