Rand Paul's filibuster is a statement for folks to wake up

[Stone]

here we go again

nice way to derail a thread with your guys petty pissing contests

geeze grow up you two

Would you like some cheese with that whine?

 

[The Man]

See what I mean.....you supported legalized torture during the Bush administration...... and contrary to your claim....waterboarding had always been torture.

And it conflicts with your statement:



And the issue isn't about letting anything go....it's about debate.
You consistently debate out of convenience of the moment.



Joe I believe is sincere.......but you did support legalizing torture and let's face it, there isn't much sincerity in your comments when you now deny that support.
It's obvious you think reclassifying torture as aggressive influence was legal.
It's rather obvious your interests are more aligned in perverting law for convenience.



No.....that second remark is neither the scenario presented in the Constitution nor the context of my terms......."actively involved"......or do you need a dictionary?
And my comments do not address 'executions'.



Off topic and contextually------>nonsense



The above means you are desperate and eager to go off topic.
It also means you neither consider re-establishing law and order after a civil break down important, nor realize you just took a left turn from your usual ultra rightwing neocon political position to a left wing liberal position as was frequently expressed after Katrina (edit) as expressed in much of the press.
But that's not surprising after seeing you argue socialism is evil and then argue in support of a socialist economic model for economic recovery......( wow! )

Don't you ever feel dirty from all those contradictions?




I suggest you read up on suspending habeas corpus and implementing martial law.
And I suggest you read my posts closer and be more careful in responding.
You look silly.


Under certain circumstances, habeas corpus can be suspended and martial law imposed.
And it's been done in the recent past.

That's the way it is and the rationale is to re-establish civilian order when it's over run.

Don't like law AND ORDER?
Would you like your TS card punched?

Paul was grandstanding.
Obama got burned on trying to conceal what the government already has a right and duty to perform when necessary. Probably for political imagery......he is a liberal, after all.

See what I mean.....you supported legalized torture during the Bush administration...... and contrary to your claim....waterboarding had always been torture.

Again there is no such thing as legalized torture.
My position has also been very clear with....while water boarding was legal then it needs to be illegal now.
Its posted dozens of times in response to your ill attempts of character attack.
For the record I will say it one more time /while water boarding was legal then it needs to be illegal now.
If you are having trouble understanding such a simple statement you are either being intentionally being dishonest or are having reading issues.

And the issue isn't about letting anything go....it's about debate.
You consistently debate out of convenience of the moment.

Then argue your point.
The fact remains I have never argued for legalized torture.
I will say it again...water boarding while legal then needs to be illegal now....again for the record one more time.
Perhaps you should make a sticky note and put it on your monitor to remind yourself before posting in regard.

Joe I believe is sincere

Mine is as well..I may it perfectly clear I dont give a fuck about the terrorists...my interest is the law.
I am not attempting to be sympathetic falsely by any means.

The above means you are desperate and eager to go off topic.

No what it means it you wont let go the fact that you were wrong...and you are wanting to go off topic by diverting the topic to me....it is to be expected.

It's obvious you think reclassifying torture as aggressive influence was legal.

Water boarding was legal at the time...get it through your fucking head.
And again for the record while it was legal then it needs to be illegal now {which it is}
This has been stated endlessly by myself...a fact you choose to ignore so you can argue out of convenience in pure hypocritical fashion.

It's rather obvious your interests are more aligned in perverting law for convenience.

Only in your head as I have stated over and over again...that while water boarding was legal at the time it needs to be illegal now.

No.....that second remark is neither the scenario presented in the Constitution nor the context of my terms......."actively involved"......or do you need a dictionary?
And my comments do not address 'executions'.

They were your statements not mine...your position was a comparison to katrina in regard to martial law in regard to the current topic.

Off topic and contextually------>nonsense

My response was a response to your katrina statement...you solely injected katrina into your argument but now claim its off topic when rebutted...such behavior can make one appear to be a hypocrite.

The above means you are desperate and eager to go off topic.
It also means you neither consider re-establishing law and order after a civil break down important, nor realize you just took a left turn from your usual ultra rightwing neocon political position to a left wing liberal position as was frequently expressed after Katrina (edit) as expressed in much of the press.

Poppy cock.
What it means is that you saw a post of mine and decided to go off topic with your standard false character attack of saying I support the legalization of torture.

Don't you ever feel dirty from all those contradictions?

I have none...but you must feel filthy as all you present is dishonesty in an effort assassinate my character.
Your debating skills have went down hill...you used to bring good information to forums..now all your bring is bullshit.

I suggest you read up on suspending habeas corpus and implementing martial law.
And I suggest you read my posts closer and be more careful in responding.
You look silly.

I fully understand it,just as I read your posts and understood them.
You didnt like the response

Under certain circumstances, habeas corpus can be suspended and martial law imposed.
And it's been done in the recent past.

Whats your point.

What was the state of emergency{martial law} with the droning of the US citizen in Pakistan
Again katrina is a poor comparison you insist on using as it was disaster zone.

That's the way it is and the rationale is to re-establish civilian order when it's over run.

So you do understand it then.
So how would a drone attack to an individual apply to re establish order when its over run.
Where was the chaos here?
What and where was overun here?

Don't like law AND ORDER?

My posts are clear that I am in support of law and order.

Would you like your TS card punched?

I tossed it when I was eight.

Paul was grandstanding.

You have stated this multiple times....perhaps you can get a discount tattoo of such.

Obama got burned on trying to conceal what the government already has a right and duty to perform when necessary. Probably for political imagery......he is a liberal, after all.

He may want to limit who speaks on behalf of his administration.

Example being the Benghazi incident.

 

[The Man]

I believe they killed two birds with one stone. The man we are refering to was only one of those birds.

Yes two were killed...there was actually only one target though.
Dont get me wrong..I shed no tears for him either

 

[The Man]

here we go again

nice way to derail a thread with your guys petty pissing contests

geeze grow up you two

I agree.
Here we were talking about drones and the law..he sees a post of mine..and goes back to his fictional torture argument.
Very off topic too I might add.

 

[Stone]

Again there is no such thing as legalized torture.
My position has also been very clear with....while water boarding was legal then it needs to be illegal now.
Its posted dozens of times in response to your ill attempts of character attack.
For the record I will say it one more time /while water boarding was legal then it needs to be illegal now.
If you are having trouble understanding such a simple statement you are either being intentionally being dishonest or are having reading issues.




Then argue your point.
The fact remains I have never argued for legalized torture.
I will say it again...water boarding while legal then needs to be illegal now....again for the record one more time.
Perhaps you should make a sticky note and put it on your monitor to remind yourself before posting in regard.


Mine is as well..I may it perfectly clear I dont give a fuck about the terrorists...my interest is the law.
I am not attempting to be sympathetic falsely by any means.




No what it means it you wont let go the fact that you were wrong...and you are wanting to go off topic by diverting the topic to me....it is to be expected.


Water boarding was legal at the time...get it through your fucking head.
And again for the record while it was legal then it needs to be illegal now {which it is}
This has been stated endlessly by myself...a fact you choose to ignore so you can argue out of convenience in pure hypocritical fashion.

Only in your head as I have stated over and over again...that while water boarding was legal at the time it needs to be illegal now.



They were your statements not mine...your position was a comparison to katrina in regard to martial law in regard to the current topic.

My response was a response to your katrina statement...you solely injected katrina into your argument but now claim its off topic when rebutted...such behavior can make one appear to be a hypocrite.



Poppy cock.
What it means is that you saw a post of mine and decided to go off topic with your standard false character attack of saying I support the legalization of torture.


I have none...but you must feel filthy as all you present is dishonesty in an effort assassinate my character.
Your debating skills have went down hill...you used to bring good information to forums..now all your bring is bullshit.


I fully understand it,just as I read your posts and understood them.
You didnt like the response

Whats your point.

What was the state of emergency{martial law} with the droning of the US citizen in Pakistan
Again katrina is a poor comparison you insist on using as it was disaster zone.



So you do understand it then.
So how would a drone attack to an individual apply to re establish order when its over run.
Where was the chaos here?
What and where was overun here?


My posts are clear that I am in support of law and order.

I tossed it when I was eight.


You have stated this multiple times....perhaps you can get a discount tattoo of such.


He may want to limit who speaks on behalf of his administration.

Example being the Benghazi incident.

Again there is no such thing as legalized torture.

There was under the Bush administration and you specifically supported the use of waterboarding.

My position has also been very clear with....while water boarding was legal then it needs to be illegal now.

Like I've pointed out many times, you debate from convenience

Its posted dozens of times in response to your ill attempts of character attack.

Anytime you post contradictions as you have in this thread, I'll be pointing out those contradictions.

If you are having trouble understanding such a simple statement you are either being intentionally being dishonest or are having reading issues.

I'm calling you out on major contradictions.
If you stop making them, I wouldn't have anything to debate

Then argue your point.

Already done by pointing out Article 1 Section 9 of the Constitution, which you've been avoiding.

The fact remains I have never argued for legalized torture.

You supported the legal use of waterboarding as a legal means to acquire information from captured terrorists, during the Bush Administration.
That's fact and remains.....I've successfully called you out on this long ago.
And it's a contradictions of your position in this thread as I pointed out:

...............

There is much difference is between running in the gray of a law...and the law itself being very gray...the latter has no place in our system.

And while I agree......your words are contradictory to your position of redefining the English vocabulary to debase our legal system for political advantage.

Mine is as well..I may it perfectly clear I dont give a fuck about the terrorists...my interest is the law.
I am not attempting to be sympathetic falsely by any means.

Again, not related to our discussion, but nice try to distract.

No what it means it you wont let go the fact that you were wrong.

LOL!
TM....you were outed long ago in those closed threads

Water boarding was legal at the time...get it through your fucking head.

Indeed......the torture called waterboarding was legalized during the Bush administration and you supported that activity as a legal activity.

I merely demonstrated that your take on law isn't consistent. Wouldn't it be easier to admit to supporting that torture at the time and now admit you were wrong?
You seem to think you never make mistakes......
Now convince others.....

And again for the record while it was legal then it needs to be illegal now {which it is}
This has been stated endlessly by myself...a fact you choose to ignore so you can argue out of convenience in pure hypocritical fashion.

But you said you don't support gray laws and I presented the contradiction where you did.
You did support torture during the Bush years!!!!!!!!

Only in your head as I have stated over and over again...that while water boarding was legal at the time it needs to be illegal now.

And I've pointed out many times that you supported torture during a Republican administration and here you are, with a Democrat in office complaining about torture.

Hypocrite!

They were your statements not mine

Anything I post are my comments, Captain Obvious.

My response was a response to your katrina statement

Off context.
Your quote:

Which means you approve of the disarming and killing of citizens during Katrina...not a good position to take.

And I pointed out that your reply was anti-law AND ORDER.......the purpose of habeas corpus being suspended and martial law being invoked under the constitution is for re-establishing civil order. Katrina is a recent example.
Removing weapons and killing civilians, as you posted, was not the objective.

Rand could have made a much better plea for oversight than the filibuster he presented.

.you solely injected katrina into your argument but now claim its off topic when rebutted

See above statement........nice try, though ( not! )

such behavior can make one appear to be a hypocrite.

Indeed. You seem very familiar with the concept.....

Poppy cock.
What it means is that you saw a post of mine and decided to go off topic with your standard false character attack of saying I support the legalization of torture.

Whine, whine, whine.....
You got called out on your BULLSHIT

Your debating skills have went down hill

Where's the grammar police?





Continued

 

[Stone]

Continued

you used to bring good information to forums..now all your bring is bullshit.

Whats your point.

The Constitution allows the government to intervene in civil disruptions where civilian authority is over run.
That can be by many events, from natural disaster to rebellion to terrorism.

Holder's 'letter' to Paul:

"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,"

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/...lder-drone-letter-to-sen-rand-paul-88572.html

However, as I've pointed out by referring to Article 1 Section 9 of the Constitution.....it's rather obvious American terrorists in the act of performing terrorism on US soil can constitutionally be killed without judicial review when resisting martial law.
Lives lost in the Katrina aftermath with criminals challenging martial law was a recent example of suspended habeas corpus and enforced martial law as noted.
You can whine all you want......but that's the point and the only way to change it is like our resident libertarian's argument with gun control.....chop up the Constitution to suit your whim.

What was the state of emergency{martial law} with the droning of the US citizen in Pakistan

Off topic.....the thread topic is about Americans on US soil.

Again katrina is a poor comparison you insist on using as it was disaster zone.

It's a good example of suspending habeas corpus and the institution of martial law.
It applied to US soil while much of your discussion in this thread is off the original topic and about activity on foreign soil.

Numbskull.

So how would a drone attack to an individual apply to re establish order when its over run.

Well ..IF you have an American terrorist that's involved in combat on US soil.....it's going to be the best weapon for the situation at hand. Might be an M16 or an RPG......or maybe TM waving a white flag and screaming in a high girlish voice, please give up
A drone attack is an extreme situation, and probably not first choice to begin with

Where was the chaos here?
What and where was overun here?

I think the chaos is in your mind because you've stomped over logic too many times.

My posts are clear that I am in support of law and order.

.....good one!

 

[Stone]

I agree.
Here we were talking about drones and the law..he sees a post of mine..and goes back to his fictional torture argument.
Very off topic too I might add.

Another whiner

 

[Alien Allen]

way to kill a thread guys

 

[Stone]

way to kill a thread guys

You complain too much

 

[Joe the meek]

way to kill a thread guys

I'd love for you to show me a social internet forum where any thread of length actually stays on tract from start to finish, particularly one that is realated to politics or world events.

Impossible due to people being people.

 

[The Man]

I'd love for you to show me a social internet forum where any thread of length actually stays on tract from start to finish, particularly one that is related to politics or world events.

Impossible due to people being people.

What we have here is rather simple.
Stone claims I support the legalization of torture.
He has based this on the fact that I do not believe those that done the water boarding should be prosecuted/ remember what they done was legal at the time.
We cant go back and prosecute people for something that was legal at the time,
My position has been clear while water boarding was legal at the time it needs to be illegal now...now how someone interprets that into the support of legalization of torture is a very far stretch.
This would be the same as making whiskey illegal today and prosecute Jack Daniels company for manufacturing it while it was legal.
I could not support prosecuting them nor anyone associated with the production of such.
Our laws are written to protect the govt from going "back" and doing such....it is there for a purpose.

I dont give a shit about those 3 terrorists that were water boarded....that does not mean I support the legalization of torture....to some it may; that is an issue that have to work out with themselves {by researching the protections we have in place to prevent going "back" on prosecutions.
With my position being clear {and stated dozens of times} that while water boarding was legal then and needs to be illegal now that I am in not in support of legalization of torture.

In the drone killing I dont give a shit about that terrorist....my interest is in "when was the decision made to drone him" and why was he not convicted when we had him in custody but rather freed then killed later....I shed no tears for the guy mind you...but IMO it just seems a little to odd that judicial process was intentionally left out.
I suppose next I will be in support of the "legalization of murder" according to stone as I dont give a shit about that dead terrorist.

I am sure he will he will write a lengthy post to try to assassinate my character after reading this post.
I will be a hypocrite.
Support the legalization of torture
A liar.
Illogical.
A whiner.
Dishonest.
And have ruined my credibility in front of the forum.

It pretty much ruins every thread he goes to especially since it is based off of a false premise.
It will be the same shit...this thread...the next, the next, the next, and the next.
He just dont know when to let something go...he has to make himself "right" even when he is wrong...I suppose we all do to an extent...but with stone I guess it is a matter of pride.
I suppose I could say "hey stone I support the legalization of torture" give him an imaginary win ....but I will not lie to be used as a shill to build his "wins"

 

[Stone]

What we have here is rather simple.
Stone claims I support the legalization of torture.



(edited for brevity but saved in .xps format in case any edits are made that change context)

Lame

What we have here is rather simple.
Stone claims I support the legalization of torture.

Fail.
What 'we' have here is a childish attempt on TM's part to spin, forgetting that the the past tense usage of support------- was used and that TM's typical style of debating out of convenience for the moment, is in play.
You did support the usage of legalized torture during the Bush administration and now during a Democrat Administration are completely opposed to that type of torture.
It's obvious it's a political decision, TM......making you a (drum roll ) hypocrite.
You do support gray laws when it's convenient for you and deny support when it's convenient for you.

My position has been clear while water boarding was legal at the time it needs to be illegal now

Your position was very clear during the Bush administration......you supported the use of a torture that is called waterboarding.
And I used linkage in past threads to prove your intent at the time.

Further, another member, Tim, provided proof, in your own words used at this web site, that you even used torture on a vagrant that broke into your home and bragged you kill him the next time.
You've even denied that.
But Tim's link to your words was telling.

It's rather obvious you aren't being honest with the forum.

We cant go back and prosecute people for something that was legal at the time

Perhaps, but that's not a rationale for condoning torture to begin with. It's just a lame excuse to avoid responsibility and hide your shame.

This would be the same as making whiskey illegal today and prosecute Jack Daniels company for manufacturing it while it was legal.

Do you think Adolf Hitler and his minions could have used that argument for all the torture they committed at a time when the torture of Jews was legal in Germany?
Comparing prohibition to acts of torture is neither logical nor sane.
One is is a free choice by an individual, the other an imposed act of violence upon an unwilling individual.
But then......your fallacious argument at the time of those waterboardings was that those tortured, chose to be tortured.
That was insane logic.

I could not support prosecuting them nor anyone associated with the production of such.

But you did support the legalization of a torture and the legal act of the torture called waterboarding.
And you aren't addressing that issue because you you know you did support it during the Bush Administration.
Gray laws......you support them when it's convenient.

I dont give a shit about those 3 terrorists that were water boarded....that does not mean I support the legalization of torture

Slick.....those closed threads where we discussed this earlier have the proof with linkage to source, that shows otherwise.
You did support the legalization and usage of waterboarding during the Bush Administration.

that is an issue that have to work out with themselves {by researching the protections we have in place to prevent going "back" on prosecutions.

You still don't get it. This is a debate forum and I've outed you on a claim you've made about gray laws.
The Bush Administration imposed torture as a legal activity through legal decisions in the Justice Department:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture_Memos
You support gray laws when it's politically advantageous and reject them when it's politically advantageous.
You're a hypocrite.

I am sure he will he will write a lengthy post to try to assassinate my character after reading this post.

Done and done......this is a debate forum, after all.

I will be a hypocrite.

Called that one right

Support the legalization of torture

You did during the Bush Administration.

A liar.
Illogical.
A whiner.
Dishonest.

You sound upset ......

And have ruined my credibility in front of the forum.

And the whining kicks in.

It pretty much ruins every thread he goes to especially since it is based off of a false premise.

Have you ever thought that being honest with the forum, or at least avoiding situations where you present yourself as a poser........might avoid the above debate?
You do support gray laws when there is a political element, to your advantage. And you do reject that same identical gray law, when there is a political element to your advantage.
It's called......'speaking out both sides of your mouth'.
And I caught you at it

It will be the same shit...this thread...the next, the next, the next, and the next.

You are exaggerating....
Stop posting shit and see what happens

He just dont know when to let something go...he has to make himself "right" even when he is wrong...I suppose we all do to an extent...but with stone I guess it is a matter of pride.
I suppose I could say "hey stone I support the legalization of torture" give him an imaginary win ....but I will not lie to be used as a shill to build his "wins"

Sour grapes

 

[Accountable]

I'd love for you to show me a social internet forum where any thread of length actually stays on tract from start to finish, particularly one that is realated to politics or world events.

Impossible due to people being people.

True, but it really sucks when people keep dragging old shit up from former threads and rehashing it over and over. That's what kills threads.

 

[Alien Allen]

and shit that started at another forum to boot

 

[Stone]

True, but it really sucks when people keep dragging old shit up from former threads and rehashing it over and over. That's what kills threads.

Of course I realize you're aligned with TM on the issue of demonizing the Obama administration....and I really don't mind as I see most current political associations as corruptible/corrupted....including your own favorite, Ron Paul, current figurehead of the 'libertarian' movement......who not so oddly, seems to have a lot of support from neocons and elements of white supremacist/neo-nazi groups like Dan Black's Stormfront.
Reading Pauls 'Liberty Defined' was certainly a wakeup call to me, it being a manifesto of a wanabe little dictator that presents the concept of 'liberty' as a tool for elitist governing through massive simplistic sophistry and vociferous rhetoric. He just wasn't enough of an intellectual to convince me of his position.
But that's another issue....

Post a platitude I think you don't mean and I'll debate it with you as I have TM.

Oh!....that's right!!!!.....I already have when you argued to chop out the Second Amendment to suit your own whim.......and yet argue in other threads the need to honor and uphold the Constitution.

If you or TM are going to sling BULLSHIT.....why should you be treated differently in a debate forum?

Or was your post just meaningless whinery not realizing that you too "keep dragging old shit up from former threads and rehashing it over and over"?

 

[Stone]

and shit that started at another forum to boot

Indeed......and the forum now knows TM's ethics vary depending on the political party in power.
So.....what are his motives with such drastic contrasts of ethics?

Perhaps it's fortunate being a sociopath isn't illegal? .........

Thanks for bringing up that angle.

 

[Accountable]

True, but it really sucks when people keep dragging old shit up from former threads and rehashing it over and over. That's what kills threads.

Case in point (and right on cue):
http://www.offtopicz.net/showthread...s-to-wake-up&p=2283203&viewfull=1#post2283203

 

[Stone]

Case in point (and right on cue):
http://www.offtopicz.net/showthread...s-to-wake-up&p=2283203&viewfull=1#post2283203

Whine, whine, whine.......

 

[Alien Allen]

Whine, whine, whine.......

I saw the same on those walls in the cave

No wonder you are a Neanderthal

 

[Stone]

I saw the same on those walls in the cave

No wonder you are a Neanderthal

LOL!


Hidy-ho Mr. Barbarian.......
Rough day pillaging in Motor City Heaven, or are you just now getting up?