Rand Paul Wants to Free All the Terrorists?

Breitbart carried an article entitled, “Rand Paul Threatens Filibuster of Defense Bill to Release Potential Terrorists,” regarding the Senator’s amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). This headline and article highlight what’s wrong with the establishment GOP. They believe in the popular fallacy that everything our military and defense departments do is in Americans’ best interests. Any suggestion to take a step away from invasive measures imposed on ordinary American citizens that continually chisel away at our liberties is akin to “letting the terrorists win” and “siding with Al-Qaida.” Ironic, isn’t it, that our government actually does those very things overseas. We literally “let the terrorists win” and “side with Al-Qaida” when it helps to accomplish our goals.

Senator Rand Paul’s amendment to the NDAA was a benign but symbolic attempt to remind people of the Sixth Amendment. In fact, Paul’s amendment was essentially a reiteration of the Sixth Amendment, which mainly has to do with those accused having the right to a speedy and public trial before a jury, something that the NDAA renders null and void.

As The New American asserted in a recent article, Senator Paul’s amendment doesn’t go nearly far enough. Nowhere in his amendment or in his speeches does he call for the repeal of the NDAA, which authorizes the President to deploy troops and detain American citizens indefinitely in military prisons until the end of the war on terror, which, if politicians get their way, will never end. These people can be detained on a mere “hunch” without charges, evidence, trial or jury, courtesy of another GOP favorite, the Patriot Act. Frankly, we don’t need a mere reference to the 6th Amendment. We need a full repeal of the NDAA (and the Patriot Act).

The Breitbart article referenced above claims that Senator Paul’s amendment that merely quotes the Sixth Amendment will not only keep Paul out of the White House if he were to run in 2016 but also offers evidence that he wants to free the terrorists:

 But in order for Paul to win, he’ll have to disassociate from the positions of his father, a multiple-time failed presidential candidate. If he hopes to do that, he’ll have to do better than he’s doing now with regard to the latest Defense authorization bill. He’s threatening to filibuster Defense funding unless he gets a vote on an amendment that would curtail indefinite detention of potential terrorists.

 Oh, please. By wanting to insert one of our very own Bill of Rights into the NDAA, Rand Paul wants to free the terrorists!? This Breitbart contributor seems to think that anybody that the White House deems a terrorist deserves to be indefinitely detained without charges, evidence, etc. Do we need any reminders as to who the government thinks are “potential terrorists?” Pretty much anybody who is vocally opposed to the government’s policies and goals is at risk of being labeled a “domestic terrorist” and treated as such.

And the suggestion that only a Republican who upholds such treasonous, immoral and unconstitutional acts like the NDAA will be able to win the presidency in the next election is completely ludicrous. We don’t need another establishment GOP politician running for president. Maybe next time, we shouldn’t let the GOP dictate whom we should and should not like.

Someone on Godfather Politics quoted a Who song that goes, “Meet the new boss; same as the old boss.” That lyric sums up the changes we see every four years in the White House regardless of party affiliation, precisely because Republicans have gotten in the habit of letting the GOP establishment give them their opinions. Here’s another Who lyric (from the same song) that I hope we’ll all heed next time:  “Don’t get fooled again!”

Comments

comments

  • http://www.monster-island.net/ kushibo

    Dear readers, do not trust headlines that end with a question mark. They are not meant to inform but to agitate.

    • bwilson

      Would you have preferred a declarative sentence for a headline? Leaving the headline more open-ended with a question is more objective.

  • Duffmiver

    Great article Mr.
    Hodges! As a recovering Journalist and political junkie, I applaud you for
    telling it, the way it really is.

  • oldcoyote

    Like father like son, Rand knows what he's talking about.

    • Edward53

      Like Adolph like oldcoyote.

      • oldcoyote

        You sound like a filthy grubby stinking thieving jew swill..

        • Edward53

          I love it when you talk dirty, coyote. Such charm.

        • oldcoyote

          Just the facts sonny, just the facts!!

      • ironmountain

        good one.

  • tdaly

    Bull crap! Why don't you get your facts straight! It's Due Process for American Citizens not foreign terrorists.

    • RogerZ

      To what are you referring?

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_NLORN6B3ZNGCAJTFHWWFUUEY4Q jong

      Precisely. However the Paulbots will get riled up with this article. Define what a terrorist is and is not first and then go from there.

      • Edward53

        You'e right, jong. The Paulbots hate Israel and the Jews (just like Ron) but they're head over heels in love with the terrorists.

        • oldcoyote

          The Obumerbots like yourself love terroristic Israhell and the destruction they are bringing to America.

  • oinker123

    The NDAA is just another example of our leaders wanting to nullify the bill of rights. Of course it's unconstitutional but that has not stopped the enemies if liberty in the past, Any one who supports indefinite imprisonment without trial or due process and based only on suspicion is dangerous, really stupid and a totalitarian ( Think NAZI, Fanciest and Communist). In Russia you got imprisoned in an "insane asylum" because you did not like communism and that was proof enough that you must be crazy'

    • dan phillips

      rand paul and his idiot dad are freaking lunaics. they love terrorists and want iran to ge a nuke. they hate jews and love muslims .there conpiracy theorist who never stop talking abut the fed and 911 and aliens. rand does want the terrorists to go because him and his colt followers are terrorsts. hey want america to be bombed. at least obama got this one right. just a bit of history, both pauls voted agaist the patriot act. how can an american vote aainst the patriot act . there unamerican hate isreal and they want to tear up the constitution.they need to be chained up and rounded up and thrown in jail.

      • adamenochnoah

        Probably the most dimwitted comment I have ever read, it is truly off the charts & this guy is off his rocker...

      • Don39

        You dare call someone else an idiot?

      • Lindsey Brutus

        Dan: Do you know that Ron Paul's brother is a Presbyterian minister? Do you know that Rand Paul graduated from Baylor University, probably the most evangelical school in the country? Do you know anything Dan? These two people are the most theologically conservative people in politics today! I doubt they hate anybody but if they do, it is the people trying to take our God-given rights away from us in the form of the Patriot Act! Christians don't hate!

      • Batch

        Dan, are you a troll for the dems. NDAA is a bad law. Patriot act was also going to fade out. But it did not. Why. Power you fool.
        Dan, you are a dumb ass.

      • DocJimmy

        Well Danny-Boy; it would appear you are so full of 'road apples' that your eyes are brown and any other color would indicate your a quart low. Don't know where you came up with your opinion of the Paul's, but; you've just shown everyone here that you're not the sharpest knife in the block...

      • Deep Blue

        dan phlips, ...you are a feakin coward !........ ignorant at best .....and you certainly are not the one footing the bills !!! Besides Israel has all the means neccessary to defend itself quite well thank you !

        Israel certainly could not exist without the support of the federal reserve cartel ..and the Internal Revenue Service nor the IMF , nor the European working class tax payers ,...nor can you ignor the fact that it is the treasury bonds bought by China and other developing countries in exchange for market shares namely that of the famous Walmart stores that finace the American militro-industrial complex which in turn protect the " GOD trusts " that are boldy shown apon every American $1

        bill ! * G = gold ; O= oil ; D= drug cartels ......

        But don't you dare claim that All Americans are Muslim lovers ......besides , >>

        If the patriot Act is such a good thing , then why is there a Muslim in the white house who made that Act a permanent feature of his puppt dictatorship ? Certainly because the American public is ignorant of the facts and that they know that voting doesn't change anything .....because the puppet masters always get the desired results . ..don't they ?

        Nor can you ignor the fact that it is the money given to Saudi Arabia via the purchase of thier oils that actualy finances a sect that uses violence as a means to conquer the world by forcing Occidental countries to accept the implantation of Muslim colonies at thier expence ?!.....

        And why is it that everytime a British controled country that goes to war or simply colonies them for thier natural resources end up being colonised by them at the expence of it's own subjects ?

        Why is it that only Muslims get through customs without full body searches TSA style with hands on genitals approach at airports across the woirld ??

      • dude

        Let's play "spot the gov't disinfo troll". Look, Dan Phillips is one.

  • http://www.survivingurbancrisis.com/ Silas Longshot

    When 0bama signed the NDAA he 'promised' to never use the powers of locking up American citizens without due process. That just makes me feel so much more secure in my rights as a US citizen. After all, this Marxist has always kept his promises, right?

    • ironmountain

      just like the article says GOP establishment types are in favor of trusting Obama like all those republicans who are caving on the fiscal cliff negotiations. These people have no principles. And here they are talking about how in favor they are of this act that Obama signed. Is the GOP even remotely conservative anymore.

    • Jayce Davidson

      I think it's high time we as Americans simply accepted that the Constitution, whatever good it may have been two hundred years ago, is simply outdated for modern society. If you notice nowadays, it's mainly conspiracy theorists and racist nutjobs that spend all their time harping about constitutional rights (same with those secession freaks). Obviously, we as a society need to move along, and leave behind all that silly claptrap.

      Yes, the founding fathers had some things right, but we live in a post-9/11 world, and if we are ever going to survive, we're not going to be able to do it with the libertarian anarchy that the Paul supporters are advocating. Let's face it: we would all do very well to have 24-hour surveillance in a lot of places. We'd do even better to take the very people that are a real threat to us, and simply deny them access to lawyers and due process. Why? Because if you give terrorists those options, you allow them the chance to get off scot free by legal loopholes and other tricks. I say no way. Don't even give them the chance.

      Only if you're a criminal would you want these options. I can't help but think there's something a lot more sinister going on under the surface of these white elitist Paulbots.

  • ChiefBull

    Look, turn'em loose. We're not willing to try them and kill them, except on a battle field he last time I checked after we call backn to the Pentragon and ask permission to shoot. So, let's just turn'em loose. Holdng them does violence to the Constitution. Maybe we can even th wogs GI Bill educational benefits because they've suffered from "work place violence".

  • Don

    I wont forgive John McCain and Lindsey Graham , among other lawmakers who GAVE this socialist president these powers to "take out" American citizens, without due process of the law.

  • SIR JAMES

    These people that are attacking Mr.Paul and his father should be run out of the country or have their mouth sewn shut. These are the same idiots that are ruining this country and they're just to stupid to see it.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_NLORN6B3ZNGCAJTFHWWFUUEY4Q jong

      Both Pauls are lunatics and neither has a clue of the Constitution. I hoped that Rand would have escaped this obvious that he has not.

      • adamenochnoah

        Jong, go back to your bong...

    • Don39

      So you are in favor of suppressing free speech. Some patriot you are!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Whittington/100001496682673 John Whittington

    Leave it up to a Liberal to quote a Conservative and make him look like a Liberal! They get nothing about Conservatism. Not a clue!!!

    • bwilson

      I don't think the author is a liberal. I think he's criticizing not conservatism but big government republicans. The NDAA is misnamed because it has less to do with national defense and more to do with silencing political opponents. It's interesting that you are in favor of the NDAA even though it was enacted under the Obama administration. So who are you calling a liberal?

  • gmhunt4

    Rand Paul for President, 2016.

    • Don39

      Maybe, if he will promise not to hire his dad for state or an ambassadorship!

      • gmhunt4

        or Head of Defense......he would be great as head of the Fed.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_NLORN6B3ZNGCAJTFHWWFUUEY4Q jong

    Rand should know that the terrorists have no rights to a speedy trial as they at that point are relegated to the same punishments as spy's in this war. What we need is clear and real definitions to what a terrorist is and is not. After all the NDAA has not sprung up over night and has been on the books since the 1950's. Obama is the one changing the definitions and that is what we need to change back. Rand is proving to be to much like his nut case father.

    • Don39

      And the NDAA , or more specifically the offensive parts were aimed at US citizens that might be accused of terrorism by a tyrantical government run amok, and not foreign terrorist!

  • GWY

    I think I will stand with Rand Paul on this one. The NDAA is bad for the United States and I'm sure much of it is unconstitutional.

    • oldcoyote

      Amen.

  • LiveFreeOrDie

    RAND Paul is one of the best of the CONSERVATIVES in the SENATE- he is different from his dad- he is a beacon of liberty-

  • Guest (but maybe not for long)

    I'm for legislating the indefinite detention of anyone in politics or the Judicial systems suspected of violating the full intent of the framers Bill of Right's and the Constitution.
    That would most likely see every Democrat, Independent, and a few "Republicans" as well as 4/9ths of the Supreme Court and a majority of all appointed Federal Judges filling our detention cells.
    If they can threaten the citizenry with such an outrageous piece of legislation, perhaps a bit of Concord in reverse is to be considered.

  • The Mutt

    Leave Paul be with a little luck the terrorists will come for obammy and take him with!

  • http://www.facebook.com/crzydancer Richard Holmes

    Let the terrorests go free. They make good moving targets.

  • Don39

    And why not try them and legally retain them or let them go back home. They do not constitute the threat to our liberties and freedoms that the leftist regime in DC does . They, the left, are the real enemy of the once great Constitutional Republic!

  • Dempseycoleman

    pour some whiskey in your water and put some sugar in your tea what's are all these crazy questions your asking me don't turn on the lights I don't want to see Silas they are already locking people up for bull crap

  • R Stone

    I really don't think Rand Paul will compromise truth and rights for a stupid presidency which is nothing but an errand boy job; a job that has a contract on you if you don't deliver what they say

  • chvietvet

    If anyone really believes that our corrupt government employees should have the right to lock anybody up who they want to and hold them indefinately without indictment or trial, there are much better countries for them to live in. Try North Korea. There is a country where everyone can march in step. Any whiner will disappear and never be seen again. They also send their secret police to other countries to kidnap school children so that they can have people capable of teaching their spies foreign languages. What a neat place! Closer to home is Cuba. They have much better border security than the USA, and it is especially good at preventing people from leaving. With such model totalitarian countries in the world, why to the people who like the "Patriot Act" so much want do stay here?

  • Lindsey Brutus

    The classic song by The Who says it all!! Let's not get fooled again folks! Nominate Rand Paul in 2016!

  • Jayce Davidson

    I think it's high time we as Americans simply accepted that the Constitution, whatever good it may have been two hundred years ago, is simply outdated for modern society. If you notice nowadays, it's mainly conspiracy theorists and racist nutjobs that spend all their time harping about constitutional rights (same with those secession freaks). Obviously, we as a society need to move along, and leave behind all that silly claptrap.

    Yes, the founding fathers had some things right, but we live in a post-9/11 world, and if we are ever going to survive, we're not going to be able to do it with the libertarian anarchy that the Paul supporters are advocating. Let's face it: we would all do very well to have 24-hour surveillance in a lot of places. We'd do even better to take the very people that are a real threat to us, and simply deny them access to lawyers and due process. Why? Because if you give terrorists those options, you allow them the chance to get off scot free by legal loopholes and other tricks. I say no way. Don't even give them the chance.

    Only if you're a criminal would you want these options. I can't help but think there's something a lot more sinister going on under the surface of these white elitist Paulbots.

    • dude

      Yes, because all that liberty, freedom, sound money, privacy, right to a jury trial, right to bear arms, freedom of speech and religion, due process stuff etc. is soooooooo outdated. Because of 9/11 we should just throw it all away.

  • RightGunner

    Speaking of “Establishment” picks, the only unelectable candidates are Republicans.

  • http://twitter.com/LeonieAlemann Leonie Alemann

    Why is it that so many otherwise admirable and intelligent people don't understand the concept of Prisoners of War? It's a simple progression: we are in a declared and formal state of war with al Qaeda and it's allies, such as Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. The prisoners at GITMO were captured on the battlefield or in active subversive action against the US or its allies. Therefore, according to the millennia-long tradition of war, they were taken prisoner and incarcerated to remove them from the conflict. They are being kept humanely (they eat better than the guards, and most get a little pudgy, despite the Olympic-class soccer field paid for by US taxpayers) as required by international law.

    I'll admit, they are unlikely to ever be released, since defeating Islamofascism will be difficult, and choosing an appropriate time to declare the conflict over will be extraordinarily difficult. But they are not criminals being held pending trial; they are prisoners of war, being legally and appropriately held.

    • RogerZ

      Did you know that most of the "terrorists" that were hauled off to Gitmo were found to be shepherds with absolutely no connection to terrorism? They were essentially picked at random. They're not prisoners of war. Many of them were civilians. I suppose you're also in favor of Obama bombing the hell out of Pakistani and Yemeni men, women and children who also have no connection to terrorism. But, we're at war, so it's ok to kill innocent people as long as we also get our targets. Anybody else that's killed is collateral damage. When Hamas bombs innocent men, women and children, it's called "terrorism," even though they're at war with Israel. When the US does it, it's called collateral damage, because we're at war with terrorism, a war that will likely never end.

  • dude

    Rand Paul does NOT want to "free all the terrorists", nor is he "siding with the terrorists". They use the excuse of 9/11 and terrorism for everything they push through and anyone who questions what they're doing is derided with phrases like that. RP sees police-state crap like the NDAA for what it is - an assault on our Bill of Rights. . He actually READS these bills and doesn't just accept them because they have some nicey-nice name.

    Because of the NDAA, the president can now deem anyone a terrorist for any reason what-so-ever, or no reason at all - and detain American citizens indefinitely with no trial, no charges, and no access to a lawyer.

    The biggest threat to our freedom is not a bunch of yahoos hanging out in caves and deserts in the mideast. The biggest threat to our freedom is our own government. Anyone who still buys into the War on Terror BS better wake up to this fact.

    • http://www.monster-island.net/ kushibo

      As I noted earlier, do not trust headlines that end with a question mark. They are not meant to inform but to agitate.

      By posing his propaganda as a question, the author is able to plant the idea that Rand Paul "wants to free all the terrorists" while claiming he never made such a statement but merely ASKED the question.

      It is a common tool of echo chamber managers on both right and left. Recognize it for what it is.

      • RogerZ

        If you read the Breitbart article to which the author references, you'd see why this article was titled the way it was. The Breitbart author implies that Rand Paul's amendment will release potential terrorists.