Posted on 07/19/2013 11:10:19 PM PDT by WilliamIII
Former vice president Dick Cheney said Sunday that Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) was wrong to suggest that the government’s recently revealed sweeping surveillance techniques are an invasion of Americans’ privacy. “Two-thirds of the Congress wasn’t here on 9/11, or for that period immediately after when we got into this program,” Cheney said on “Fox News Sunday.” He later added: “When you consider the possibility of somebody smuggling something like a nuclear device into the United States, it becomes very, very important to gather intelligence on your enemies and stop that attack before it ever gets launched.”
Cheney defended a National Security Agency program to collect phone records from millions of Americans, about which Paul has expressed deep concerns. The Kentucky senator announced last week that he has taken steps toward bringing legal action against the government over its surveillance efforts.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Listen to what Reagan said about the evil empire http://youtu.be/M0NXs_uWPgg . These words match the entire western world today because we’re drifting into a evil empire.
uhh... hate to break it to you, but beheading, stoning and “blowing up stuff” are already illegal (i.e. banned)
Lets change a few words....
If a person owned a gun for target shooting and hunting, that would be his right. If he were to accidentally shoot himself, that would be his choice, and I’d be just as happy as everyone else to wish him well in the afterlife.
Now, if some idiot gun owner were to start shooting and killing other people, I’d be happy to see that idiot gun owner properly tried and hanged for that/those crimes.
Additionally, should a growing epidemic of such idiot gun owners start spreading across the land, similarly shooting at other people, then the people and the states would have a compelling interest in banning such practices, and sentencing the practitioners (gun owners) to confinement or exile some great and safe distance from functioning humans.
So... you still good with this line of thought?
Weird.
This cuts both ways. Sure, there are some over the top Tea Party types who demand ideological purity. But you also get that faction who start screeching "liberal Democrat" or "go back to Huffington Post" when George W. Bush or members of his administration are criticized, even when that criticism comes clearly from a right-wing perspective.
” But no. Mr. Bush opened the Mexican border the next day, capitulated to Islam as a whole, and took it out on us by cursing us with an internal police state that we are only now seeing the full scope of.
Sorry Dickie. You had a chance, but you screwed the pooch. “
Correct
Rush today made it obvious he thinks she’s the cat’s meow.
http://gizmodo.com/new-google-earth-hack-lets-you-nuke-any-city-in-devasta-866361443
I think it’s overloaded and down now, but you can set them off where you’d like on that and see from the ground what it would look like. Even a small 10kt would be unbelievable, the country would be virtually destroyed.
I’d rather have more security but it needs to be very targeted. Throw all the illegals out and seal the borders. Throw all islamics out, citizens or not. Forever.
Then we could relax the security quite a bit.
I’d rather just ban all religions if it meant we’d be done with islam for once and all. People can get into other activities frankly. Have social clubs and stuff.
I just don’t understand why religion actually matters to so many people. At least with political parties there’s a real element on Earth right now (usually) for what they say or do.
If you are SO scared of Islam that you’d ban all religions just get rid of it, then they have won. Thats like amputating your arm because you’re afraid of getting a hangnail.
No, it’s like amputating it after gangrene is up to the shoulder.
So you think Islam in the US is currently like “gangrene to the shoulder?” They are a minor problem. At best. And certainly not a problem worth throwing away the first amendment to the Constitution.
Relax. Have a beer. Its not that bad.
Not so much in the US, but the global threat is bad enough. I’d rather get rid of them globally, but the least we can do at this point is stop it from spreading internally.
Indeed, and it perpetuated the expansion of the military industrial complex needed to carry on the endless war against the religion of peace. Our sovereignty and freedom now challenged by the very apparatus created to put up a false sense of security.
There was and still is, a simple solution to this— if the parties can separate themselves from the arabic/muslim money invested in them, to influence legislation and our government. The solution is the one Machiavelli, or Sun-Tzu would approve of. We must return to the founding principles of this country, and the rule of law— not lobby and not foreign entanglements (thank you George Washington) which do not come under our secure control.
Cheney and many other technocrats(of any political persuasion) have made millions from this ruse— and we are NOT more secure with the notion of “forget the needle, gather up the haystack” intel. He is wrong, and in a different way so is Rand Paul. We should take our lessons from Israelis, and human intel, not a new liberal gestapo, run by the people who live in gated communities and think each other to be “OK” because they are in the same club. This is what has bastardized the UK and will destroy us. Freedom first, borders, language and the culture of moral belief essential to our Constitution. We got here starting with the Bushes, through the Clintons, another Bush and now this apostate thing. And the complex Eisenhower warned us about has metastasized into a nightmare they cannot and will not put in abeyance.
I'd heard.
Rush's compass in discerning "conservative" vs. Republican has always been broken. Frankly, neither he or his judgement can be trusted.
I agree.
Well stated.
Moreover, we don't need 0bama supported in any respect by Bush and Cheney, and yet isn't that just what they've done? Anti-Constitution, Big Guv Statists one and all.
So... you still good with this line of thought?
For your rewording of my statement to be logically consistent with the example I presented, you would have to insert [(gun owners who are shooting and killing other people)]; also assuming that the shootings are not legally justified.
Gun owners, so far as I know, do not have a stated intent to abolish the US Constitution. Muslims, on the other hand, do have that stated intent. Muslims also have a stated intent to replace our Constitution and our system of laws and justice with sharia law.
Muslims also have a stated intent of using our Constitution and our system of laws against us, to undermine and overthrow our system.
Apparently you are in favor of this muslim agenda, as you are most certainly defending it, and you are using their same methods to do so.
What the hell is wrong with you??
Figures!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.