Wednesday, April 24, 2013

Rand Paul flip-flops, says drone strikes on U.S. citizens on U.S. soil without charge or trial are okay

Madison Ruppert
Activist Post

Senator Rand Paul’s celebrated filibuster of the nomination of CIA Director John Brennan over the Obama administration’s unclear stance on lethal drone strikes on Americans on U.S. soil (which was cleared up slightly) apparently meant absolutely nothing. He has now contradicted himself entirely and stated that he supports the idea of drones killing Americans without charge or trial.

He has completely backed down from his previous position in the wake of the Boston marathon bombing, saying that he “never argued against any technology being used when you have an imminent threat, an active crime going on.”

Paul went on to state that this could even include killing an individual who allegedly committed a robbery. Never does Paul mention a court, a charge, or a trial and he’s already received a lot of criticism for his comments.

“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash,” Paul said, “I don’t care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him.”

This sounds eerily like a signature strike like those carried out in Pakistan where people are killed by drones without their identity being known, based on “intelligence indicating patterns of suspicious behavior.”

“It’s different,” Paul claimed, “if they want to come fly over your hot tub or your yard just because they want to do surveillance on everyone and watch your activities.”

Yet Paul once again said, “if there’s killer on the loose in a neighborhood, I’m not against drones being used.”

Since Paul’s comments were clearly referencing the Boston bombing suspect, it must be pointed out that here we’re talking about an alleged killer who actually hasn’t been convicted of anything. That is quite a dangerous and slippery slope to begin traveling down.

“Paul’s comments in light of the Boston suspect’s arrest are a far cry from his staunchly anti-drone stance just last month,” Mediaite points out.

At the beginning of his filibuster that lasted almost 13 hours in total, Paul said,

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.
Apparently our rights to trial by jury are no longer precious and Americans should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime and without first being found to be guilty by a court.

Paul clearly contradicted his earlier statements on every single point.

During the same interview, Paul said that he did not agree with other Republican senators calling for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev to be treated as an enemy combatant, but as Mediaite rightly points out, this is hardly some kind of principled stance for civil liberties.

“[B]y indicating he would have made the call to kill the suspect with drone if he’d had the chance, Paul seems to have betrayed the principles of his filibuster,” Matt Wilstein writes for Mediaite.

Yet Rand Paul went on the defensive, with his office releasing a statement claiming that his position hasn’t actually changed.

“Armed drones should not be used in normal crime situations,” the statement said, according to Reason. “They only may only be considered in extraordinary, lethal situations where there is an ongoing, imminent threat. I described that scenario previously during my Senate filibuster.”

“Fighting terrorism and capturing terrorists must be done while preserving our constitutional protections. This was demonstrated last week in Boston. As we all seek to prevent future tragedies, we must continue to bear this in mind,” the statement concluded.

However, “someone” leaving a liquor store with a weapon and $50 in cash isn’t quite “fighting terrorism and capturing terrorists,” yet that is exactly a situation where Paul said he wouldn’t care if a drone was used to kill an American.

Watch the clip below.

Did I forget anything or miss any errors? Would you like to make me aware of a story or subject to cover? Or perhaps you want to bring your writing to a wider audience? Feel free to contact me at with your concerns, tips, questions, original writings, insults or just about anything that may strike your fancy.

Please support our work and help us start to pay contributors by doing your shopping through our Amazon link or check out some must-have products at our store.

This article first appeared at End the Lie.

Madison Ruppert is the Editor and Owner-Operator of the alternative news and analysis database End The Lie and has no affiliation with any NGO, political party, economic school, or other organization/cause. He is available for podcast and radio interviews. Madison also now has his own radio show on UCYTV Monday nights 7 PM - 9 PM PT/10 PM - 12 AM ET. Show page link here: http://UCY.TV/EndtheLie. If you have questions, comments, or corrections feel free to contact him at


This article may be re-posted in full with attribution.


If you enjoy our work, please donate to keep our website going.


Anonymous said...

Rand is NOT Ron! Someone must be whispering sweet nothing's in his ear about 2016. I saw some of his media spectacle testing him with minorities. He is now bought and paid for just like all the others. The establishment will play him if they need him to keep providing us with the illusion of choice.

Anonymous said...

Just one word: O-bomb-a

Anonymous said...

Well, I guess that clears up this whole "U S Constitutional Bill of Rights" thing. I sincerly hope all you old fuddy-duddy hold outs are satisfied now. What could make this country safer than knowing if some guy does a bad thing he, and a few dozen people around him, will be summarily executed and not even cost the country the expense,or time needed,for a trial.

Hide Behind said...

To expect any person that is in any way at all connected with the political establishment in US to represent anything more than their own self interest is to be a fool outright or a deluded Fool :hat thinks there is a chance in hell a true Libertarian can ever get electedThe old man Paul had to kiss Republican blican ass in order to stay electable and the libertarians had to kiss hiss and now his kids ass in order to play in the political games and get a few bucks while doing so.
To those who want a true constitutional representative, until you grow a pair stay under the dryers at the hair salon.

Anonymous said...

I trust this guy as much as I would trust a rattle snake two inches from my face...we all know, at least I do, that he is a pro-Zionist and ready to do what ever they want of him.

V ............ this is Ponce

Anonymous said...

This was all predicted:

Anonymous said...

Should be a run on anti-drone rifles soon... stock up...ANY SCOPED 22 TO 50 CAL WILL DO.

djohnston said...

Video link has gone missing. Try here:

Anonymous said...

hang the NWO scumbag for treason after a proper trial, along with EVERY member of Congress.

Anonymous said...

Bad for Ron who may have to tell his own son to FOFF!

Anonymous said...

fools abound. Who cares about Rand Paul? Who in their right mind would give notice to any politician....especially the Pauls?

Don't you see what Ron Paul orchestrated? He's an excellent actor...sorry to say to all the chumps who worship his every word.

You CANNOT be in government and go against the grain. I think you who are savvy enough realize what that "grain" is.

My guess is that the government is sending a message of zero tolerance for crime, disobediance and civil disorder. Yes, they can kill you whenever they choose. You are their property because, like in court, silence is an admission of guilt. And most americans are still more concerned about TV, partying, sports and other stupid crap. And don't tell me I'm wrong. I see it every day...the stupidity and arrogance of americans who could care less about what is really going on in their country.

Maybe they know already. Maybe they know it just too phuckin late to do anything about it. Or maybe they know that americans will not do anything that will interfere with their comfort zone.\

Ignorance truly is bliss. You thought they were lying?? How many years have YOU many worrying? Since 2008? Sorry to say that YOU who speak loudly with your discontent are all talk and hyperbole. You ain't gonna do shit, and most know it, especially the government.

Anonymous said...

Ron Paul got the idiots to vote in Rand Paul. What do you think his movement was all about??? LMFAO!! You people wonder why they continue to exploit you.

All it would take is for you ALL to STFU and ignore all this nonsense. Ignore TV. Ignore the politicians. Ignore big business. Ignore big banks.

You want a satisfying life....then move on without these barnacles clinging to your ass. ITS YOUR CHOICE....and its obvious what your choice has been.

Anonymous said...

I don't think Rand Paul was ever against strikes as such, his filibuster was about clarity, or at least that's what I always understood. I never understood why people assumed he was against drones against Americans? But then again I'm not sure why people still pay attention to this nonsense? Life is pretty amazing once you stop being their bitch.

Anonymous said...

Funny how junior is expected to be a patriotic elected(?) official.

Funny how people thought that daddy was patriotic, especially when he wanted to gut Food Stamps and Social Security of billions of dollars. All of this would kill Americans.

Funny how the American Public seems to always elect lying representatives. They always vote for the biggest sellout that is under the total control of Wall Street.

Yeah, it's ALL really funny how it happens all the time.....

Anonymous said...

I knew from the get-go that RAND was being used to confuse people with RON.

I don't know how in the hell RON managed to survive politics as long as he has but I fear what will come out about him. I kinda like the guy. He seems to be the only guy in the country who gets any attention who's worth a damn. I wish others who were just as worthy could be found and profiled here. Not that they'd GET anywhere in the race but.. .it'd be nice to learn about them so we can let them know that we support their work.

Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney should be researched and written about. From what I've seen of her she's pretty damn amazing. Very outspoken.

Anonymous said...

Rand Paul: very creepy.

Anonymous said...

No Rand isn't his father. And all of you that were silently hoping for a Paul combo for
Prez and VP in 2016 are high. First it would be a misguided sentiment at best a huge mistake at worst. Their political philosophies are too polarized to meld into a cohesive unit , no matter how much spin is applied. Rand is a politician with aspirations more aligned with traditional Republican rhetoric, Ron's libertarian leanings while gaining ground across most age groups especially younger voters is just too freedom oriented for most staunch older republicans. So it is just best to leave both in their respective camps In 2016

Post a Comment