D.O.D. gives 12,000 fixed bayonets to local Police

Rand Paul asked some interesting questions during a hearing on Tuesday. Say what you want about Paul, he is one of a few willing to hold this administration’s feet to the fire. Just why do the police need bayonets? Anyone recall Kent State? Bayonets were at the ready on that day. Just saying.

Tuesday in Washington D.C. at a Senate Hearing from the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on the Department of Defense selling military grade weapons to local police forces, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) grilled Alan F. Estevez, the Assistant Secretary of Defense and from Homeland Security, and FEMA Brian Kamoie, over local police being suppliedwith armored personnel carriers and thousands of bayonets.

Partial transcript as follows:

PAUL ….

But confronting those with armored personnel carriers is thoroughly un-American and for 150 years, we’ve had rules separating the military, keeping the military out of policing affairs. But you sort of obscure that separation if you allow the police to become the military.

In FEMA’s authorized equipment list there’s actually written descriptions for how the equipment should be used and it says it’s specifically not supposed to be used for riot suppression. Mr. Kamoie, is that true, that it’s not supposed to be used for riot suppression? And how do you plan on policing that since the images clearly show us large pieces of equipment that were bought with your grants used in that riot suppression, or protest suppression rather?”

KAMOIE: Sen. Paul, that is accurate. The categories of personal protective equipment that include helmets, ear and eye protection, ballistics, personal protective equipment. There’s a prohibition in the authorized equipment list not to be used for riot suppression.

PAUL:

So I think by supplying all of this free equipment, much of which is, frankly, inappropriate, really shouldn’t be on anybody’s list of authorized equipment. Mr. Estevez, in the NPR investigation of 1033 program they list that 12,000 bayonets have been given out. What purpose are bayonets being given out for?

ESTEVEZ: Senator, bayonets are available under the program. I can’t answer what a local police force would need a bayonet for.

PAUL: I can give you an answer: None. So, what’s President Obama’s Administration’s position on handing out bayonets to the police force? It’s on your list. You guys create the list. Are you going to take it off the list or are we going to keep doing it?

H/T:Breitbart

Obama cites Paul Revere to justify spying on us

A sad commentary when our Constitutional genius President cites Paul Revere to justify his unlimited spying on each and every one of us. The Coup d’état is almost complete. Sickening.

The Washington Times reports:

President Obama on Friday cited Paul Revere as one of the earliest American intelligence-gatherers, riding through the streets to warn of impending British raids. But Sen. Rand Paul disputed the president’s take on the iconic Revere and his overall understanding of the American Revolution.

“He mentioned Paul Revere, but Paul Revere was warning us of the British coming. He wasn’t warning us the Americans are coming,” Mr. Paul, Kentucky Republican, said on CNN just after the president concluded a speech in which he outlined changes to U.S. surveillance and data-collection efforts.

“The thing is, the lesson from the American Revolution that the president I think misunderstands is that we were upset about British soldiers writing their own general warrants — like national security letters — that allowed them to go into the colonials’ house and look at their papers. We didn’t like that so we wrote the Fourth Amendment to say the warrants have to be individualized … we didn’t want a dragnet.”

To virtually no one’s surprise, the president’s “reforms” will not stop NSA’s mass spying, and this was immediately evident in the opening remarks of Obama’s speech when he attempted to argue that in times of war, the US has always used surveillance to secure freedom.

“At the dawn of our Republic, a small, secret surveillance committee borne out of the “The Sons of Liberty” was established in Boston.” Obama stated. “The group’s members included Paul Revere, and at night they would patrol the streets, reporting back any signs that the British were preparing raids against America’s early Patriots.”

Note how in the first sentence, using incredibly Orwellian tactics, Obama has twisted the facts to link spying to patriotism, and to suggest that the earliest American icons were engaged in the same sort of activity as today’s NSA.

Obama then went on to cite the Civil War, World War II, and the Cold War, arguing that “Throughout American history, intelligence has helped secure our country and our freedoms.”

Anyone with any shred of intelligence knows that comparing the actions of Paul Revere, who famously alerted the Colonial militia to the approach of British forces before the battles of Lexington and Concord, is in no way comparable to NSA mass spying.

Was Paul Revere covertly spying on his own people? Was he collecting records of all their communications, even if they were completely innocent and not suspected of doing any wrong? Of course not, to argue so is completely asinine.

Senator Rand Paul immediately took to the airwaves on CNN to challenge Obama’s characterization of Paul Revere as a proto-spy:

“Paul Revere was warning us that the British were coming. He wasn’t warning us that the Americans were coming.” Paul noted.

Infowars

The Washington Post also hilariously pointed out in a blog post that “if the British Redcoats had access to the type of metadata and processing power the NSA does today, Revere probably would have been caught before he could go on his legendary midnight ride.” Indeed, Revere would have been outed as a “terrorist”.

Speaking of terrorists, it was only a matter of minutes before the president invoked 9/11 in his speech, following pre-determined NSA talking points in order to further justify the unconstitutional practices of the NSA.

Tweedledee and Tweedledum – Rand Paul and Alice and Wonderland

 Time for the Sunday respite. Last week I posted a clip of Rand Paul as he took us through the looking glass with his “Alice and Wonderland” analogy. When I caught this music when making my rounds it seemed to fit perfectly. Am I the only one thinking we are living in an alternative reality?

 

One pill makes you larger
 
And one pill makes you small
And the ones that mother gives you
Don’t do anything at all
Go ask Alice
When she’s ten feet tall

And if you go chasing rabbits
And you know you’re going to fall
Tell ‘em a hookah smoking caterpillar
Has given you the call to
Call Alice
When she was just small

When the men on the chessboard
Get up and tell you where to go
And you’ve just had some kind of mushroom
And your mind is moving low
Go ask Alice
I think she’ll know

When logic and proportion
Have fallen sloppy dead
And the White Knight is talking backwards
And the Red Queen’s “off with her head!”
Remember what the doormouse said;
“Feed YOUR HEAD…
Feed your head”

“Senators McCain and Graham, you have sat too long for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of G-d, go!”

H/T: Predictable History, unpredictable past

From the post:  Rand Paul and his epic rant

 

“They say Lewis Carroll is fiction,” Paul said. “Alice never fell down a rabbit hole and the White Queen’s caustic judgments are not really a threat to your security. Or has America the Beautiful become Alice’s Wonderland?” Paul then looked down and began reading directly from Carroll’s text: “‘No, no,’ said the queen. ‘Sentence first; Verdict afterwards.’ ‘Stuff and nonsense,’ Alice said widely — loudly. ‘The idea of having the sentence first?’ ‘Hold your tongue,’ said the queen, turning purple. ‘I won’t,’ said Alice.”

Instead the Queen’s infamous exclamation, “Off with her head,” Paul read his own, updated line: “‘Release the drones,’ said the queen, as she shouted at the top of her voice.”

By connecting the Alice story to the drones debate, Paul was echoing the judge who early this year ruled that the Justice Department memos on the program could remain secret. Judge Colleen McMahon wrote in her ruling, “The Alice-in-Wonderland nature of this pronouncement is not lost on me.”

Gingrich: ‘McCain’s attack on Paul sad’

 Gingrich takes on McCain and calls him sad. Understatement of the year. The Grand Old Party should be declared dead. The word “Old” needs to be replaced with new. As the song says, “Get out of the old road if you can’t lend a hand, cause the times they are a changing. A nice little rant going here. What troubles me is they never talk about Al-alwaki’s son that was blasted away a week after his father was killed while sitting in a  restaurant.

 Gingrich said he was “disappointed” by McCain’s decision to “lecture” Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and those senators who joined him in his Wednesday filibuster. “I don’t know what’s happened to John McCain, but I find this very sad,” Gingrich said. “So, who are you with?” Blitzer asked Gingrich pointedly regarding the feud between the Senate GOP’s younger and older members over the Obama administration’s drone warfare program. “The McCains or the Rand Pauls?”

“Well, I’m really disappointed in John McCain, and I’m very saddened by it,” Gingrich replied. “McCain, in his younger years, was a great maverick. He took on his party all the time.”

The idea that he’s now lecturing the next generation because they have the guts to stand up, which is I — I would have thought John McCain we do have applauded them and he would have said, I may not agree with you in detail, but I’m proud of the fact that you’re standing up for your beliefs, you’re fighting.
Gingrich added that Paul was correct to question the Department of Justice’s presumed legal authority to execute and American citizen on U.S. soil without due process via a drone strike.

“I mean, if our Constitution means anything, it means that your government can’t capriciously kill you without the rule of law,” Gingrich asserted. “And it was very clear from the attorney general’s earlier letters that they were reserving the right — remember, we’re not talking about a combatant engaged in fighting against the US. The minute you do that, you lose all your rights.”

Rand Paul epic rant – Filibusters on

 This is what we have come to. Rand Paul gives America a wake up call. Anyone listening?

Brennan Sidesteps Query on Drone Kills in U.S.

In written answers to Senate Intelligence Committee questions released Friday, CIA director nominee John Brennan would not say whether the U.S. could conduct drone strikes inside the United States — only that it did not intend to do so. Roll Call

FBI Director: I have to check to see if Obama can kill citizens on U.S. soil

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “three criteria” for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.

Rand Paul Reads From Alice In Wonderland During CIA Filibuster | Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) stood up in the Senate chamber just before noon on Wednesday and declared his intention to “speak until I can no longer speak” in opposition to the nomination John Brennan for the position of CIA director. Without the 41 Republican “no” votes needed to prevent a cloture vote and block Brennan’s nomination, Paul was forced to halt the proceedings by standing and speaking for as long as he could.

“I rise today to begin to filibuster John Brennan’s nomination for the CIA,” Paul began. “I will speak as long as it takes 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.”

Paul repeated his fears that if the Obama administration could justify the drone strike that killed American citizen Anwar Al-Awlaki in Yemen, what’s to stop the government from killing U.S. citizens while they are “sitting in a café” on American soil. But shortly after he began his filibuster, Paul turned to external source for inspiration: Lewis Carroll’s literary classic Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland.

“They say Lewis Carroll is fiction,” Paul said. “Alice never fell down a rabbit hole and the White Queen’s caustic judgments are not really a threat to your security. Or has America the Beautiful become Alice’s Wonderland?” Paul then looked down and began reading directly from Carroll’s text: “‘No, no,’ said the queen. ‘Sentence first; Verdict afterwards.’ ‘Stuff and nonsense,’ Alice said widely — loudly. ‘The idea of having the sentence first?’ ‘Hold your tongue,’ said the queen, turning purple. ‘I won’t,’ said Alice.”

Instead the Queen’s infamous exclamation, “Off with her head,” Paul read his own, updated line: “‘Release the drones,’ said the queen, as she shouted at the top of her voice.”

By connecting the Alice story to the drones debate, Paul was echoing the judge who early this year ruled that the Justice Department memos on the program could remain secret. Judge Colleen McMahon wrote in her ruling, “The Alice-in-Wonderland nature of this pronouncement is not lost on me.”

As of 2pm ET, Sen. Paul has been speaking for more than two hours straight without stopping.

Vote Tally Count Rand Paul’s amendment to deny sale of F-16’s to Egypt

Anyone who voted to table this ought to be sent packing. A clear indication that their deep pockets are filled with the cash from the Military Industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about. Two posts today as I am traveling. In case you missed the DHS and their suggestion that we arm ourselves with scissors. The world sure in getting more and more bizarre. Add the hearing today of Hegel and we have to know the world thinks we have lost our  minds. Fox military contributors believe the 200 tanks are much more of a danger to Israel than the planes.. We have given them the fastest and greatest.

Rand Paul’s amendment “To prohibit the sale, lease, transfer, retransfer, or delivery of F-16 aircraft, M1 tanks, or certain other defense articles or services to the Government of Egypt” failed in the Senate today by a vote of 79-19.

Just to clarify, the vote was to ‘table’ the amendment which is why there are more YEAs than NAYs. H/T” Right Scoop

Grouped by Home State Senate Gov Roll Callm- head over to their link to see it broken down in various other ways.

Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Alaska: Begich (D-AK), Yea Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Flake (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Boozman (R-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Yea
California: Boxer (D-CA), Yea Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Colorado: Bennet (D-CO), Yea Udall (D-CO), Yea
Connecticut: Blumenthal (D-CT), Yea Murphy (D-CT), Yea
Delaware: Carper (D-DE), Yea Coons (D-DE), Yea
Florida: Nelson (D-FL), Yea Rubio (R-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Hirono (D-HI), Yea Schatz (D-HI), Yea
Idaho: Crapo (R-ID), Nay Risch (R-ID), Nay
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Yea Kirk (R-IL), Yea
Indiana: Coats (R-IN), Nay Donnelly (D-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Nay Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Kansas: Moran (R-KS), Nay Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Kentucky: McConnell (R-KY), Yea Paul (R-KY), Nay
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Nay
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea King (I-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Yea Mikulski (D-MD), Yea
Massachusetts: Kerry (D-MA), Not Voting Warren (D-MA), Yea
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Yea Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
Minnesota: Franken (D-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Wicker (R-MS), Yea
Missouri: Blunt (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Yea
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Yea
Nebraska: Fischer (R-NE), Nay Johanns (R-NE), Yea
Nevada: Heller (R-NV), Nay Reid (D-NV), Yea
New Hampshire: Ayotte (R-NH), Yea Shaheen (D-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea Menendez (D-NJ), Yea
New Mexico: Heinrich (D-NM), Yea Udall (D-NM), Yea
New York: Gillibrand (D-NY), Yea Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Hagan (D-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Heitkamp (D-ND), Yea Hoeven (R-ND), Yea
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Yea Portman (R-OH), Yea
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Merkley (D-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Yea Toomey (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Yea Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea
South Carolina: Graham (R-SC), Yea Scott (R-SC), Nay
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Yea Thune (R-SD), Nay
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Nay Cruz (R-TX), Nay
Utah: Hatch (R-UT), Yea Lee (R-UT), Nay
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Yea Sanders (I-VT), Yea
Virginia: Kaine (D-VA), Yea Warner (D-VA), Yea
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Not Voting
West Virginia: Manchin (D-WV), Yea Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Wisconsin: Baldwin (D-WI), Yea Johnson (R-WI), Yea
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State

bunkerville:

I think this sums up things quite nicely.

Originally posted on Reclaim Our Republic:

January 15, 2013 at 11:02 am

“I’m against having a king,” Paul said. “I think having a monarch is what we fought the American Revolution over and someone who wants to bypass the Constitution, bypass Congress — that’s someone who wants to act like a king or a monarch.”

“I’ve been opposed to executive orders, even with Republican presidents. But one that wants to infringe on the Second Amendment, we will fight tooth and nail,” he continued.

“And I promise you, there’ll be no rock left unturned as far as trying to stop him from usurping the Constitution, running roughshod over Congress,” he vowed. “And you will see one heck of a debate if he decides to try to do this.”

View original

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 829 other followers

%d bloggers like this: