Monday, May 27, 2013

Rand Paul demands answers on drones


'I don't want them watching us everywhere we are'

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., told radio host Aaron Klein that the Obama administration may have made promises about drones over U.S. soil, but “there still exists a question” on exactly how the White House does plan to use the unmanned, armed vehicles.

“There is a difference between being in combat and not being in combat,” Paul told Klein. “For example, if you’re an American and you’re in Afghanistan and you’re fighting with the Taliban and you’re shooting at us, there’s not going to be any due process in that situation. … You fire back.

“The question is: What happens when you’re not involved in combat, but you’re thought to be conspiring to attack the United States?”

Paul was speaking Sunday on “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio” on New York’s WABC Radio.

“I personally would prefer a type of scenario where we try people for treason,” Paul suggested.

“There are Americans who have gone to the other side, but so we know that there is a process in place to determine their innocence or guilt, I would try them for treason. If they don’t come home, I would try them in abstentia. But I would have some kind of process other than flash cards and PowerPoint to determine who’s innocent and who’s guilty.”

More @ WND


  1. Lately I've been wondering why drones are so scary to people. It doesn't seem like they can do anything that can't be accomplished with conventional aircraft or satellites.

    1. One reason is that so many can be used at less cost and it's frankly a 1984 thing.