Read the following article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/12/opinion/show-us-the-drone-memos.html?_r=0
Answer the following questions:
1. From what state is Rand Paul a senator?
2. Who is President Obama trying to appoint to the US Court of Appeals?
3. What is Paul's objection to the request?
4. What is your opinion on the issue? Should the president be able to use drones in this way?
5. Was Anwar al-Awlaki's death justified?
Gabby Traywick, 1st
ReplyDeleteRand Paul is a senator from Kentucky. The President was trying to appoint David J. Barron, a Harvard professor to the US court of appeals. Paul objected to this request because the memos written by Barron were not visible to him or others. I believe the fact that Obama used a drone to execute someone for treason is stupid, for he could have done injection, but wanted to show off his drone. I don't think the president should be able to use drones for treason, but in other situations he may. Anwar al-Awlaki's death was justified in private and not allowed to be seen by others.
Rand Paul is a senator from Kentucky. President Obama is trying to appoint David J. Barron to the U.S. Court of Appeals. Paul wants the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, to delay the nomination of Mr. Barron because of a pending court-ordered disclosure of the first of two memos. The president should not be able to use drones in this way at all because everyone should be given a fair trial. Anwar al-Awlaki's death is not justified because he never got a trial.
ReplyDeleteTaryn Dockery
ReplyDeleteRand Paul is a senator from Kentucky. President Obama is trying to appoint David J. Barron to the US Court of Appeals. Paul's objection to the request is that Barron wrote two memos justifying the execution of two people with a trial. I think that everyone who has done something worthy of execution should get a trial. It is only fair. The President should not be able to use drones in this way. I agree with Rand Paul when he says that “I don’t doubt that Mr. Awlaki committed treason and deserved the most severe punishment. Under our Constitution, he should have been tried and allowed a legal defense.” The President can’t just go around killing people without a trial, because this defies the Constitution.
Grace Glasscock
ReplyDelete1. Kentucky
2. David J. Barron
3. That all senators should have access to Mr. Barron's memos.
4. I agree that all senators should have access to Mr. Barron's memos; I do not think the president should be able to use drones in this way.
5. Yes
Kryana Brown
ReplyDelete1) Kentucky
2) David J. Barron
3) To delay this nomination
4) Nobody stopped Obama or voted on this so the decision was up to him. Not stopping him is the same as silently agreeing with him. Since it went this way, no debate etc., then I think he should have he power to do this under circumstances. Maybe in the future we should vote, like a democracy does, to see if we should use drones or not.
5) I believe so because he could harm the lives of other citizens. On the other hand, I do believe there should be a trial first to be certain that the suspect is guilty.
Kryana Brown
Rand Paul is a Republican senator from Kentucky. Obama is attempting to nominate David J. Barron, a former Harvard law proffessor. Paul's objection is that Barron wrote papers to justify the assassination of Anwar al-Awlaki, which was actually a violation of the Bill of Rights. Against a non-citizen, yes i support drone assassination, but as a citizen of the U.S. (no matter how treasonous) al-Awlaki deserved the trial that is the right of each and every U.S. citizen. What Obama did makes the U.S. look hypocritical. Anwar al-Awlaki's death may have been deserved but it was not justified at all. It is written in our national law that any citizen has the right to a trial.
ReplyDelete~Blake E. Lockridge
Rand Paul is the senator from Kentucky.President Obama nominated David J. Barron for the court of appeals. Paul's objection was that Barron was covering up the memo about the drones. I do think that the president be able to use the drones this way but he shouldn't abuse his presidential powers. Anwar al-Awlaki's death was not justified because he could have accidentally shot the drone or could have been terrible communication.
ReplyDelete-Jordan Tatum
1. Kentucky.
ReplyDelete2. David J. Barron
3. He urged Harry Reid to delay the nomination because Barron seems to support drones/killing of American citizens without trial or jury and Paul does not.
4. I don't agree with the use of drones in any form. Not even used in war against other countries. Drones are oddly scary to me and I think it's weird that we've created a way to kill multiple people without as much personal emotion. Now, one doesn't have to be face-to-face, looking in each other's eyes before death. They just have to press a button. It's weird that we seem to be taking all the emotion out of everything and anything.
5. No.
Kailee Post
Rand Paul is a republican Senator from Kentucky, who has written this article in challenge to US president Barrack Obama's decision. Obama is trying to appoint David J. Barron, a Harvard law professor to the US court of Appeals. Paul's problem with appointing Barron is the fact that we do not know Barron's opinion on executing US citizens with Drones, for Paul does not believe that it is right to US government should review the Memos Barron wrote on using drones, before he is appointed. Anwar al-Awlaki, a US citizen suspected of treason was killed by a missile from a US drone in Yemen in 2011, in my opinion this killing was not justified because he should have had a fair trial.
ReplyDelete-Brandon Appling
- Katelyn Hardy
ReplyDelete1. Kentucky
2. David J. Barron
3. That President Obama should not refuse to share Mr. Barron's legal argument with the American people.
4. I don't think it's right for Obama to be able to use drones in this way. He should at least allow for Mr. Barron's memos to be read to the public, so they can hear his side.
5. I think his death was justified, because if he committed treason, he got the punishment that he needed.
Kalysa Garrett
ReplyDelete1. Washington
2. David J. Barron
3. Delay the nomination
4. I honestly don't think he specifically should've been killed by this drone in this type of way. I think they should've of captured him and made him suffer in some type of way. but Obama is the president... so he can do what he wants.
5. yes
Rand Paul is a senator from Kentucky. President Obama is trying to appoint David J. Barron to the US Court of Appeals. Paul's objection to the request because he believes that no senator can meaningfully carry out his or her constitutional obligation to provide ‘advice and consent’ on this nomination to a lifetime position as a federal appellate judge without being able to read Mr. Barron’s most important and consequential legal writing. I believe that the president should be able to use drones but not in this way unless there has been a trial, and even if the convicted cannot personally attend he should have the right to an attorney. Anwar al-Awlaki's death was justified, however not necessarily correctly under the law and he probably would not have received the death penalty in a modern, unbiased court.
ReplyDeleteJohn McDonough
1. Kentucky
ReplyDelete2. David Barron
3. He believes that he should be able to read the writing of Mr. Barron and that every American citizen has rights to a fair and speedy trial, which is stated in the constitution, and that should be how your sentencing is carried out.
4. In my opinion, in a way I feel like he has the responsibility to use the drones in this way only if all of America was in danger or in situations like 9/11. But, if it does not involve national security, he should not have that right. Everybody deserves a fair and speedy trial guilty or not.
5. I believe that his death was not justified. He should have been given time to explain his side of the story even though he was guilty of treason.
~Ava Travis
Abby Ingle
ReplyDelete1) Kentucky
2) David J. Barron
3) It is wrong to target an American citizen for execution without a trial
4) No, because the Bill of Rights says that everyone gets a chance at a fair trial
5) No, because he was killed without a trial
~Abby Cooper
ReplyDelete1. Kentucky
2. David J. Barron
3. Paul thinks that Barron wrote the opinion that made Obama think it was okay to kill Americans with drones
4. No, it is inhuman and unfair. You shouldn't kill anyone without a trial and Obama should not have the power to do that unless they are planning to kill someone else.
5. No because he should have been tried for it.
Luke Yarbrough 5/6
ReplyDelete1. Kentucky
2. David J. Barron
3. That Barron was immoral. He pleaded that the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki was justified.
4. No, it is spine-chilling knowing that the president has the power to drop a missile, or spy by using nearly invisible unmanned airplanes.
5. However, I believe Anwar's death was justified. He threatened the lives of U.S. citizens. It could have endangered the lives of multiple soldiers, and result in an ultimately unsuccessful assassination attempt.
Matthew Sloan
ReplyDelete1) Rand Paul is a senator from the state of Kentucky.
2) President Obama is trying to appoint David J. Barron to the United States Court of Appeals.
3) Rand Paul objection to that request is Barron is justifying the execution of an American citizen without trial.
4) Yes, he should be able to use the drones in this way because this guy in this situation could have easily escaped our view on the target.
5) Yes, Anwar al-Awlaki's death was justified.
Megan Bandy
ReplyDeleteRand Paul is a Republican senator from Kentucky.
He has nominated David J. Barron, a Harvard law professor and a former acting assistant attorney general, to a seat on the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.
Defending the rights of all American citizens to a trial by jury is a core value of our Constitution.
Yes, if it saves American lives then I am for it. We live in a world of terrorism and until that problem is resolved we need to improve our security.
No, no death is ever justified.
Jane Frances Armour
ReplyDeleteRand Paul is the senator of the state of Kentucky. President Obama is trying to appoint David J. Barron to the US Court of Appeals. Paul's objection to the request is that in the Bill of Rights it says that an accused American citizen has a right to a trial and not immediate death, the opposite of Barron's beliefs. I agree with Paul because he follows the Bill of Rights and I think that having a trial is justice, I do not think the president should be able to use drones in this way because its an terrible way to die, a robot or machine killing you. Anwar al-Awlaki's death was not justified because he did not have a legal defense or a trial, also he was killed by a machine and there is no honor in that.
1. Kentucky
ReplyDelete2. David J. Barron
3. American citizens should not be executed without a trial and American citizens should have a say in this debate
4. I think the death penalty is not morally right. No.
5. No, because, "Under our Constitution, he should have been tried" and allowed a legal defense.
Lauren Beatty
Hannah Glasscock
ReplyDelete1. Kentucky
2. David J. Barron
3. All senators should be able to see Barron's memos
4. I agree with Rand Paul but I can also see where Barron is coming from. No he should not.
5. Yes
1. Kentucky
ReplyDelete2. David J. Barron
3. Because it's not open knowledge because people will vote for it
4. Well drones are helping us majority of the time.
5. Yes, but not the way they killed him
Demetrius Smith
ReplyDelete1. Kentucky
2. David J. Barron
3.
4. No because he could use it to eliminate potential political enemies.
5.
Rand Paul is a senator for the state of Kentucky. David J Barron. Paul didn't get to see the memos. It seems childish to object to something because you weren't allowed to view something. The drones should be used to defend our country but not harm anyone for the heck of it. No, if he was in fact convicted of treason bring him to jail, don't kill him.
ReplyDelete-April McCool
Laura Coats
ReplyDeleteRand Paul is a Kentucky senator. Obama is trying to appoint David Barron. Paul's objection is that the proceedings are unconstitutional. My opinion is that people should be innocent until proven guilty, and that no one should be able to drop drones whenever, and i dont think Anwars death was justified because he was just killed without trial.
Marie Doyle
ReplyDelete1. Kentucky
2. David K. Baron
3. He didn't see the memos
4. I believe that he is slightly alright for thinking its unfair he can't see
it. The president should have let other people see it, but I don't know that
Paul would be on the top of the list.
5. It was not justified because the US shouldn't have the right to kill people
to kill people with drones!
kentucky
ReplyDeletedavid j barron
there are at least eleven OLC opinions on the targeted killing or drone program
i think it should be if it is used correctly, but not haphazardly
yes
-Tanner Bramlett
Frankie Malveo
ReplyDeletePre-AP English 9 Current Events Blog for Week of March 12
1. Kentucky
2. David J. Barron
3. Rand Paul doesn't want Barron elected until he discusses his opinion and the American peopel are able to debate in the drone issue.
4. I don’t think the president should be able to use drones to kill people in other countries without a trail. Everyone should have access to the rights of the constitution and by breaking that we open the door for more instances like this to come.
5. Anwar al-Awlaki's death is not justified he should have received a trail before being killed.
comment
ReplyDelete