So, we have a good conclusion to all this, that is, Rand Paul defunding U.S. to Pakistan foreign aid. As little as it is, it’s better than nothing. I’m not expecting Rand to try this with Israel.
But, should Rand Paul, let’s say a libertarian for argument’s sake, be trying to help a CIA snitch get out of punishment? Obviously, this would burn a CIA asset; just using them then let what happens to them happen to them. But, the CIA wasn’t in the right in the first place.
The snitch worked with the CIA against the security wishes of the Pakistani government. ‘Helping one state aggress against another’ one might say. Is it the third party’s responsibility to pick one state aggressor to support, as Rand has done? And this all sets aside, that it was an assassination (and the moral issues behind that).
“Sure, this guy helped us assassinate someone*, but you can’t punish him for it!” - Rand Paul
Something about this seems like bent morality, or selective consistency. He is sticking up for the policy of assassination. Rand dances, covered in blood, with wolves to songs of morality.
Also, I think Rand might actually be in line for VP. Recently, Daniels and Rubio were ruled out by their own word, leaving Christie, Ryan, and Pawlenty (!). The media is saying that Romney is going to pick someone who can get evangelicals to vote (which is why Pawlenty is there), but Rand Paul fits that bill. I thought he made that gay joke about Obama in a church for a reason. He meets with Karl Rove & Co. and knows all aobut moral majority manipulation. Get the right wing religious people worked up so they will go vote…
-
- An international terrorist. Although, no evidence or charges for the crime that is most associated with him has ever been provided. bin Laden seemed a low level operator; car bombs to embassies in Africa, boat bombs, bus bombs, but not 9/11.