Is there a single real American that does not AUTOMATICALLY pledge the flag?? Answer: NO
Posted on 09/07/2013 4:45:19 AM PDT by bayliving
The betrayal of one's own country by waging war against it or by consciously or purposely acting to aid its enemies.
(Excerpt) Read more at legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com ...
If I'm way of base please respectfully let me know but if we bomb Syria to assist the rebels (some of which are al-Qaeda) in removing Assad, wouldn't that be giving aid to a sworn enemy of the United State that we are still at war with?
yes
See my tagline.
It should be noted that in WWII we allied with and fought alongside Stalin, who by any logical definition was our enemy before, during and after the war.
Did you know that the CIA Director that Obama just appointed is a recent Islamic convert?
Our real enemies are infiltrating our government's means to defend us and fight back and we have a Muslim in the White House helping them.
Is there a single real American that does not AUTOMATICALLY pledge the flag?? Answer: NO
Ok but we were never in a state of (hot) war with Russia and Stalin didn’t commit acts of terror on, or take up arms against the United States.
The precise legal definition relevant to the topic at hand is give in Article III Section 3 of the US Constitution.
“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.”
It doesn’t make much difference, though, because the “living” Constitution that has evolved over the past century has rendered the written Constitution a dead letter.
Between 0bamaCAIR and a steamy MuzzieBromance, Bammy seems to meet the definition.
I read somewhere that some uppity up muslim stated something like "We will install a muslim as president of the US"
Guess what, kids.
Heeeeere's your sign.
Obama has made so many cuts in the national intelligence arena - that the “once most powerful nation in the world” has lowered itself to rely on You Tube videos for world wide situational developments...it’s that nice...I wonder if they are going to budget for future costs if You Tube starts charging everyone to watch???
Correct in your thinking but treason will never be brought up under our current government even though there have been numerous reasons under the current administration.
A more appropriate definition congress should look at:
Moral Courage: the ability to act rightly in the face of popular opposition, shame, scandal, or discouragement.
That’s right,but what you fail to mention at the time the American Government had been infiltrated with Russian agents and sympathisers. Check out Diana Wests “American Betrayal” the secret assault on our nation’s character,that will open your eyes.
That’s right,but what you fail to mention at the time the American Government had been infiltrated with Russian agents and sympathisers. Check out Diana Wests “American Betrayal” the secret assault on our nation’s character,that will open your eyes.
Looks like an open and shut case against obummer and his administration.
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them,
conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States,
or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.
Congress, JCS, USSC... I am thinking it is a criminal organization...
Which screams RICO!
Our government has been telling us that Islam is a peaceful religion. While not treason, it does give comfort to our enemy.
The world, and America in particular, would be a better place, if we destroyed our enemies (Iraq and Afghanistan) and spent zero American treasure on rebuilding these failed cultures.
No, the Soviets just recruited, supported and armed those who did “commit acts of terror on, or take up arms against the United States.”
Communist ideology has at least one thing in common with Islamist ideology. It assumes as a definitional issue that it will be at war, hot or cold, with the rest of the world until its final victory. No such thing as true peace can exist.
Actually, we did fight a hot war (sort of) with the Russian commies, though Stalin wasn’t in supreme command at the time. 13,000 Americans were stationed in and around Vladivostok and Archangel from mid-1918 thru 1920. They regularly engaged in combat with Red forces.
My original post probably wasn’t clear. Sometimes we choose to ally ourselves with enemy A because we believe enemy B is worse, as we decided, correctly IMO, in WWII.
I doubt that situation applies in this case, but opinions can legitimately differ.
I am aware there were Russian and commie agents in the government under Roosevelt, some in powerful positions.
It is debatable how much they influenced policy, at least with regards to fighting Hitler.
It should be pointed out that even after Hitler attacked Stalin, we did not declare war on Germany. In fact, we only declared war on Germany after Hitler, for forever unknown reasons, declared war on us.
Had he not, it is quite possible we would have been at war with Japan but at peace (theoretically) with Germany. Doubtful this would have lasted long, of course.
BTW, I am well aware of Roosevelt’s illegal secret war against Germany during 40 and 41. Which was probably what led Hitler to declare war.
Check out the book and find out how much policy was influenced toward the Russians,while our men in the Phillipines were hung out to dry. A lot of sacred cows are skewered.
Sorry, but that's a subject I know a little something about. There was just no way that we had the capability of projecting sufficient force into the Philippines to defeat the Japanese. All we could have accomplished was to "reinforce defeat," and waste additional men and resource in a lost cause.
We just barely stopped them in the Solomons, which was much farther out on the Japanese supply line.
It took us several years of the most massive military buildup in history to be able to retake the Philippines. 1942, just not possible.
I agree the troops were hung out to dry, but it was the only rational military decision.
BTW, a great deal of the suffering of the troops was due to MacArthur's appalling mismanagement of the (First) Battle of the Philippines. He somehow managed to get most of his Air Force destroyed on the ground, ten hours after Pearl Harbor. His war plans were utterly unrealistic, given the poor training of most of the Filipino Army, and the starvation of the army on Bataan was primarily the result of his failure to move sufficient food, which was available, into the peninsula in time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.