Is It Treason Yet?

GOP USA ^ | 12-09-05 | Joe Mariani - Commentary

[smoothsailing]

Is It Treason Yet?

By Joe Mariani

December 9, 2005

Treason is defined, in part, as "giving aid and comfort" to the enemies of the United States, according to the Constitution (Article III, Section 3) (web site) and the United States Code (Title 18, Part I, Chapter 115, Section 2381). (web site) Yet the Constitution also states, in the First Amendment, (web site) that "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech." How do we distinguish between free speech and treason? Where do we draw the line? The answer may be found using that least-used resource: common sense.

I would submit that the elected leaders of this country have more responsibility than the rest of us to ensure that they give no aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war. With American troops risking their lives in daily battle on behalf of the nation, critical words from those in leadership positions carry greater weight than in peacetime, both with the enemy and with our own troops.

Yet the leaders of the Democratic Party consistently attack the war in Iraq with lies, from distorting the history of our confrontation with Saddam Hussein, (web site) to prevaricating about their own statements which led us to war, (web site) to defaming the character of every member of the Bush administration in turn. Worst of all, however, is the slander they spread about our troops.

The Chairman of the Democratic party, Howard Dean, said during a radio interview on 6 December (web site) that the "idea that we're going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which is just plain wrong." Does this statement not give "aid and comfort" to the enemy? The leader of a major political party, to which nearly half of all Americans belong, is telling the terrorists and insurgents in Iraq that they will win; that they will beat the United States.

Dean also said that, "this is the same situation we had in Vietnam," and in a certain sense, he's right. The beaten, demoralized North Vietnamese leadership was given new hope by certain American politicians and the press, to the point where they struggled on until America's liberals turned public opinion against the war. America was forced to withdraw from Vietnam in disgrace, having never lost a battle, by people just like Howard Dean. With his defeatist statements, Dean is giving our enemies the aid and comfort they need to keep fighting. How many Americans will die because of Dean's irresponsible remarks, made only to seek political advantage? Tell me why that's not treason.

Senator John Kerry (D-MA), the Democratic Party's most recent Presidential candidate, appeared on CBS' "Face the Nation" on 4 December (web site) to deface the American military. Speaking to interviewer Bob Schieffer, Kerry said that "there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the -- of -- the historical customs, religious customs." (And some people accuse GW Bush of being incoherent?) .

Does a United States Senator and former Presidential candidate accusing American soldiers of terrorizing women and children in the dead of night not give aid and comfort to the enemy? Just as he did during Vietnam, (web site) John Kerry is falsely accusing American troops of committing atrocities as a matter of normal course in an attempt to undermine support for the war among Americans. As a consequence -- intended or not -- he is yet again handing America's enemies an immense propaganda victory. How many potential terrorists will have their hatred of Americans fueled by Kerry's matter-of-fact statement that American soldiers are terrorising women and children in their homes at night, breaking cultural and religious taboos? Tell me why that's not treason.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) fully supports and endorses the recent statements of Representative John Murtha (D-PA), the ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee. Murtha has made a big splash among the anti-war faction by calling for an immediate -- within six months -- pullout from Iraq. On 1 December, Murtha told a group of leading Pennsylvania citizens (web site) that America would be forced to abandon Iraq within a year because the troops are "broken, worn out" and "living hand to mouth." Murtha is hailed as a hero in the media for suddenly changing his mind about the war in Iraq, but called it "unwinnable" and stated that "we cannot prevail... with the policy we have today," while urging President Bush to send even more troops in May 2004. (web site)

What a burst of enthusiasm Murtha's words must have engendered among our enemies! How much hope will they take from his proclamation that they are, in fact, winning the war? Despite fantastic losses, and despite earning the enmity of the Iraqi people, the terrorists and Saddam supporters in Iraq can now believe that if they just find the strength to hold on a little longer, they can push the hated United States out of Iraq. How many of the enemy will fight rather than surrender, because Pelosi and Murtha have told them they're winning? How does that not give the enemy aid and comfort? Is that not treason?

Not all Democrats follow the defeatist, destructive path of their leaders. But those ARE their leaders -- the Chairman of their party, their most recent Presidential candidate, their party leader in the House of Representatives. Some Democrat politicians have repudiated the statements of Dean, Kerry, Pelosi, Murtha and the rest... not because those remarks were vile, untrue and treasonous, but because the Democrats are afraid such openly anti-American statements might "harm efforts to win control of Congress next year," according to the Washington Post. (web site) The only way they can regain power is to hide their true feelings, and they know it. Treason, it seems, is still considered malapropos by some Democrats.

But not all.

-------------

Joe Mariani is a computer consultant born and raised in New Jersey. He now lives in Pennsylvania, where the gun laws are less restrictive and taxes are lower. Joe always thought of himself as politically neutral until he saw how far left the left had really gone after 9/11. His essays and links to articles are available at http://www.guardianwatchblog.com/

--------------------

Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.

NOTE: All (website) notations can be accessed by going to the GOP USA link at the top of this article-smoothsailing

[smoothsailing]

WE WILL WIN BECAUSE WE MUST WIN.

As for Hanoi John, he needs to live in that Marine brig until he begs for the gallows.

Thanks again Tonk, I hope this thread keeps going through the Iraq election.

Now, I gotta get some sleep.

NEVER FORGET

[ohioWfan]

I THANK you, sir............and my SON thanks you too!

He is your brother, and I am deeply moved that you honor him with your persistence and will.

I may be alone in this, but I believe that Kerry's "our troops are TERRORIZING women and children" crap is going to finally be this traitor's undoing.

These are different times than the '60's. I think he has sounded his own death knell.

[de Buillion]

"I may be alone in this, but I believe that Kerry's "our troops are TERRORIZING women and children" crap is going to finally be this traitor's undoing. "

You are not alone- I believe that this will hurt him, and by association, many other traitors.

[Pajamajan]

"Treason has to be redefined in the context of todays world situation and technologies.

The seditious blatherings of Kerry, Dean, Pelosi, et. al. go directly from their mouths to the ears of the enemy."

At the very least- US representatives should be mindful of this before shooting off their mouths.

[ohioWfan]

I am praying that this is the beginning of a massive collapse of the traitorous left.

I hope these words of jFk continue to be replayed over and over again, so that every American hears him, in his own voice, calling our brave men and women in uniform terrorists.

I pray we are both right!

[JohnBovenmyer]

There's actually very little difference between the position of the most Freepers and most Democrats regarding the war. Both favor a traditional American war ending, unconditional surrender. They only disagree on which side should surrender.

It's a shame we can't have a phased double surrender. First let just the libs surrender to the jihadists. Let them get the full Sharia treatment. Then have the jihadists surrender to the rest of us. We'd then have grounds to treat them mercifully.

[Blind Eye Jones]

"Is It Treason Yet?"

Yes, it was always treason! Americans don't want to see it for what it is. It's "Falcon and the Snowman" or a variation on that theme, to be picked up by Hollywood, to be adored in a Michael Moore movie, to be prettier than CODE PINK... loserville, man!

[Smokin' Joe]

Can't give 'em a cigarette--they might die of cancer, don'tcha know. Cruel and unusual an' all that.

...AND, the second hand smoke!

Oh, the humanity!

(/sarc)

Blindfold and wall work, though, maybe earplugs, (don't want them hearing impaired, now)...

[ZULU]

Tolerance for Treason started during the reign of LBJ and Viet Nam.

It has grown and trhived, thanks to cowardly politicians and venomous judges.

[Caipirabob]

Oh man, yer killin' me! ROTFL!

[E.G.C.]

BTTT

[E.G.C.]

BTTT

[E.G.C.]

BTTT

[R. Scott]

If our Congress Critters would actually make a formal declaration of war it would be treason. Without it treason would be a difficult charge to prove. WW II was the last time we had a declared war. The Korean War, Viet Nam War and now the Iraqi War were undeclared – and treason was rampant and not prosecuted.

[cricket]

I've been reluctant to use the word treason, but I just don't what else to call it anymore

An opinion shared, apparently, by President Bush and Republican et als. . .

Truth is. . .it has been 'treason' for a long time now. . .and I absolutely do hope that this essay expresses the sentiments and beliefs of GOPUSA and of the whomevers left in our Congress that has the fortitude for genuine patriotism and the responsibility that their elected office demands.

[Jim Noble]

I don't think it's treason, it's better called wannabe treason.

The charge of treason is hedged about by Constitutional language, and for good reason. It was a principal weapon in the hands of the King to deal with his enemies, and in 1648-9 it was used by Parliament to kill the King.

The essence of a treason charge is the aid or comfort given to the "enemies of the United States". It's my view that only the People of the United States, acting through their representatives in Congress assembled, can define their "enemies", and the only way they can do that is to use the power granted to them in Article One, section 8 to declare war on them.

Any other construction enables the commander-in-chief (who will not always be GWB) to turn someone or something into an "enemy of the United States" through his own military powers, and that opens up the vista of treason prosecutions which the founders never envisioned.

It's yet another reason that Congress' abandonment of OUR (not their) war power is so bad.

If the People of the United States had declared war on the al Qaeda organization and Iraq, Michael Moore would be in prison right now.

It's a shame that our representatives failed to do so.

[Modok]

First comes spine then comes charges.

[Jim Noble]

(a) Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully makes or conveys false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies

The United States is not "at war". although God knows we should be.

The war powers of the United States are virtually without limit. If you study the assumption of power by the executive branch from December 8, 1941 until mid-January, 1942, you would realize that after about 1/20/42 we had a completely different government, different in nature, from the one that existed on December 6, 1941. All with these few little words:

"the President is hereby authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the United States and the resources of the Government to carry on war against the Imperial Government of Japan; and, to bring the conflict to a successful termination, all of the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States".

All the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States.

THAT is what we are missing in Iraq, and it is also what we were missing in SVN and Korea.

[Jim Noble]

The Korean War, Viet Nam War and now the Iraqi War were undeclared – and treason was rampant and not prosecuted.

Only Congress can identify the "enemies of the United States", and for very good reason.

There's three choices, as I see it.

You and Jim Robinson are arrested for treason by AG Gorelick, and charged with giving aid and comfort to Free Republic, an enemy of the United States.

Your defense is that FR is NOT an enemy of the United States.

Who has the right to decide?

A) Commander-in-Chief HRC?

B) DC jury?

C) The people of the United States through their representatives in Congress assembled?

[Jim Noble]

or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.

Please point me to the Act of Congress which made the government and armed forces of the DRVN "enemies of the United States".

There is no such Act of Congress.

The fact that Congress, then and now, is composed of cowards and poltroons is insufficient in my judgement to confer the power to work a charge of treason on the President.