See post #11.
Posted on 12/08/2005 7:56:07 PM PST by 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
It's too late. They already are. I feel like we've turned that corner. I want to know when someone will be held accountable.
This must stop now. It's not getting better, it stalled for awhile, Cindy was countered, but it's getting worse.
Elected officials are doing it, not just some nutcase who didn't call her own son a murderer nor protest the war before he died.
I'm having a really bad couple of days, here. I dreamt about Schultz last night.
I believe it's applicable because we have war waged against us.
War be damned in the definition of treason.
Enemies who wish to do us harm, period.
No, but it is sedition.
Government is the least effective, least efficient means to do anything. Protecting our borders, prosecuting and preventing crimes are examples of how well government accomplishes its only legitimate function.
With that said, think back to 1996 and Bill Clinton. There was compelling evidence that Clinton transfered strategic intel to a foreign nation that was and is clearly a serious potential enemy of the United States in exchange for contributions that helped him win the 1996 election. Even if Clinton were found not guilty of the crimes that appear to have been committed, it cannot be disputed that he allowed the transfer of technology (super computers) to Red China. And without super computers much of the other acquired technology (gps missle warhead targeting and nuclear weapons testing modeling) would effectively be useless.
Your arguments don't prove that Democrats haven't committed treason, only that government can't do anything very well. As President Reagan said, "Government isn't the solution; government is the problem." I would add that most of the problems caused by government are actually initiated by Democrats and their willing accomplices in the media. Senator McCarthy was right; it was the Democrats and the media that got it wrong.
One other thing: "Not a single Confederate was ever prosecuted for treason."
When wars are fought, the winners get to write the history, as opposed to "right" the history. Historians called it the "War Between the States" or the "Civil War". In reality, it was actually a war between two separate nations. You obviously can't distinguish the difference. If you actually understood the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States, you might have known enough to keep your mouth shut instead of having removed all doubt.
I think you make a very good point, with one exception, the very definition of 'enemy'. War declaration or not, the United States has people DYING while actively, militarily, engaged and these actions are promoting or hastening deaths at the hand of an armed enemy. Therein lies the application of treason.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&oi=defmore&defl=en&q=define:enemy
Will you settle for a "thank you" for adding my name to your ping list?
Thank you.
It has been treason ever since Kerry sat in front of the Senate and LIED and then went and kissed the NV asses in Paris.
The argument about whether we should be in this war ended when both the House and the Senate authorized the president to use force to remove Saddam from power. In another age, Murtha, Kerry, Kennedy, Pelosi, Durbin, Reed, and a whole host of others would be tarred and feathered in the least and maybe hanged.
Congress did identify enemies of the United States.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030319-17.html
Were the Branch Davidians guilty of treason?
Was Robert E. Lee?
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them"
This sentence is very important.
It must be comprehended correctly. Treason is levying war against the United States.
It's been Treason from day one. What's more, the Republican Leadership is just as guilty of it because of their damnable Cowardice in refusing to call it what it is.
TREASON!
Oh, please.
Thanx
Hilarious! Thanks for the ping.
See post #11.
Remember, according to one high profile democrat - There is "No Controlling Legal Authority".
Outstanding!!
Treason ~ Bump!
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.