Is there a statute of limitations on treason?

[capt. apathy]

Originally posted by anonymous
really? id like to see someone argue that. what in your opinion makes the cic an enemy of the usa?

putting us into an expensive war that has and will cost us billions of dollars and American lives, while providing no benefit to American citizens while making more enemies and helping to gather support for enemies we already have.

supporting legislation that is undermines the rights guaranteed by the constitution, and our the foundation to our very way of life.

his administration looking for loopholes around any part of the constitution that gets in the way of whatever plans they have for our money.  

just for a start.  

while I don't really feel he should be on trial for treason, I think his behavior is a lot closer to treasonous than those who speak out against his policies.

soldiers should Carry out their orders with out much question (other than is this a legal order), but it is not only the right but the responsibility of the rest of us to question how our soldiers (and anything that is done in our name) are used.  to let our soldiers be sent to some mans personal war without doing our duty by demanding a reasonable explanation of why, is letting them down.

  we trust them to risk their lives to defend us, they trust us to make sure their lives aren't wasted.  those who don't speak out and oppose a war that has not been supported by any sort of a logical explanation are letting down the soldiers and really crappy citizens.  

Bush hasn't given a reasonable explanation for this war, the intel it was based on was erroneous at best, fabricated at worst.  anybody with their eyes open has seen this for at least 18 months or so.

  if you think keeping your mouth shut and continuing to support the CIC in this situation makes you a better American than one who is out there protesting, then just keep waving that flag, wave it real close to your face and you might not even have to see some of the crap being done in your name.

[ravells]

Excellent post, capt.

But the way I see it, for every US serviceman dying, it represents a potential life saving of lots of Iraqis if Saddam had still been in charge. So, yes it was worth it.

The coalition just have to see it through and win hearts and minds (which is really difficult). But the way I read our (biased) news, the Iraqis are getting shrecked off with their country being treated like an international 'get the coalition' battle ground.

There will come a time when Iraqis will shop all of those bastages who are wrecking a peaceful handover of power. Not for any major political reason, but because they'll be tired of seeing people dying on their streets everyday.

Ravs

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by ravells
Hiya Gunsliger!

I don't get on the boards much since they installed a new bit of software in the office which now tells me, when I try to get here:

'You have been attempting to access a pornographic website - your attempt has been recorded' or some such.

Ravs

Yup same here......If I try to access the forum it says this is "chat"

oh well at least the govt almost gets thier moneys worth out of me  now.....actually my last EPR (enlisted performance report) was outstanding accros the board so maybe the smart filter was a good thing

[ravells]

LOL! Well I'm doing a lot more work too, for the same reasons.

Gunslinger

Ravs

[bigsky]

ship him to iraq. he can go kick suspicious objects along the roads.

[anonymous]

Originally posted by capt. apathy
putting us into an expensive war that has and will cost us billions of dollars and American lives, while providing no benefit to American citizens while making more enemies and helping to gather support for enemies we already have.

supporting legislation that is undermines the rights guaranteed by the constitution, and our the foundation to our very way of life.

his administration looking for loopholes around any part of the constitution that gets in the way of whatever plans they have for our money.  

just for a start.  

while I don't really feel he should be on trial for treason, I think his behavior is a lot closer to treasonous than those who speak out against his policies.

soldiers should Carry out their orders with out much question (other than is this a legal order), but it is not only the right but the responsibility of the rest of us to question how our soldiers (and anything that is done in our name) are used.  to let our soldiers be sent to some mans personal war without doing our duty by demanding a reasonable explanation of why, is letting them down.

  we trust them to risk their lives to defend us, they trust us to make sure their lives aren't wasted.  those who don't speak out and oppose a war that has not been supported by any sort of a logical explanation are letting down the soldiers and really crappy citizens.  

Bush hasn't given a reasonable explanation for this war, the intel it was based on was erroneous at best, fabricated at worst.  anybody with their eyes open has seen this for at least 18 months or so.

  if you think keeping your mouth shut and continuing to support the CIC in this situation makes you a better American than one who is out there protesting, then just keep waving that flag, wave it real close to your face and you might not even have to see some of the crap being done in your name.

wow that was dramatic. the cic put us into the war? doesnt congress have something to do with that as well? what legislation is undermining constitutional rights? have you read patriot act or do you just take left wing hate clubs word for what it is. "anybody with their eyes open"? i think you mean "anyone who swallows moveon.org whole and asks for seconds". erroneos or fabricated intel? are you talking about yellow cake from niger? kept up on that story? there were lies involved there for sure but it looks like it was your precious dem crusader wilson doing the lying. shocking i know. now tell me again what legislation undermines constitutional rights? and does the cic pass legislation alone?

[anonymous]

couple more questions. can you wage modern warfare effectively on the ground and have it not be expensive? do dems get volume discount on jdam kits or something? and costing american lives? whered you get the idea war can be waged without loss of life? making more enemies? who has become our enemy since taking down sadaam? are we talking nations here or are we losing the hearts and minds of the world one disgruntled arabic version of you at a time? you speak of right and responsibility of questioning what is being done. i agree. but this is not what is being done. there is a political war being waged and the bias is immense. when you have a dem presidential candidate that is unable to say to a camera that it is a good thing that hussein has been captured the partisan bullsheet has gone to far. youre not questioning sheet. youre hyping any news that can possibly be spun as defeatist and ignoring reality by refusing to acknolwedge any progress made because it wasnt made when your buttboy was cic.

[Preon1]

Originally posted by Thrawn
Hmmm.


From the US Constitution.

Article. III.

...

Section. 3.
Clause 1: 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.


Of course, I've heard some people argue that merely criticising the US President is giving aid and comfort to the US's enemies.

That does begin to call into question our use of the word 'treason'.  I mean...  how many people have been convicted of treason in our entire history?  10?  The American traitors that I can think of off the top of my head (Benedict Arnold and John Walker Lindh) weren't even tried.  Spies during the cold war were charged with espionage.  Americans being held for giving aid to Al Qaeda cells in the US will likely be charged with terrorism.

What does it take to bring treason on the table?

If Lee Harvey Oswald had been paid by the Russians to kill JFK, would he be guilty of murder or treason?

If Wen Ho Lee gave the nuclear intelligence from Los Alamos to China, and they used it to attack Americans, would he be guilty of espionage or treason?

If Khalid Shaikh Mohammed were an American, would he be guilty of terrorism or treason?

Supposedly, there were 8 treason convictions in the US in the 20th century.  I can only find info on one:
Tokyo Rose - American citizen made Japanese propaganda broadcasts to US troops during WWII.

How different is this than Jenkins' case?  Gender?  Declaration of war? Considering the point in our country's history: where no other nation in the world would oppose us militarily, does that mean that treason is off the table?