It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Really? is that what you think? you'd better go back and study things just a bit more. The clause cited in the OP is but one of the avenues available with an awake and mature citizenry - oh but one has to remember they quit teaching that stuff long ago - I digress
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.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
Originally posted by Phoenix
Being that nobody has REALLY come out with any actual objection or coherent argument that postulates the administrations or governments actions in regards to Syrian intervention do not rise to treasonous levels as defined by the US Constitution.
I have to believe that Denninger was entirely correct in his summations that treason has and continues to be committed by the Obama administration, the chief prognosticator being Barack Obama himself as the nominal leader of the nation.
Originally posted by Phoenix
reply to post by AlienScience
Yes you are correct but what would be used code or constitution?
Originally posted by Urantia1111
Ugh. When did out leadership stop committing treason? Pretty sure that's an ongoing theme. Also, "al quaeda" had nothing to do with 9/11. Nothing at all. Our leadership acted alone in treasonous fashion on that day too.
Originally posted by Tardacus
reply to post by AlienScience
The government isn`t the "united states", the people are the "united states" without the people there is no "united states". A government with no people to govern isn`t a country.
The president isn`t a King he doesn`t decide who our enemies are, the people decide who our enemies are through our elected representatives. If our representatives vote to fund a military and send that military out to kill people then it`s safe to assume that the people they are killing are our enemies.
Can a president commit treason? absolutely, can our elected representatives commit treason? absolutely.
can all of them as a group commit treason? absolutely.
edit on 28-8-2013 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by AlienScience
Originally posted by Tardacus
reply to post by AlienScience
The government isn`t the "united states", the people are the "united states" without the people there is no "united states". A government with no people to govern isn`t a country.
The president isn`t a King he doesn`t decide who our enemies are, the people decide who our enemies are through our elected representatives. If our representatives vote to fund a military and send that military out to kill people then it`s safe to assume that the people they are killing are our enemies.
Can a president commit treason? absolutely, can our elected representatives commit treason? absolutely.
can all of them as a group commit treason? absolutely.
edit on 28-8-2013 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)
Sure, the President and any Government official can commit treason, but not through official government actions. They can do so in their personal actions, but not through their official government actions.
The people have no say at all who our "enemies" are. Further more, an "enemy" doesn't have to be a global defined group. Our "enemy" in one situation may be our "ally" in another.
This thread, like I said before, is silly. It is a pipe dream straight out of Right Wing World...the day dream and fantasize about different ways they can get rid of Obama.
I would put down any amount of money on a wager that Obama or no one else would ever be committed of treason over attacking Syria...it's just a dumb idea.
Originally posted by neo96
While I think this is treason.
In the span of 1 decade we went to fighting AQ to aiding and abetting them.We truly have messed up 'leadership'.
Really?
You have dodged the question about who defines our enemies???
Do we have a Declaration Of War against Al Qaeda?
Those of you who continue to vote for Democrats and Republicans in the House, Senate, and for the President of the United States are also a huge part of the problem that has paved the way for a Rogue Government.
As long as you all continue to cling to and consciously participate in the partisan nonsense and the left/right paradigm that has divided the populace, YOU ARE COMPLICIT IN THE CRIMES OF THESE MAD MEN.
Originally posted by AlienScience
Sure, the President and any Government official can commit treason, but not through official government actions. They can do so in their personal actions, but not through their official government actions.
The people have no say at all who our "enemies" are. Further more, an "enemy" doesn't have to be a global defined group. Our "enemy" in one situation may be our "ally" in another.
This thread, like I said before, is silly. It is a pipe dream straight out of Right Wing World...the day dream and fantasize about different ways they can get rid of Obama.
I would put down any amount of money on a wager that Obama or no one else would ever be committed of treason over attacking Syria...it's just a dumb idea.
Originally posted by MrSpad
As I have covered before we were on the same side as Iran in Afgansitan, the same side as Hezbollah in Bosnia, the same side as Maos communist in the Pacific etc. So no it is not treason to have a common enemy with an enemy. It happens all the time.
Of course the question of what helps Al Quaida and what does not is not simple. In Syria you have the rebels fighting for their freedom. When they win, and they will win. They will look back who helped them and who did nothing. A West that did nothing with radical groups who did is going to make people real receptive to the radicals. So the West will act. It really has no choice. Just as it acted did in Libya and Bosnia the idea of state owing its existance to radicals is simply not acceptable. One of the keys to make sure the rebels have the arms and the organization to deal with radicals after the civil war. A Syria run by Assad is no longer a reality, the best he can hope for is small area protected by Iran, Hezbollah and Lebanese militias and that would be one terrorist filled little state.
Originally posted by AlienScience
Originally posted by Tardacus
reply to post by AlienScience
The government isn`t the "united states", the people are the "united states" without the people there is no "united states". A government with no people to govern isn`t a country.
The president isn`t a King he doesn`t decide who our enemies are, the people decide who our enemies are through our elected representatives. If our representatives vote to fund a military and send that military out to kill people then it`s safe to assume that the people they are killing are our enemies.
Can a president commit treason? absolutely, can our elected representatives commit treason? absolutely.
can all of them as a group commit treason? absolutely.
edit on 28-8-2013 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)
Sure, the President and any Government official can commit treason, but not through official government actions. They can do so in their personal actions, but not through their official government actions.
The people have no say at all who our "enemies" are. Further more, an "enemy" doesn't have to be a global defined group. Our "enemy" in one situation may be our "ally" in another.
This thread, like I said before, is silly. It is a pipe dream straight out of Right Wing World...the day dream and fantasize about different ways they can get rid of Obama.
I would put down any amount of money on a wager that Obama or no one else would ever be committed of treason over attacking Syria...it's just a dumb idea.