Treaty Too Quiet

[anygunanywhere]

killing of US citizens with drone strikes.


I feel better now.

Anygunanywhere

I blame the parents of the kid, for sending the kid to a known terrorist , in a known war zone...

If ANY U.S. citizen knowingly collaborates with enemies of the USA they are equal targets... I dont understand all the up roar.... they are the enemy... and if a innocent is killed, its called collateral damage...

it happens in every war... GET OVER IT... I am so sick and tired of people wanting it both ways... bull feathers.... its war biotches .... and things die.. everything dies in its path... you dont want dead? stay out of the path....

to bad... 14 year old kid is pink mist... well.... dont send your kids to a war zone, dont send your kid to grandpaw terrorist for indoctrination...

No I have no sympathy for the family or the kid or any former U.S. citizen that proclaims allegiance against the USA.. frackem, fragem, chootem.

I think it was 1959 a man who denounced the USA so many times... he was stripped of his citizenship place on a cargo ship with orders he was never to set foot on U.S. soil again.. he also never set foot on anyone else's soil either.. he truly was a man with out a country... and I found it fitting.

wheres Joe McCarthy when ya need him...

The uproar is for two reasons: 1) it clearly violates the Constitution. If you don't like that, go through the process to change the Constitution....the same thing we tell the antis about the 2nd Amendment; and 2) all your rhetoric is meaningless...for instance, under the "rules" so far posted, there is no requirement for a US citizen to "knowingly collaborate with enemies of the US." Furthermore, there is no requirement for the killing to be in a "war zone." We're not at war with Yemen BTW. But that's not why your rhetoric is meaningless. It's meaningless because all that is needed by the Obama rules to kill an American is the assertion by a member of the Obama administration, without supporting evidence, that an American is a "terrorist" or "associated" in some undefined way with a "terrorist." The is no way for the person targeted to challenge the assertion. I guess you believe everyone on the no fly list deserves to be there, that the government never gets things wrong, and never makes mistakes? Furthermore, there is no review by a neutral party, and there is no accountability. Opps, ha ha ha....turns out we got the names mixed up and so and so really wasn't the guy we thought.....better luck next time. And wow, if some 10 year old's, or some 16 year old's father, says he hates the US and wants to destroy it, you think Obama should be able to kill his children? In my America we don't kill the children for the sins of the father.

VM177 is correct and I want to add that the total decision on who to kill rests solely on Obama and his staff. They are not required to involve any other branch of gov or any other executive agency to support the decision to execute a US citizen without due process anywhere in the world at anytime and place of their choosing.

Anygunanywhere

[VMI77]

Man... So many points you way off on... Sins of the father... Better look to wwII... WE KILLED SO MAY CIVILIANS IT STINKS..
IN BOTH GERMANY AND JAPAN... I never said we were at war with Yemen. I said yemen is a war zone.... You had better read your history about treasonous and collaborations.... In a time of war...as far as obama and this drone policy... Gw was the one who brought this policy to light of day.... Your America... It must be wonderful to live in Your utopi America.

It WAS. That America doesn't exist anymore, and one of the reasons is because its now apparently full of people who think it's ok to kill children because of what their fathers do.

You sound like a leftist....you claim so many points are way off...but you don't mention any for my enlightenment.....and I need a history lesson from you. Nice try, or not. In the first place, what was done in the past is irrelevant if it was also unconstitutional. We put American citizens in concentration camps back then too....doesn't make it right or Constitutional. Also, WW2 was a declared war. The Irish sympathized with the Nazis but we didn't bomb people in Ireland. We didn't bomb Spain either, even though they actually had Nazi naval vessels in their ports. The reason? We hadn't declared war on Spain.

Here's another difference: they called WW2 "World War Two" because it involved a large part of the world and included the world's largest industrial and economic powers. It was potentially an existential war for US and Britain, as well as occupied Europe and Russia. There were millions of Nazis and Japanese and other Axis forces, and they had all the modern weapons of the day: armies, air forces, and naval forces. To compare a bunch of rag heads who by government estimates number perhaps 20,000 world wide, with no army, no manufacturing capability, no air force, no navy, and no economic power to be equivalent to our enemies in WW2, making whatever tactics used then relevant now, is absurd to the point of just plain silliness.

I also don't care who did what because I support the rule of law, not the rule of men. So, whatever GWB did isn't automatically OK because HE did it. If it's unconstitutional it's unconstitutional whether the man behind the policy is Bush, Obama, or Gandhi.

Edited to add:

BTW, here's what the Constitution specifically says about treason:

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.

You don't like what it says, change it, don't ignore it. The drone policy violates two elements of this provision alone: 1) it doesn't require ANY witnesses or evidence at all; and 2) it assumes a power granted to Congress, not the president.

[67SS]

you had better read what you just quoted..

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.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies

Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act

whats a leftest?
I took the oath of office in 1973 to support, defend and protect the Constitution from all enemies ...

war is hard, and it takes hard men to wage it... there were your kind in both WWI and WWII who were peace nicks who thought we should not have aided England..... I guess I come from a family of Hawks... from Virginia named lee, to nam and Iraq/Afgan... named son... with grand fathers, fathers, and brothers by blood who fired shots in fear and anger so you can sit then and whine about a person who clearly had bad intention against the USA...

we are a Different Nation than that of the WWII.... OMG.. America is a LAND of warriors.. We kick but and tell other how the cow chews the cabage.... read your history.... we have had troops in china befor WWII, in Russia, all over the world....

why do you think you enjoy the prosperity this nation has? because we killed everyone in WWII.. and bombed every nation into dust... no country had any industrial power save the USA.. and to rebuild thoes countries bought goods and services from us.. which is why the 1950s and 1960s were so good...
if your a vet.. if not.. you dont have a clue...

[67SS]

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. - Thomas Jefferson
III%
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Anygunanywhere

Oath of Enlistment
I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

Now I dont what to delve into the UCMJ and illegal orders..

[anygunanywhere]

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. - Thomas Jefferson
III%
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Anygunanywhere

Oath of Enlistment
I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

Now I dont what to delve into the UCMJ and illegal orders..

Please explain your comments.

I took the oath of enlistment too. You quoted my signature line.

I'm having a hard time reading betweeen your lines.

Anygunanywhere

[anygunanywhere]

you had better read what you just quoted..

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.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies

Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act

whats a leftest?
I took the oath of office in 1973 to support, defend and protect the Constitution from all enemies ...

war is hard, and it takes hard men to wage it... there were your kind in both WWI and WWII who were peace nicks who thought we should not have aided England..... I guess I come from a family of Hawks... from Virginia named lee, to nam and Iraq/Afgan... named son... with grand fathers, fathers, and brothers by blood who fired shots in fear and anger so you can sit then and whine about a person who clearly had bad intention against the USA...

we are a Different Nation than that of the WWII.... OMG.. America is a LAND of warriors.. We kick but and tell other how the cow chews the cabage.... read your history.... we have had troops in china befor WWII, in Russia, all over the world....

why do you think you enjoy the prosperity this nation has? because we killed everyone in WWII.. and bombed every nation into dust... no country had any industrial power save the USA.. and to rebuild thoes countries bought goods and services from us.. which is why the 1950s and 1960s were so good...
if your a vet.. if not.. you dont have a clue...

VM177 is a veteran who honorably served. I assure you he has more than a clue. His grasp is firm and clear, no clouds or haze. He understands more thanmost the times we are in now and the challenges we face.

Anygunanywhere

[VMI77]

you had better read what you just quoted..

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.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies

Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act

whats a leftest?
I took the oath of office in 1973 to support, defend and protect the Constitution from all enemies ...

war is hard, and it takes hard men to wage it... there were your kind in both WWI and WWII who were peace nicks who thought we should not have aided England..... I guess I come from a family of Hawks... from Virginia named lee, to nam and Iraq/Afgan... named son... with grand fathers, fathers, and brothers by blood who fired shots in fear and anger so you can sit then and whine about a person who clearly had bad intention against the USA...

we are a Different Nation than that of the WWII.... OMG.. America is a LAND of warriors.. We kick but and tell other how the cow chews the cabage.... read your history.... we have had troops in china befor WWII, in Russia, all over the world....

why do you think you enjoy the prosperity this nation has? because we killed everyone in WWII.. and bombed every nation into dust... no country had any industrial power save the USA.. and to rebuild thoes countries bought goods and services from us.. which is why the 1950s and 1960s were so good...
if your a vet.. if not.. you dont have a clue...

All right, well, apparently you don't have any kind of coherent argument to make. You just want to talk about what a tough guy you are and your family history. I'm talking about the law and the Constitution, you're talking about how the cow chews the cabbage without using complete sentences, and talking a lot of irrelevant nonsense. No, we didn't kill "everyone" in WW2 and we didn't bomb "every nation" to dust. I've got some news for you "hard man," in order to defend the Constitution you first have to understand what it says, and it would seem from all the emotional nonsense and misdirection, you don't. I don't know whether you're incapable of an intelligent conversation or just unwilling --not that it matters to me, because I'm done with you.

[67SS]

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. - Thomas Jefferson
III%
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Anygunanywhere

Oath of Enlistment
I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

Now I dont what to delve into the UCMJ and illegal orders..

Please explain your comments.

I took the oath of enlistment too. You quoted my signature line.



I'm having a hard time reading betweeen your lines.

Anygunanywhere

EASY...

I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me,

blood of patriots and tyrants.

what does that mean? a finger prick? a paper cut?... it means bloody war...We as a nation are now in a war of Ideals, from within and without...from socialisms, to infidelics.... this nation is in trouble...my job is to keep the faith, bear true witness to the same.. to protect the home front as my age and physical conditions limit my stamina... to fight the good fight as long as I can wage it.. to Quote Nathan Hale: "I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country"

[67SS]

you had better read what you just quoted..

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.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies

Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act

whats a leftest?
I took the oath of office in 1973 to support, defend and protect the Constitution from all enemies ...

war is hard, and it takes hard men to wage it... there were your kind in both WWI and WWII who were peace nicks who thought we should not have aided England..... I guess I come from a family of Hawks... from Virginia named lee, to nam and Iraq/Afgan... named son... with grand fathers, fathers, and brothers by blood who fired shots in fear and anger so you can sit then and whine about a person who clearly had bad intention against the USA...

we are a Different Nation than that of the WWII.... OMG.. America is a LAND of warriors.. We kick but and tell other how the cow chews the cabage.... read your history.... we have had troops in china befor WWII, in Russia, all over the world....

why do you think you enjoy the prosperity this nation has? because we killed everyone in WWII.. and bombed every nation into dust... no country had any industrial power save the USA.. and to rebuild thoes countries bought goods and services from us.. which is why the 1950s and 1960s were so good...
if your a vet.. if not.. you dont have a clue...

All right, well, apparently you don't have any kind of coherent argument to make. You just want to talk about what a tough guy you are and your family history. I'm talking about the law and the Constitution, you're talking about how the cow chews the cabbage without using complete sentences, and talking a lot of irrelevant nonsense. No, we didn't kill "everyone" in WW2 and we didn't bomb "every nation" to dust. I've got some news for you "hard man," in order to defend the Constitution you first have to understand what it says, and it would seem from all the emotional nonsense and misdirection, you don't. I don't know whether you're incapable of an intelligent conversation or just unwilling --not that it matters to me, because I'm done with you.

yeah I a tough guy, I'm 57 have half a leg, cant see, cant run, cant do 20 min of hard work befor I have to take a 2 hr break... oooo fear me.. are ya shakin yet?

BTW hard MEN is attitude and commitment...and moral judgment.. not physicality...

One other thing.. family history.. that is a commitment to the United States OF America... In WWi , In WWII in the pacific, in nam, in afga, Iraq,.. My family and I have shed blood for this nation.. dont lecture me on patriotism nor belittle it before me or my history....

PS. we killed over 250,000 in toyko fire bombings in one night, we fire bombed Germany, Italy, so much along with Belgium, Austria, from the Med, to the north Atlantic lay in total ruin ... my god man.. have you not read the total lives lost nor see the cities...... Europe was in total destruction, spain was in a rebuild from the franco wars...

[Slowplay]

you had better read what you just quoted..

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.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies

Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act


...

I'm not sure I understand what you are asking him to read. The way you've chopped the last part of Article III, section 3...it's like you're changing and twisting the presumption in a way that makes no sense. So, we have treason unless two witnesses (to an overt act of levying war or providing aid & comfort to enemies) say it was somebody else...?

The bar is a wee bit higher than that.

[67SS]

you had better read what you just quoted..

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.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies

Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act


...

I'm not sure I understand what you are asking him to read. The way you've chopped the last part of Article III, section 3...it's like you're changing and twisting the presumption in a way that makes no sense. So, we have treason unless two witnesses (to an overt act of levying war or providing aid & comfort to enemies) say it was somebody else...?

The bar is a wee bit higher than that.

OK each one is a act considered treason. ok?

(this is definition)(1)Treason against the United States, (2)shall consist only in levying War against them, or in (3)adhering to their Enemies, (4) giving them Aid and Comfort. (definition again)No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless(1)on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, (2) or on Confession in open Court.

so in the first part. 1 (this is definition)(1)Treason against the United States,
action :(2)shall consist only in levying War against them,
ACTION: (3)adhering to their Enemies,
action: (4)giving them Aid and Comfort.
so in the first section, you commit treason by 3 possible means: 1 levying War , 2 .adhering to their Enemies, and 3, giving them Aid and Comfort.

section 2
(definition No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless:
action: (1)on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act,
Action:(2) or on Confession in open Court.

each number after each definition is a act to which treason is applied... not the sum of its total...but each act is a treasonous offence. they do not have to be in conjugation, but are separate descriptions.

[Slowplay]

OK each one is a act considered treason. ok?

non sequitur - okay? I was referring to how you chopped the standard for conviction.

I'm not going to dissect the other details of you post, except to say the word "or" and the use of commas are important.

[Andrew]

you had better read what you just quoted..

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.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies

Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act


...

I'm not sure I understand what you are asking him to read. The way you've chopped the last part of Article III, section 3...it's like you're changing and twisting the presumption in a way that makes no sense. So, we have treason unless two witnesses (to an overt act of levying war or providing aid & comfort to enemies) say it was somebody else...?

The bar is a wee bit higher than that.

OK each one is a act considered treason. ok?

(this is definition)(1)Treason against the United States, (2)shall consist only in levying War against them, or in (3)adhering to their Enemies, (4) giving them Aid and Comfort. (definition again)No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless(1)on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, (2) or on Confession in open Court.

so in the first part. 1 (this is definition)(1)Treason against the United States,
action :(2)shall consist only in levying War against them,
ACTION: (3)adhering to their Enemies,
action: (4)giving them Aid and Comfort.
so in the first section, you commit treason by 3 possible means: 1 levying War , 2 .adhering to their Enemies, and 3, giving them Aid and Comfort.

section 2
(definition No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless:
action: (1)on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act,
Action:(2) or on Confession in open Court.

each number after each definition is a act to which treason is applied... not the sum of its total...but each act is a treasonous offence. they do not have to be in conjugation, but are separate descriptions.

So, when was the trial? There must be due process. Even if all of your assertions are true, there must be a trial, even in absentia, with sworn witnesses, before Congress. The Executive branch cannot assume the powers specifically granted to the Congress and attaint a citizen of these U.S. as a traitor.

[cheezit]

soory but no treaty can be inforced if its in direct violation of the constution

Right. You told them. They will flat out obey the constitution now that you said your piece.

I am so glad you stepped up to the plate.

Since you addressed this in such a firm manner why not take care of a few other things like the economy or killing of US citizens with drone strikes.

killing of US citizens with drone strikes.

I feel better now.

Anygunanywhere

running low on tinfoil
a few other things like the economy sorry this is off topic.
killing of US citizens with drone strikes sorry this is off topic
killing of US citizens with drone strikes this has been done. I think more may be in order however

[Slowplay]

...snip...

so in the first part. 1 (this is definition)(1)Treason against the United States,
action :(2)shall consist only in levying War against them,
ACTION: (3)adhering to their Enemies,
action: (4)giving them Aid and Comfort.
so in the first section, you commit treason by 3 possible means: 1 levying War , 2 .adhering to their Enemies, and 3, giving them Aid and Comfort.

section 2
(definition No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless:
action: (1)on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act,
Action:(2) or on Confession in open Court.

each number after each definition is a act to which treason is applied... not the sum of its total...but each act is a treasonous offence. they do not have to be in conjugation, but are separate descriptions.

So, when was the trial? There must be due process. Even if all of your assertions are true, there must be a trial, even in absentia, with sworn witnesses, before Congress. The Executive branch cannot assume the powers specifically granted to the Congress and attaint a citizen of these U.S. as a traitor.

They are not correct. The actions listed out by 67SS are flawed. The Constitution states: "...,or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." These are not two unlinked acts, as stated by 67SS. They are connected. Mens rea and actus reus, if you will. You could give aid and comfort to enemies under duress or unknowingly. Giving aid and comfort would not consist of treason unless you did so "in adhering to" the enemies of the United States (need the intent).