What is the penalty for treason?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Anarchy 2 : One Thread

Ok...The Bush Administration made a claim that Saddam Hussein was trying to buy uranium from Niger. Joseph Wilson went over to Niger to investigate this claim and found that it was wrong. He told the CIA, and they wrote numerous memos to the White House, all of which were ignored, and Bush repeated the already disproved claim in his state of the union adress. Then when Wilson started making too much noise, the Administration leaked the name of his wife, who was currently undecover with the CIA, to columnist Robert Novak, who then published the fact that she was an undercover agent.

This yields two questions. Number one, why is Robert Novak not in trouble for treason? For christ's sake, he endangered the woman's life! She was under cover! She could have been killed! Isn't that treason? The Washington Post was sued for publishing the Pentagon Papers. Why have no charges been leveled against Novak? Why has no one complained about him endangering national security?

Secondly, what about the people that leaked it to him? Is it not treason to expose an undercover agent? Bush had Plame's name leaked to settle a political grudge. Not only is this quite possibly grounds for impeachement, but also treason? Don't they give the death penalty for that?

I'm not sure if they still kill people for treason or not. Tator, you're in the military. What is the penalty for willfuly and deliberately giving up the name of an undercover agent?

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), August 13, 2004

Answers

The article lost all credibility right off the bat. 1) havnt you heard new intel suggests Iraq did try to buy Uranium.

-- FACISTCARTER (Pike159@aol.com), August 13, 2004.

This is an easyone. Im surprised that you dont know it seeing as how it was such a big deal in American History. Yes you can be put in front of a fireing squad for treason. But there has to be a whopping 2, yes, TWO, people to witness said treasonous acts. Are there 2 people that would lie about you?:)

-- Dick Tator (link4pres@yahoo.com), August 14, 2004.

Carter,

What intelligence? Where did you hear that? Was it real news or just something you heard Bill O'Reilly say?

And even if it's true (which is highly unlikely), it's still treason to reveal the name of an undercover agent.

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), August 14, 2004.


I believe treason and it's penalties are detailed in the Constitution, but I'm too lazy to look.

BJ

-- 2 (1@3.4), August 14, 2004.


Yeah, school is almost back and so I wont be around much..... Anyway it seems a lot of threads on this forum dont work.....

Ok yes I heard it on CNN news. It was a few weeks ago and I remember saying to Jordan "I bet they will tell the public this just to day and all the news media will ignore the story from tomorrow on". I remember the Clinton Admin. released some CIA woman's records and no one made a big deal..... I remember because it upset my father a lot.... Anti-bush have you ever liked President Bush?

-- Carter (Pike159@aol.com), August 14, 2004.



When was there ever anything to like? He's spent his whole life a spoiled, snobby rich kid who has had everything handed to him and hasn't worked a day in his life. He's never earned anything. Time and again he has shown complete lack of concern for anyone but himself. He had a mentaly retarted man who could not understand the nature of his crimes executed when he was governor or Texas. The election fraud that allowed him to steal the 2000 election was so great that in any other country it would warrant the oversight of U.N. inspectors. He was the first President in decades to break the tradition of getting out of his limo on innauguration day and walking the last few blocks. Why? He didn't like seeing the people protesting his little coup and holding up signs that said "hail to the thief". He spent four months out of his first year in office on vacation and let 9/11 go on while he was asleep at the wheel. He has lied over and over again to the American people and shown blatant disregard for what they think.

What in God's name is there to like?

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), August 16, 2004.


The election fraud that allowed him to steal the 2000 election was so great that in any other country it would warrant the oversight of U.N. inspectors.

Please, Anti, try some truth! Even the Democrat's and liberal media's recounts showed Bush won. Give it a rest with the "stole the election" crap. Bush won fair and square, Gore is a (and the) loser. I'll now leave you to your ramblings...

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), August 16, 2004.


It's not the counting of the votes that was the probelm. It's the fact that the Florida state government had thousands of legitimate names removed from the voter roles, a majority of which were African American and registered Democrats. The company hired by the Florida government to set up the election system just happened to be run by good friends of the Bush family. The net they cast to catch ineligible names in the voter roles was far too wide and caught people with the same last name, or even just similar sounding names. Some names were just abritrarily removed. 92% of the names just happened to be registered Democrats. One woman was told she couldn't vote because she was a convicted felon. Turned out she was an upstanding citizen who had never been arrested in her life and she was chairman of the local Democratic party. These names were deliberately removed to give Bush an advantage in Florida. That is election fraud, plain and simple.

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), August 16, 2004.

One woman was told she couldn't vote because she was a convicted felon.

A few years ago some guy with my exact name defaulted on his bills, and the city came after me to pay them. I told them it wasn't me, and had my ssn to prove it (thankfully) but it was still an ordeal. I don't think the city was being *malicious* though, just incorrect. Are you seriously saying that if you looked at every democratic voter you wouldn't find SOMEONE who was voting who shouldn't be or some repub that didn't get to when he should have? It's over, man, don't get your head stuck in an anxiety bag. Bush won, he's the President. Live.

BJ

-- 2 (1@3.4), August 16, 2004.


If someone stole your car and still had it, would you "get over it"? No. Bush has stolen our country and, and we won't "get over it" until he either gives it back or gets legitimately elected.

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), August 16, 2004.


It's easy to PROVE that someone stole your car. If it was PROVED that the President "stole" the election, he wouldn't BE President. But it has NOT been proven, it's just some disgruntled peoples' assertion. The same people are still waiting for Y2K to happen. That didn't either, they should "get over it."

Now don't get me wrong, if Gore was "elected" I'm sure there are conservatives that would be doing the same thing as you libs, but they'd be wrong too. If you don't like his policies, continue to criticize them, but this particular horse is WAY dead.

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), August 16, 2004.


BTW, why are you so hot to have Gore in office? Do you really think HE would make a better Pres?

-- 2 (1@3.4), August 16, 2004.

That's a pretty good point. Gore would be pretty shitty. Probably not as shitty as Bush, but we'll never know.

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), August 18, 2004.

Are you kidding me? If Gore had made it……. The economy would be completely destroyed; we would have never of hit Afghanistan as hard as we did. Iraq would still be out there supporting terrorism, and posing a threat to a democratic middle east. I hope you realize going into Iraq is a democratic plan. Iraq is like Germany a key stone nation to the region. Getting a democratic government in place will mean a spread of our version of democracy all over the Middle East.

-- Lt. (M4socom@aol.com), August 18, 2004.

Anti,

I think it makes a bigger difference than you might imagine who's in office. Terrorism is a real thing, or perhaps it would be better to say "militant Islamism" or something like that to avoid the overtones we associate with terrorism (that is, something to do with us), but these people need to train and be funded from *some*where. They are going to kill or disrupt *something* whether it has anything to do with us or not. By going in to both Afghanistan and Iraq and causing a regime change, this has showed the Middle East countries we are serious about fighting back, if nothing else. This means a lot in cultures that values strength over human life.

The next time a country in the Middle East thinks about whether or not to help us or *really* antagonize us they'll look to Kuwait -- whose ruler we put back in power after Saddam invaded it, to Saudi Arabia who we've always viewed as an ally, and to Afghanistan and Iraq. It's not tough to see who you'd want on your side in a fight if you were the leader of one of these countries.

This of course assumes a STRONG American presence. A weak America gives these guys a real reason to saber rattle, take hostages, etc. just like Iran, and Iraq used to be. They will strengthen their own power locally, and won't be seriously retaliated against. In that case, again if all you were interesed in was your own personal power, why would you NOT attack American interests?

Seems pretty clear, really. There won't be any peace in the Middle East for a long time, but one thing we CAN do is divert most of their attacks to someone else, hopefully back on themselves, until they decide to quit killing people.

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), August 18, 2004.



To Anti-Bush: Politically ignorant,immature brainwashed sheep such as yourself NEVER cease to amaze me with your idiocy. You prove your worthlessness immediately, with your name: "Anti-Bush". Yes, that shows GREAT intelligence. If everyone went always stated they were anti-this, and anti-that, how would we ever know what people were "FOR"? So your anti-"Bush". I don't really care if you're gay, what I want to know is WHAT ARE YOU "FOR"? Whgat do you ADVOCATE? What is your "better" idea? Lay out your plan for running the country, the economy,foreign policy, the correct response to having 3,000 innocent civilians murdered on Sept. 11, what our policy, in public and BEHIND THE SCENES,(which YOU nor anyone knows NOTHING about)policy concerning the Saudis, Iraq, Iran, Syria, North Korea, China, Taiwan, etc. Seeing as you you are so brilliant as to call yourself "anti-Bush", you MUST have BETTER ideas that would be TOTALLY DIFFERENT and MORE EFFECTIVE than the President, so we would ALL like to HEAR them. And you should be able to answer this IMMEDIATELY, seeing you have so much criticism, you must have the BETTER answers right at the tip of your tongue. And don't forget that these policies must take into account that from 1992 to 2000, during the Clinton Admin., our intelligence agencies were neglected, in some cases ignored, dangerous terrorists like Osama bin-Laden were allowed to roam free, to recruit, to buy guns, bomb-making material, and who knows what kind of chemicals, biological agents, even rumors of suitcase nukes. The only fact that allows me to sleep at night is the knowledge that either fission or fusion bombs(Hiroshima was a fission bomb,power of 12,000 tons of TNT, modern thermonuclear weapons, up to 50,000,000 tons of TNT explosive power)only the knowledge that a in order to fit a nuclear device into a package that a person can carry, it has to be made with elements that decay(disintegrate, disappear), and parts of it must be maintained on a regular schedule and most likely, if they DID buy any of these devices from a black market Russian, they got ripped off. However, all these dangerous things and dangerous people flourished for those 8 years, it seems the President had other "distractions", other "dangers" that took priority in his mind (Monica Lewinsky, Jennifer Flowers, Paula Jones(c'mon, Paula, just Kiss It), Kathleen Willy, Hillary(flying lamps), Vince Foster, Ron Brown, Arkansas State Troopers, Meny Airport(cocaine), Whitewater,Rose Law Firm, Web Hubble, billing records, forcing IRS and FBI against people he didn't like, cattle futures, Grand juries, Senate hearings,impeachment, etc., etc. No WONDER he didn't have time for Osama. And even when Sudan and others OFFERED Osama,Clinton said "Well, ah dint have a reason to take him into custody" Never mind he bombed our embassies and the USS Cole, killed many of our citizens, and this was AFTER, of course the first Trade Center bombing. Meanwhile, Osama had plans going, and guys coming into our country, asking to learn how to fly Jumbo Jets, but "not interested in learning how to take-off or LAND" these jumbo jets. So a Middle- Eastern guy comes into your country on a student visa, wants to learn to fly a 747 while it's in the air, but doesn't care about taking off or landing. No problem there, let him, and all his freinds in the country. If they're minority, they'll probably vote Democrat! And, to wrap up, your original question about the penalty for treason? Well, it depends. In peacetime, it's prison. During wartime, it's longer time in prison, I believe the last execution for treason was Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, in 1953. However, there have been MANY instances of treason since that time. Spies, like Aldrich Ames, have been caught and publicly discussed, and other cases, which have been extremely sensitive, have been played down, so as not to reveal sensitive areas of our intelligence, or our ability to learn information(spy) on other security risks, be they personnel or foreign governments. Then there are acts of treason that are not prosecuted, for political reasons. Between 1993-1999, Bill Clinton gave Chinese Nationals free reign in Washington:(read below) The facts below are all well known, but yet No calls for the arrest of Clinton for TREASON have ever been filed. Terrorists are small potatos compared to over 1 billion Chinese, who have slave-labor (cheap Wal-Mart prices!) and are building factories and cars and trucks and an economy determined to defeat ours, and Nuclear Warhead - Tipped Missles that can ALREADY reach Los Angeles, only a matter of time 'til they can reach New York City. They've already calmly stated to us if they move on Taiwan, and we interfere, they will launch Nukes at Hollywood. Nice, huh? And Clinton GAVE them the technology (radiation-hardened microchips) to make the guidance systems UNSTOPPABLE, like OURS. For more info on The greedy, power-hngy piece- o-shit Clinton, ********************************************************************* USA Today 5/19/99 "...In 1996, the Administration transferred the licensing authority for exporting satellite technology from the State Department, which had opposed giving new technology to China, to the Commerce Department, which immediately approved the transfer. Given the green light by the Commerce Department, Loral Corporation provided China with missile technology to improve its satellite launch and guidance systems. This same technology can be used to improve the performance of missiles aimed at the United States. Loral is headed by Bernard Schwartz, one of the largest Democratic donors in the '96 election cycle...."

World Net Daily 7/21/98 Charles Smith ".President Clinton signed a SECOND part to the waiver for Loral's Globalstar system in July of 1996. The second part of the Clinton waiver was not for satellites to Russia but allowed Loral to sell an encrypted telemetry control ground station to China for the Loral Globalstar satellites. The station has already been built and has opened just outside of Beijing.."In March 1996," wrote Reinsch in his recent letter to Spence. "The export of a ground station which contained encryption would have been under the jurisdiction of the State Department." In 1996, encrypted telemetry was a separate item -- not controlled by the Commerce Department. The only way to dodge the State Department sanctions on the export of satellite encryption to China was by obtaining Bill Clinton's signature. On July 9, 1996, Bill Clinton signed the waiver for Loral."

Capitol Hill Blue 4/22/99 Doug Thompson "...In 1996, the Clinton administration, over the objection of the CIA and the Defense Department, approved the sale of sensitive satellite technology to China by Loral, a company headed by Clinton campaign contributor Bernard Schwartz. That technology, intelligence analyst Owen says, was a key component in developing the missile technology that China is using to developing a delivery system for its new nuclear weapons. "Countries spy on each other, that's a fact of life," Owen says. "But usually the country that is being spied on doesn't give the one doing the spying this much help." ..."

Wall Street Journal 4/14/98 Editorial "…President Clinton approved the transfer of missile guidance technology to China at the behest of the largest personal contributor to the Democratic Party. He granted the needed waiver despite an ongoing Department of Justice criminal investigation of the same company's earlier transfer of similar technology: a Pentagon study concluding that in the earlier episode "United States national security has been harmed." That is the essence of a report yesterday by Jeff Gerth of the New York Times (who also reported the original Whitewater story in 1992) concerning satellite launch technology provided by Loral Space and Communications and Hughes Electronics, a subsidiary of General Motors. Loral Chairman Bernard L. Schwartz topped the personal contributions list in 1997; his 1994 trip to China with Commerce Secretary Ron Brown was quickly followed by a memo to the President from Harold Ickes saying Mr. Schwartz "is prepared to do anything he can for the Administration." Lobbying jointly with Hughes Chairman C. Michael Armstrong, who has gone on to head AT&T, Mr. Schwartz succeeded in softening licensing requirements for export of guidance technology to China…."

Wall Street Journal 3/11/99 Editorial "…On their own the security lapses would be serious enough….. But the story's context invites an even more chilling conclusion. The Clinton Administration's inaction, after all, did not occur in a vacuum. It came in the thick of a 1996 re-election effort we now know included campaign contributions from those with ties to the Chinese government, its military and even its intelligence organizations In other words, at the same time the FBI and CIA were investigating the source of the Los Alamos leak, Vice President Al Gore was passing the hat among inexplicably wealthy Buddhist nuns, Mr. Clinton was serving coffee at the White House to PLA arms dealer Wang Jun and the Administration responded favorably to a request from a man who would be the Democratic Party's largest donor in 1996--Loral Chairman Bernard L. Schwartz--to transfer authority over licensing of satellite technology from the State to Commerce Department. Two years later Loral would be granted a Presidential waiver to export its technology to China, even though it was under criminal investigation by the Justice Department for previous technology transfers….More to the point here, neither of Mr. Clinton's predecessors involved their foreign policy people in campaign politics the way this Administration has. What makes Sandy Berger's lack of action on the espionage front so scandalous is that as deputy National Security Adviser in 1996 he sat in on the weekly White House meetings about the re-election campaign. And he wasn't alone. The President himself chaired a September 13, 1995, meeting after which Johnny Huang--Lippo's man at the Commerce Department--was transferred to the Democratic National Committee. The result was that a man suspected of having compromised national security continued at his post, and foreign scientists were allowed to visit lab facilities without background checks. Indeed, the White House began to tighten things at Los Alamos only late last year, after the arrival of Bill Richardson at Energy and after a bipartisan committee convened by Rep. Chris Cox looked into issues of Chinese espionage and technology transfer. Over at Justice, meanwhile, the Attorney General resolutely refused to follow the recommendations of either FBI director Louis Freeh or her handpicked prosecutor, Charles La Bella, to appoint an independent counsel to look into any Chinese connection to the 1996 campaign…."

Omaha World Herald 3/10/99 Editorial Board "…Bereuter has said before that two American companies, Loral Space and Communications and Hughes Electronics Corp., have broken the law in the 1990s by giving China access to unauthorized technological materials. Both companies contract with China to launch satellites. China uses the same type of missile for commercial and military launches, Bereuter said, so Loral and Hughes are subject to restrictions on how much they can help China improve its missile technology. He said the companies are required to keep satellite technology to themselves. Bereuter suspects that Loral and Hughes shared prohibited missile and satellite technology. He said he believes Loral was especially brazen in violating national security laws in order to curry better business relations with China. When congressional investigators tried to pursue the matter, Bereuter said, the Justice Department told them to back off, that Justice was conducting its own criminal investigation. That, Bereuter said, does not inspire confidence. He said Justice may be shielding Loral rather investigating it. He noted that Bernard Schwartz, Loral's chairman, was the largest individual donor to the Democratic Party last year and has given the party more than $1 million in recent years…."

FoxNews 3/17/99 Crier report interviews Timperlake author of Year of the Rat – Freeper Jobim reports "…Why did Clinton sell out? For the money. A quest for power. Then you need to cover your tracks. Riadys had John Huang working with them for a long time. Riady $ was to get Huang in the government. Hubbell was at ground zero in the entire conspiracy. Huang got clearance 5 &1/2 months before he showed up for work. Huang received documents that were stamped: COULD LEAD TO HANDLERS DEATH. 1996 - Clinton needed money. Loral sends committee over to help the Chinese. Berger gave Loral a get-out-of-jail-free card. 20 missiles have ready capability to go to 200 with miniature nuke tips…."

Creators Syndicate 3/2/99 Linda Bowles "…Why did this administration obfuscate, stonewall, and cover up this devastating breach of national security? Let's set the stage. The 1996 election campaign was in full swing. Despite warnings from the FBI that the Chinese were planning to buy influence in the elections, "For Sale" signs had been hung up on the White House, and various Chinese hustlers, gun runners and communist officials were rubbing shoulders with the president of the United States. Millions of dollars from various Asian sources were being funneled to Democrats. Some of the money came directly from the Chinese People's Liberation Army…. The same year, hundreds of Chinese "visitors" without security clearances toured Los Alamos, some of them, no doubt, on their way to White House receptions. Background checks for visitors at Los Alamos were not required until early in 1999, a full 17 months after a recommendation by the FBI. In 1996, against the advice of then Secretary of State Warren Christopher and experts in the Defense Department, Bill Clinton lifted a long-standing policy of severe restrictions on the export of American satellites to China for launch on Chinese rockets. He moved control over such decisions from the security-oriented State Department to the let's-make-a-deal Commerce Department run by the late Ron Brown….. But when the dust cleared, the Democrats got money from satellite companies and from Chinese communists; China got supercomputors, advanced production equipment and missile technology; Loral got its satellites launched at bargain basement prices; and the American people got shafted. The theft from Los Alamos gave the Chinese the capability to produce highly sophisticated nuclear bombs. And on Clinton's watch, the transfer of sensitive missile technology gave them the capability of depositing the bombs on American cities…."

WorldNetDaily 3/30/99 Charles Smith "…General Ding and the PLA also passed money directly to Clinton through various agents such as Johnny Chung and Charlie Trie. In exchange, the PRC warlords got access to U.S. secrets other than W88 nuclear bombs. For example, Lt. General Shen's son, Shen Jun, was the lead software engineer for Hughes on all Chinese satellites. Loral provided the PLA with radiation-hardened encrypted telemetry control systems such as the missing board of chips from the 1996 Intelsat crash. In fact, according to the State Department, Loral satellite CDMA communications technology was preferred by the PLA. According to a 1996 Department of State cable to President Clinton by Beijing Ambassador Sasser, the PLA was using money from Chinese billionaire Li Ka-Shing to finance Chinese army communications systems….." ********************************************************************* And the last TREASONOUS bastard is a guy, who on foreign soil, LIED about "events" he witnessed(made up), and co-operated with an enemy who held hundreds, maybe thousands, of our POW's for YEARS, without even having decency to TELL us WHO they were holding, TORTURED, BEAT AMPUTATED LIMBS AND GENITALS, MURDERED,all against Geneva Conventions, AND this same guy, after scamming his way out of danger early, because his STATED plan all along was to have a career in politics,came back to the U.S.,went to Congress, and LIED thru his teeth about all his comrades, the guys he lived with worked with, who risked their lives for him every day, as you do in War, and told Congess they were "rapists, baby-killers, civilian murderers, collectors of Heads, Ears, etc., village burners, and ravagers of the countryside in the manner of Genghis Kahn"(who he couldn't even pronounce)Why did he do it? So his name and face would become FAMOUS, in all the PAPERS, and on TV. You see, it was part of the plan, to first play the HERO, then when the public wanted out, he became ANTI- HERO.Well, he got elected, it worked, and now, he made it to his REAL goal. He's running for President. Even though his picture hangs in that enemy's war museum along with Jane Fonda and others who helped keep our POW's longer, tortured longer, and inevitably cost some their lives. Yes, the last man who is guilty of TREASON, and hasn't been charged is none other than John Kerry.

-- The Oral-Kill (ettefruc@yahoo.com), August 21, 2004.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ