 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
zinfella
Rear Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 708
Location: Mesa, Az
|
 Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2004 4:35 am Post subject: |
 |
|
John F-ing Kerry doesn't have to deny he met with the enemy in Paris to defeat a treason charge. The prosecution has to prove he knew he was being treasonous, and the records of that meeting have not been released. There is no place to go with a treason charge here. Not that I wouldn't like to see him tried and cocnvicted, but treason hasn't even been used for the two guys that were hooked into 9-11. My source on this is G Gordon Liddy, and if anyone would know, it's the G-man. Hell, he'd just kick the crap outa Kerry, even at 74 years old. 
_________________
No whiners! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
d19thdoc
PO3
Joined: 17 May 2004
Posts: 280
Location: New Jersey Shore
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2004 5:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
A more recent and similar case:
National Guardsman Accused
The Associated Press
Updated: 11:10 p.m. ET Feb. 18, 2004
Spc. Ryan G. Anderson was formally charged Feb. 12 with three counts... The charges could lead to a death sentence.
The charges do not allege that Anderson ever actually passed information to real al-Qaida members.
Anderson is also alleged to have communicated by “oral, written and electronic communication” to the supposed “terrorists” that “I wish to meet with you, I share your cause, I wish to continue contact through conversations and personal meetings.” [emphasis added]
The Uniform Military Code says attempts to aid the enemy can be punished by death.
© 2004 The Associated Press.
HOW ABOUT A CLASS ACTION CIVIL SUIT FOR LIBEL, on behalf of about 2.5 million members of the "class?"
_________________
For The Honor of the Fifty-Eight Thousand.
"He Can Lose, But He Can Not Hide" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
d19thdoc
PO3
Joined: 17 May 2004
Posts: 280
Location: New Jersey Shore
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2004 5:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
A more recent and similar case:
National Guardsman Accused
The Associated Press
Updated: 11:10 p.m. ET Feb. 18, 2004
Spc. Ryan G. Anderson was formally charged Feb. 12 with three counts... The charges could lead to a death sentence.
The charges do not allege that Anderson ever actually passed information to real al-Qaida members.
Anderson is also alleged to have communicated by “oral, written and electronic communication” to the supposed “terrorists” that “I wish to meet with you, I share your cause, I wish to continue contact through conversations and personal meetings.” [emphasis added]
The Uniform Military Code says attempts to aid the enemy can be punished by death.
© 2004 The Associated Press.
HOW ABOUT A CLASS ACTION CIVIL SUIT FOR LIBEL, on behalf of about 2.5 million members of the "class?"
_________________
For The Honor of the Fifty-Eight Thousand.
"He Can Lose, But He Can Not Hide" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zinfella
Rear Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 708
Location: Mesa, Az
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2004 5:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Is that the guy they busted at Ft. Lewis? If so they have evidence against him that goes beyond attending a meeting where nobody knows what was said. I'm not sure the the UCMJ would be able to be used against F-ing, but hell, I'm no law-ya. In any case may I wish him the worst?
_________________
No whiners! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
d19thdoc
PO3
Joined: 17 May 2004
Posts: 280
Location: New Jersey Shore
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2004 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
zinfella wrote: | Quote: | | Is that the guy they busted at Ft. Lewis? If so they have evidence against him that goes beyond attending a meeting where nobody knows what was said. I'm not sure the the UCMJ would be able to be used against F-ing, but hell, I'm no law-ya. In any case may I wish him the worst? |
Yes, it is the Fort Lewis case.
I'm not a lawyer either. But this is a public relations case, not a legal case. While we do not know the content of the meetings Kerry had with the enemy, we do know what he said and did afterward. He advocated their same position points as they published them in 1971. Just a coincidence?
And the meetings in themselves were illegal under the Logan Act anyway.
The point is, the ethical and moral position of the government of the USA, as expressed in its laws and its Constitution, that is, the will of the people, was to brand such activities as dead wrong.
It is interesting too that the Fort Lewis case was a sting operation. Whoever this GI communicated with was not even a real enemy, but an FBI agent playing terrorist. So the crime and the danger to the people is in the intent of the perpetrator, not in his overt act. Kerry's intent is explicitly clear in his testimony and a multitude of other public statements of record - victory for the enemy.
_________________
For The Honor of the Fifty-Eight Thousand.
"He Can Lose, But He Can Not Hide" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve Z
Rear Admiral
Joined: 20 Aug 2004
Posts: 687
Location: West Hartford CT
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2004 5:56 pm Post subject: Aid and Comfort |
|
|
If I've read the "Unfit for Command" book correctly, wasn't Kerry officially still in the Naval Reserve (inactive) until July 1, 1972? In that case, wouldn't he have been a member of the U. S. Armed Forces when he gave his 1971 Senate testimony?
_________________
The traitor will crater! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Cooper
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 06 Aug 2004
Posts: 134
Location: Tulsa, OK
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2004 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What was John Kerry wearing at the Congressional Hearing of 1971? Are those military ribbons over his left pocket?
Who was he representing? To whom was he waging allegations against?
What specific Congressmen were supporting his agenda? Tthe fact that they waived supportive evidence to his allegations suggests that a premeditated agenda pre-existed the hearing.
What specific journalists predominated in the media thrust of this pre-meditated agenda?
Who were the chief financial backers of this premeditated agenda?
Appears to be more of a conspiracy to treason against our Nation's efforts to free S. Vietnam from tyrrany and establish a freee democracy.
_________________
Know the difference between Politics and Mesmeratics - one embraces, propagates and promotes the truth, while the other manipulates it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zinfella
Rear Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 708
Location: Mesa, Az
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2004 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| d19thdoc wrote: | Yes, it is the Fort Lewis case.
I'm not a lawyer either. But this is a public relations case, not a legal case. |
OK, look I'm on your side in this, but, treason is not a PR charge, it's a criminal offense.
We can call it treason if we wish to, but that alone will not produce a criminal conviction. Maybe there is a lawyer here that can offer a more credible opinion than I can, because I would not want to see F-ing win in court.
The Ft. Lewis case was a sting, and they aren't going to give him the death sentence on that grounds alone. Hell, the American Taliban didn't even get the death sentence. Not that I don't think it was appropriate, because I sure as hell do, in both cases. 
_________________
No whiners! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
one more captins mast
LCDR
Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Posts: 438
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2004 7:43 pm Post subject: war crimes? |
|
|
The "free world" ran down the Dr. Death of the German prison and
death camps for 30/40 years and put him on trial
The "Hague" war crimes tribunal does this all the time in case's like
Rwanda, ect.
This time it would be easy , they have lots of vidio and witness
when he said "I did it."
Beside's there is the ultimate "statue of limations" HELL
_________________
the strange mr aj |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
d19thdoc
PO3
Joined: 17 May 2004
Posts: 280
Location: New Jersey Shore
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2004 8:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Robert Cooper asked:
| Quote: | | Who were the chief financial backers of this premeditated agenda? |
Answers to most of your questions can be found at WinterSoldier.com at http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php
Try especially "Special Features" and "News Articles" in the left hand menu column. I know I read the story of the trip to New York City just before Dewey Canyon where a famous liberal politician (forget who) took Kerry and introduced him to some fat cats who provided $50,000 - they are named.
Sorry I can't recall exactly where the answers are.
You might also take advantage of the entire Testimony of 4/22/71 available on that site, same menu column near the bottom. Take an hour or so to read all of it. I contend that, unless you have read all of it, you have no idea what this is really all about. The MSM will quote selected parts - the famous opening statement about "at all levels of command . . ." but that is not even the worst of it.
Most of the talking-heads on both sides are not up to speed on this. This plays into Kerry's hands. Ignorance of what actually went on is his greatest ally. Reallly his only ally. And they all act like that one session was all there is to talk about. That was one day out of at least two years when he did this full time and spoke for the record all over in personal appearances, to local reporters and on TV.
If Joe Six-Pack and Mrs. Middle-America knew what he had really stood for then (and still does), he would never have a chance at elective office anywhere in this country, at any level - except maybe a San Francisco or Berkeley ward committee seat.
_________________
For The Honor of the Fifty-Eight Thousand.
"He Can Lose, But He Can Not Hide" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArmyWife
Lieutenant
Joined: 06 Aug 2004
Posts: 218
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2004 4:56 am Post subject: Re: UCMJ, Article 104, Aiding the enemy |
|
|
| gilliam wrote: |
Gee in the pictures I see of him making speeches and at the Senate, he was in some kind of uniform. |
Haha! Nice try. I think he's wearing ribbons on the wrong uniform, too, but that should have been addressed at that time, according to my sources. Retirees and off-duty folks are obviously allowed to wear their uniforms for appropriate events.
Seriously, no matter how much some of us here don't like the guy, it's pretty hard to bring a charge of treason.
He did lie under oath to Congress in that war crimes testimony, though. Is there a statute of limitations on that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scott
Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy
Joined: 24 May 2004
Posts: 1603
Location: Massachusetts
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2004 4:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
The strongest case for treason seems to be the fact that he negotiated with the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong delegations to the Paris peace talks while serving in the Navy Reserve.
_________________
Bye bye, Boston Straggler! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Cooper
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 06 Aug 2004
Posts: 134
Location: Tulsa, OK
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2004 5:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
He seemed very calm as he testified before the 1971 Congress - do you suppose he was granted immunity for his testimony.
Apparently no such deal was intact for the soldiers he was speaking for, since he would not release their names for fear that they would be prosecuted - at least that was the reason he gave.
_________________
Know the difference between Politics and Mesmeratics - one embraces, propagates and promotes the truth, while the other manipulates it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
d19thdoc
PO3
Joined: 17 May 2004
Posts: 280
Location: New Jersey Shore
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2004 5:59 am Post subject: Re: UCMJ, Article 104, Aiding the enemy |
|
|
ArmyWife wrote:
| Quote: | | Retirees and off-duty folks are obviously allowed to wear their uniforms for appropriate events. |
| Quote: |
Seriously, no matter how much some of us here don't like the guy, it's pretty hard to bring a charge of treason.
He did lie under oath to Congress in that war crimes testimony, though. Is there a statute of limitations on that? |
There is a case made here somewhere by those who know that Kerry was still a serving Naval officer on Reserve duty at the time of his testimony.
A pervasive mistake, repeated only today by Pat Buchanan on MSNBC, is that Kerry's testimony was under oath. I am a firm believer that we have to be 100% accurate in any charges we make, and recent firestorms confirm that belief. It does not pay to make or repeat erroneous charges. A careful review of the written transcript and of the filmed testimony (the film begins as he walks into the hearing room) shows that he did not take any oath. The office of the Secretary of the Senate informed me that such exceptions are not rare. Whether or not a witness is sworn is entirely at the discretion of the Senator who is chairing the hearing. This deliberate lapse gave Kerry wide latitude in what he could say. Nevertheless, it is a crime unrelated to perjury to give false information to any government agency. This is, in fact, what Martha Stewart was convicted of - not "insider trading."
Treason is clearly and simply defined in the Constitution and the U.S. Code elaborates numerous violations that comprise sedition, subversion of the militray in war time, and other offenses related to, but not reaching the level of, actual treason. Any reading of Kerry's record as a war protestor side-by-side with these statutes shows obvious violations of many of them. Whether any charges could have been brought, or whether any such charges could have prevailed, is another question.
If someone could produce an authenic recording of his discussions in Paris, perhaps a case could be made. Short of that, it will never happen.
_________________
For The Honor of the Fifty-Eight Thousand.
"He Can Lose, But He Can Not Hide" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
d19thdoc
PO3
Joined: 17 May 2004
Posts: 280
Location: New Jersey Shore
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2004 6:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Scott wrote: | | The strongest case for treason seems to be the fact that he negotiated with the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong delegations to the Paris peace talks while serving in the Navy Reserve. |
18 USC, 115:Sec. 2381. - Treason
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."
"Negotiation" implies a difference of opinion, and therefore is not the appropriate term here. In fact, the Kerry campaign is at pains to make the point that he did not "negotiate." This is their thin attempt to shield him from accusations of violating yet another law, the Logan Act, which bars private citizens from engaging in negotiations with a foreign state. The real and more accurate description of what he did is "collaboration."
Regardless of his military status in or out of the Naval Reserve, he was subject to all Federal Laws and the Constitution. If he was in the Reserve, he woud have been additionally, or optionally, subject to the UCMJ. But since both Federal Law and the UCMJ can go all the way to the death penalty for treason, there is no operative difference.
Whether such a charge could ever have prevailed is very unlikely. Unless someone produces a tape of unquestionable credibility of his discussions with the communists officials, nothing will ever happen on this.
That does not change the impact it should have on public opinion today.
_________________
For The Honor of the Fifty-Eight Thousand.
"He Can Lose, But He Can Not Hide"
Last edited by d19thdoc on Fri Aug 27, 2004 6:37 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
