SwiftVets.com

4moreyears · Former Member Joined: 08 Aug 2004 Posts: 591

The following is an excerpt from the "Sedition Act"...do a google.

Whoever when the United States is at war, shall willfully cause or attempt to cause, or incite or attempt to incite, insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or shall willfully obstruct or attempt to obstruct the recruiting or enlistment services of the United States, and whoever, when the United States is at war, shall willfully utter, print, write or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States or the Constitution of the United States, or the military or naval forces of the United States, or the flag of the United States, or the uniform of the Army or Navy of the United States into contempt, scorn, contumely, or disrepute, or shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any language intended to incite, provoke, or encourage resistance to the United States, or to promote the cause of its enemies, or shall willfully display the flag of any foreign enemy, or shall willfully by utterance, writing, printing, publication, or language spoken, urge, incite, or advocate any curtailment of production in this country of any thing or things, product or products, necessary or essential to the prosecution of the war in which the United States may be engaged, with intent by such curtailment to cripple or hinder the United States in the prosecution of war, and whoever shall willfully advocate, teach, defend, or suggest the doing of any of the acts or things in this section enumerated, and whoever shall by word or act support or favor the cause of any country with which the United States is at war or by word or act oppose the cause of the United States therein, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or the imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both: Provided, That any employee or official of the United States Government who commits any disloyal act or utters any unpatriotic or disloyal language, or who, in an abusive and violent manner criticizes the Army or Navy or the flag of the United States shall be at once dismissed from the service. . . .
_________________

kerry returned to the United States on July 22, 1971, held a press conference publicly calling on President Nixon... for the surrender of the United States to North Vietnam.

CuriousGeorge · Seaman Recruit Joined: 07 Aug 2004 Posts: 46

The only problem is that I think it only comes into play when there is an "offical" declared war.

Shane's PopPop · Ensign Joined: 10 Aug 2004 Posts: 53 Location: New Jersey

4moreyears
Amazing! After reading this I do believe that JFnK should of been at Quantico instead of in the U.S. Senate.
_________________
This space for rent!

4moreyears · Former Member Joined: 08 Aug 2004 Posts: 591

CuriousGeorge

We didn't declare war...but did the VC?

If they did then a state of war existed.

And since the Vietnamese have JFK's photo in Saigon in their "WAR Museum"...then I guess they did declare war...so sedition it is IMHO.
_________________

kerry returned to the United States on July 22, 1971, held a press conference publicly calling on President Nixon... for the surrender of the United States to North Vietnam.

GenrXr · Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2004 2:11 am Post subject:

Congress does have to declare an act of war for a sedition charge to be brought. Since congress did not declare war against the terrorists, rather gave the president broad ability to commit our forces, we find our selves with the likes of Teddy, Gore, Tommy, & Mikey running afoul of war time sedition laws knowing full well they cannot be charged.

Same goes for Vietnam.
_________________
"An activist is the person who cleans up the water, not the one claiming its dirty."
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to stand by and do nothing." Edmund Burke (1729-1797), Founder of Conservative Philosophy

CuriousGeorge · Seaman Recruit Joined: 07 Aug 2004 Posts: 46

Correct me if I am wrong but the VC can't "legally" declare war as they were a group. The NV didn't declare war but "supported" the efforts of the VC.....

I don't think the Framers envisioned "Police Actions" and the like when it came to war.

I am not justifying Kerry. Just talking about the Consititution.....

Scott · Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2004 2:23 am Post subject:

Early McCain-Feingold. Should have been called the "Protection of Incumbents in Time of War Act."

Please, don't go there. The First Amendment is in enough trouble already!
_________________
Bye bye, Boston Straggler!

concerned_voter · Former Member Joined: 09 Aug 2004 Posts: 31

Just a little history lesson here. The civil war in Vietnam had been going on between the north and the south for over 40 years when we entered the picture. Our involvement was as a result of Eisenhower signing the SEATO Treaty, a treaty that France had warned us to not sign (this was back when we tolerated France as a fellow NATO ally). Their warning was after their being in the middle of the war for several decades.

The Sedition Act, only applies to a Declared War, which Vietnam was not. It was a police action as a result of the SEATO Treaty. Congress had a lot of debate during the Johnson administration of whether to escalate the action to a war; however, they could not find the justification, since there was not any direct threat to the United States.

As far as what Kerry testified, you have to remember that he testified before a congressional hearing at their request. They were the ones holding the hearings; therefore, anything said, whether we agree with the testimony, was at the request of the government. Therefore, it can't be construed that the words were malicious and with the intent to "destroy" the govenment.

I am not defending Kerry, I think he is a moron. However, since he seems to be sounding more and more like he agrees with everything Bush has to say, it comes down to whether the American public want's Bush or Bush-lite.

ralph4usa · Seaman Recruit Joined: 09 Aug 2004 Posts: 3

Corsi is not the issue.

John Kerry's fitness for command is at question, here.

concerned_voter · Former Member Joined: 09 Aug 2004 Posts: 31

Navy_Navy_Navy · Admin Joined: 07 May 2004 Posts: 5777

4moreyears · Former Member Joined: 08 Aug 2004 Posts: 591

Glad you all caught Ralph on that. I erased a response to what he HAD posted...but then I looked again and his original post was gone and replaced with the Corsi rant.

My complaint to him was: The purpose of a thread is to stay on topic.

If we don't stay on topic then dissemination of valuable information will be diluted...just what the left wants...So moderator...you got your work cut out for you.

My advice, play Pink Floyd really loud....the part about keeping the "lunatics on the path" Laughing

_________________

kerry returned to the United States on July 22, 1971, held a press conference publicly calling on President Nixon... for the surrender of the United States to North Vietnam.

Scott · Posted: Wed Aug 11, 2004 3:23 am Post subject:

4moreyears · Former Member Joined: 08 Aug 2004 Posts: 591

The sedition act should be reinstated and become retroactive to 1968. Although it is not in force I believe that kerry transgressed the spirit if not the very word of the sedition act and although unenforcable it does draw a distinction about kerry's lack of morality and unfitness to lead America.
_________________

kerry returned to the United States on July 22, 1971, held a press conference publicly calling on President Nixon... for the surrender of the United States to North Vietnam.