Should the central govt be allowed to charge anyone with treason?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,645
0
76
www.facebook.com
I'd say no; simply because the State is an irrational agent so only those at the top get to decide who is an enemy and who is an ally of the united States. Some executives wouldn't take advantage of treason legislation, but most would. For example, it was good for liberty that Dick cheney never became President as he was a much more efficient authoritarian than Bush ever could've been (and he probably supported more surveillance at home than Bush did). And then some could just as easily say Dick Cheney was treasonous. He may have used those who trusted him and he hasn't even appeared all that satisfied; he contained no original thought and he didn't fear the muslims that much because he supported Bill Clinton's Admin going after Slobodan Milosevic so he could gain more cash. Cheney had reason, but Bush seemed scared which was his excuse; Cheney's reasoning seemed as unoriginal and possibly even more selfish than Bush's excuses for more security. i also doubt dick cheney paid much in wages when he was CEO of Haliburton; I know I couldn't be any better and no one would've wanted the crap Haliburton sold if we were in a free society. Dick Cheney can always realize that his friends could take care of him rather than him working.

And please always, always remember that high Unemployment can be very healthy as it allows for private charity provided decentralization of tender (confederation govt and all the member republics may create tender while the people in each republic are free to use private mediums of exchange), public revenues from sale of public assets only, and almost no public spending.

Anyway, treason legislation is like counterfeiting legislation--if the State didn't create legal tender, then there nothing that could be centrally devalued. Likewise, if the State didn't have enemies, then there could be no treason.
 

TeeJay1952

Golden Member
May 28, 2004
1,540
191
106
Google last person charged with treason US:
Robert Henry Best, convicted of treason on April 16, 1948 and served a life sentence.
John Brown, convicted of treason against the Commonwealth of Virginia in 1859 and executed for attempting to organize armed resistance to slavery.
Iva Toguri D'Aquino, who is frequently identified with "Tokyo Rose" convicted 1949. Subsequently pardoned by President Gerald Ford.
Governor Thomas Dorr 1844, convicted of treason against the state of Rhode Island; see Dorr Rebellion; released in 1845; civil rights restored in 1851; verdict annulled in 1854.
Mildred Gillars, also known as "Axis Sally", convicted of treason on March 8, 1949; served 12 years of a 10- to 30-year prison sentence.
Herbert Hans Haupt, German-born naturalized U.S. citizen, was convicted of treason in 1942 and executed after being named as a German spy by fellow German spies defecting to the United States.
Tomoya Kawakita, sentenced to death for treason in 1952, but eventually released by President John F. Kennedy to be deported to Japan.
Martin James Monti, United States Army Air Forces pilot, convicted of treason for defecting to the Waffen SS in 1944. He was paroled in 1960.
William Bruce Mumford, convicted of treason and hanged in 1862 for tearing down a United States flag during the American Civil War.
Aaron Dwight Stevens, took part in John Brown's raid and was executed in 1860 for treason against Virginia.
Mary Surratt, Lewis Powell, David Herold, and George Atzerodt, all convicted by military tribunal and hanged on July 7, 1865 for treason and conspiracy related to the Lincoln assassination.
Samuel Mudd, convicted with the above, pardoned by President Andrew Johnson after assisting in the containment of a yellow fever outbreak.
Philip Vigol and John Mitchell, convicted of treason and sentenced to hanging; pardoned by George Washington; see Whiskey Rebellion.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
It is hard to prove treason. It is usually reserved for armed military action against the USA i.e. taking over the government or attacking a military base like a terrorist. The name of Paul Revere is about the only name that comes up as a traitor. The only other way would be to give aid and comfort to the enemy. Selling arms to terrorists might also be considered a terrorist act. I think our own government is guilty of this.
 

Meghan54

Lifer
Oct 18, 2009
11,528
5,045
136
It is hard to prove treason. It is usually reserved for armed military action against the USA i.e. taking over the government or attacking a military base like a terrorist. The name of Paul Revere is about the only name that comes up as a traitor. The only other way would be to give aid and comfort to the enemy. Selling arms to terrorists might also be considered a terrorist act. I think our own government is guilty of this.


I think you may have mixed up some names......like Benedict Arnold for Paul Revere. Don't think Revere tried to hand the fort at West Point over to the British nor deserted the Continental Army as a general to join the British Army as Arnold did, nor lead elements of the British Army in attacks and raids on Continental towns/cities in VA and in CT.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.