Reader's Favorites
Media Casualties Mount

Administration Split On Europe Invasion

Administration In Crisis Over Burgeoning Quagmire

Congress Concerned About Diversion From War On Japan

Pot, Kettle On Line Two...

Allies Seize Paris

The Natural

Gore Book Sales Tank, Supporters Claim Unfair Tactics

Satan Files Lack Of Defamation Suit

Why This Blog Bores People With Space Stuff

A New Beginning

My Hit Parade
Instapundit (Glenn Reynolds)
Tim Blair
James Lileks Bleats
Virginia Postrel
Kausfiles
Winds Of Change (Joe Katzman)
Little Green Footballs (Charles Johnson)
Samizdata
Eject Eject Eject (Bill Whittle)

Space
Alan Boyle (MSNBC)
Space Politics (Jeff Foust)
Space Transport News (Clark Lindsey)
NASA Watch
NASA Space Flight
Hobby Space
A Voyage To Arcturus (Jay Manifold)
Dispatches From The Final Frontier (Michael Belfiore)
Personal Spaceflight (Jeff Foust)
Mars Blog
The Flame Trench (Florida Today)
Space Cynic
Rocket Forge (Michael Mealing)
COTS Watch (Michael Mealing)
Curmudgeon's Corner (Mark Whittington)
Selenian Boondocks
Tales of the Heliosphere
Out Of The Cradle
Space For Commerce (Brian Dunbar)
True Anomaly
Kevin Parkin
The Speculist (Phil Bowermaster)
Spacecraft (Chris Hall)
Space Pragmatism (Dan Schrimpsher)
Eternal Golden Braid (Fred Kiesche)
Carried Away (Dan Schmelzer)
Laughing Wolf (C. Blake Powers)
Chair Force Engineer (Air Force Procurement)
Spacearium
Saturn Follies
JesusPhreaks (Scott Bell)

Biting Commentary about Infinity, and Beyond!

« Domesticity | Main | The Slide Down The Hill Continues »

Can We Call Them Traitors?

Ohio men planning attacks on troops in Iraq. If they're American citizens, why wouldn't this be treasonous?

Posted by Rand Simberg at February 21, 2006 10:09 AM

Comments

Treasonous implies the overthrow of the Federal Government. If they "only" intended to attack our troops, thats traiterous. A fine legal distinction in my mind at best.

Either way, send them to court and if convicted, line 'em up for needles or firing squads.

We can only hope these guys weren't caught because of those d@mned pesky illegal wire taps!!

That George Bush!! Who in the world does he think he is trying to protect those evil babykillers!

Posted by Steve at February 21, 2006 11:24 AM

Speaking of traitors, what about the UAE port deal? Should we support Bill Frist and oppose letting a UAE company operate our ports or should we support the Administration?

Those Ohio folks need to be dealt with, but a shipping container smuggled into New Jersey might cause considerably more damage.

Posted by Bill White at February 21, 2006 01:15 PM

Steve, the Constitution defines treason in Article III:

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.

If they have committed an overt act of war, or of aiding and comforting the enemy, and two or more people witnessed it; or if they admit in open court to having committed such an act; then it is treason. "Traitorous" is a synonym for, not a fine distinction of, "treasonous".

Bill, port security will still be handled by the Coast Guard and Homeland Security and Customs, as it is today. Cargo will still be offloaded by union longshoremen who are mostly American citizens, as it is today. I don't see the security issue, here, though it's already obvious that it won't fly politically, and doubtless the President will be blamed for the erosion of support for America in the UAE after they feel punished as terrorists even though they've been friendly to us.

Posted by Jeff Medcalf at February 21, 2006 05:39 PM

Personally, I am not all hot and bothered about the UAE company winning that port contract. But Hastert, Frist and Michelle Malkin sure seem to be.

Isn't the UAE one of the locations where Space Adventures and their Russian-made suborbital rocket will attemnpt to beat Virgin Galactic & Rocketplane into commercial space? Dubai and Singapore as I re-call.

Posted by Bill White at February 21, 2006 05:46 PM

I know I am usually trashed at this site, but I still read it regularly. Really, I do. On this port security situation Michelle Malkin is all wet:

"My presumption is, and my belief is, that the president and his secretary of state and the Defense Department and others have adequately cleared the Dubai government organization to manage these ports," Carter told CNN. "I don't think there's any particular threat to our security."

End of story.

Posted by Jimmy Carter at February 21, 2006 06:00 PM

Jeff, only one of these nut-burgers is a U.S, citizen. He can and probably should be charged with treason.

The other 2 "gentlemen" are not citizens, and were in our country to plan attacks against our troops who are in the field, fighting a war.

They are spies.

Personally I think the firing squad is the way to go with spies, after a trial of course. But spies they should be turned over to the military to stand trial.

Posted by Steve at February 21, 2006 07:29 PM

It doesn't sound like it meets the legal test of treason.
Treason requires actual levying of war.

Now conspiracy to assault federal officials (Soldiers), sure.
Conspiracy to commit Murder? Seems plausible.

You can send them to the electric chair on this, although
franly they sound like Gonif's.

Posted by anonymous at February 21, 2006 07:40 PM

It doesn't sound like it meets the legal test of treason.
Treason requires actual levying of war.

You didn't read the whole constitutional provision quoted above, did you? It says:

Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

Emphasis added. That emphasized word means "actual levying of war" is one definition of treason, but not the only one.

Posted by McGehee at February 22, 2006 10:24 AM

Checking, I generally found two definitions of traitor. One is someone who says one thing and does another. Example:
Personally, I am not all hot and bothered about the UAE company winning that port contract. - Bill White Bill's not bothered, he just brought it up during an unrelated topic... Whatever, traitor ;)

The other definition of traitor is: Someone who betrays his country by committing treason. In that case, I think Jeff is right about the synonymous. So, we do look at the definition of treason in this country. Only one of the Ohio guys is a citizen, and certainly he was not levying war. But when we look at the other condition, I'd say "adhering to their Enemies" is met. Considering the one guy was assisting two others that were not citizens, if they are considered the enemy, then he was aiding them.

So I think the term Traitor applies. That doesn't mean I believe the US will actually prosecute the guy for treason.

Posted by Leland at February 22, 2006 01:22 PM


Post a comment

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?