Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Michael LeMieux - Treason

Michael LeMieux - Treason

Ratings: (0)|Views: 19 |Likes:
Published by Juan del Sur
Anyone who has been following the antics of our central government knows that the Constitution is more a quaint historical document than a restraint on government action. We have politicians openly admitting that the legislature is intentionally ignoring the Constitution when drafting bills. Branches of government relinquish constitutionally mandated powers to other branches of government, and even to semi-private organizations, such as the Federal Reserve.

Are the actions of our politicians treasonous?
Anyone who has been following the antics of our central government knows that the Constitution is more a quaint historical document than a restraint on government action. We have politicians openly admitting that the legislature is intentionally ignoring the Constitution when drafting bills. Branches of government relinquish constitutionally mandated powers to other branches of government, and even to semi-private organizations, such as the Federal Reserve.

Are the actions of our politicians treasonous?

More info:

Categories:Types, Research, Law
Published by: Juan del Sur on Oct 31, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

11/13/2010

pdf

text

original

 
Michael LeMieux - TreasonPage
1
of 
6
 
TREASON
 
 Author: Michael LeMieuxDate: October 31, 2010http://www.newswithviews.com/LeMieux/michael133.htm It seems to me that the words “traitor” and “treason” are being used more and more when talking about modern politicians. But is that an accurate portrayal of what is goingon? Anyone who has been following the antics of our central government knows that theConstitution is more a quaint historical document than a restraint on governmentaction. We have politicians openly admitting that the legislature is intentionally ignoringthe Constitution when drafting bills. Branches of government relinquish constitutionallmandated powers to other branches of government, and even to semi-privateorganizations, such as the Federal Reserve.
 
 Are the actions of our politicians treasonous?
 
The quick answer is Yes and No. The reason I say yes and no is that under our currentsystem of law, treason has a very specific and limited definition. However, the broadergeneric definition of treason would, in fact, encompass the actions of our politicians.
 
Let us first take a look at a few definitions and see if we can determine where we stand:
 
Blacks Law Dictionary (Seventh Edition) defines treason as“The offense of attempting to overthrow the government of the state to which one owes allegiance, either by making war against the state or by materially supporting its enemies. – Also termed high treason…”
 
Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856, defines treason as:“This word imports a betraying, treachery, or breach of allegiance. 4 Bl.Com. 75. 2. The constitution of the United States, art. 3, s. 3, definestreason against the United States to consist only in levying war (q.v.)against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort.”
 
The first of Bouvier’s definitions is what I believe most people use to define treason. When a servant of the people takes an oath to uphold the Constitution and they betray that oath by passing laws they know to be unconstitutional, they believe that servant hascommitted treason. The first definition is based upon British Law, and our federal lawsare based upon the Constitution.
 
 
Michael LeMieux - TreasonPage
2
of 
6
 
 Article 3, Section 3 of the Constitution states:“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying Waragainst them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid andComfort.”
 
Let’s dissect this statement. What does it mean by “levying War?” According to Bouvier’sLaw Dictionary it means:“The assembling of a body of men for the purpose of effecting by force atreasonable object; and all who perform any part however minute, orhowever remote from the scene of action, and who are leagued in thegeneral conspiracy, are considered as engaged in levying war, within themeaning of the constitution.”
 
 At first glance one might understand this to mean gathering troops to change agovernment by force. But it also speaks of those who would be “leagued in the generalconspiracy” who are also engaged in levying war.In past wars men and women have been found guilty of treason by conspiring with theenemy by providing intelligence, safe houses, and other “aid and comfort.” If a memberof our own government was to actively work to install the ideology of an enemy, wouldthat be considered Treason?
 
How about the lesser charge of “adhering to their Enemies?” Again in Bouvier’s it states:“ADHERING. Cleaving to, or joining; as, adhering to the enemies of theUnited States… If war be actually levied, that is, a body of men be actually assembled for the purpose of effecting by force a treasonable enterprise, allthose who perform any part, however minute, or however remote from thescene of action, and who are leagued in the general conspiracy are to beconsidered as traitors.”
 
Bouvier’s Law Dictionary also states that“War is not only an act, but a state or condition, for nations are said to beat war not only when their armies are engaged, so as to be in the very act of contention, but also when, they have any matter of controversy or disputesubsisting between them which they are determined to decide by the use of force, and have declared publicly, or by their acts, their determination soto decide it.”
 
 What about our war against terrorism? We say we are at war but there has been nodeclaration of such; and yet, because we are in the condition of war, anyone siding withthe enemy is considered treasonous.In a lecture on the origins of the cold war[1]we find the following statement:
 
 
Michael LeMieux - TreasonPage
3
of 
6
 
“The TRUMAN DOCTRINE of March 12, 1947 announced aid to Greeceand Turkey in the stated context of a general war against communism. Aid in the amount of $400 million was approved by the House andSenate by a margin of three to one. In many ways, the Truman Doctrinemarked the formal declaration of the cold war between the United Statesand the Soviet Union -- it also solidified the United States' positionregarding containment.”
 
The Cold War was not only a war on Communist aggression, it was a war of politicalideology, and it was a war between America’s ideal of individual liberty and the dogmaof a communist controlled society.
 
Communism has proven to be antithetical to liberty; it is government control over allaspects of life. Socialism is to Communism what marijuana is to heroin. As VladimirLenin stated: “The goal of socialism is communism.” America has always been in anideological war with those that would foist communism upon us. As stated in theTruman Doctrine, we are in “a general war against communism.”
 
 As this is an ideological war, it will never change. It cannot change as they arediametrically opposed to one another. Can we co-exist on the same planet? Yes, as longas either side does not become aggressive toward others.But what of those who would come from within our own borders and strive to conquerus from within. What if those “elected” to represent the people are actually wolves insheep’s clothing with a design to fundamentally transform our nation into that of ourenemy? A lot can be learned by comparing the words of past enemy leaders with our own leadersof today.
 
Let’s look a few quotes of Vladimir Lenin :[2]
 
“Without a revolutionary theory, there cannot be a revolutionary movement.”“The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstonesof taxation and inflation.”“The best way to destroy the capitalist system is to debauch the currency.”“It is true that liberty is precious - so precious that it must be rationed”“Under socialism all will govern in turn and will soon become accustomedto no one governing.”“No amount of political freedom will satisfy the hungry masses”
 
 And how about Karl Marx :[3]
 
“Democracy is the road to socialism.”“In a higher phase of communist society... inscribe on its banners: fromeach according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->