thedrifter
07-15-04, 07:36 AM
07-12-2004
While Americans Vacillate, Soldiers Die
By J. David Galland
Only days after the vicious attacks on America and its sovereignty on Sept. 11, 2001, President Bush pleaded for the support of the nation in defending our homeland.
The president calmly explained that the task in bringing terrorists to justice would be long, difficult, and not without cost. With that, he earned the approval of the voters as well as almost 100 percent of our elected officials in Washington, D.C. He got the nod to go after and destroy – whatever it took – the perpetrators of 9/11.
Remember the poignant scene at the U.S. Capitol? Even before the embers began to wane in New York City, at the Pentagon and in the rural Pennsylvania countryside, a never-before seen event unfolded on the steps of the Capitol building. There, a bipartisan group of Senators and Representatives gathered to sing patriotic songs, including “God Bless America.”
Today, however, many of those who sang that night are vehemently opposed to the president and criticize his efforts to preserve our nation so that it can continue as the benchmark of freedom on earth. Those who disingenuously supported Bush nearly three years ago are now attempting to pull the rug out from under the very effort to preserve our democracy, sustain freedom, and kill terrorists.
Why? Don’t believe them when they say it is because Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) were not readily located in Iraq. Their reasons are quite different.
Many people would observe that the harsh criticism leveled at the administration is merely politics as usual. With a presidential election only months away, it appears that a sizable segment of society accepts and expects this form of politically motivated sniping and backstabbing.
I strongly and emphatically disagree. With the United States still at war with the Iraqi insurgents, the remnants of the Taliban, and a reconstituted al Qaeda terror network, such business as usual is dangerous to our national security in general and our military forces in particular.
I would also assert that under a conservative interpretation of federal law, this bitter name-calling, innuendo, and near-defamation approaches the definitions of both treason and sedition.
Those of you who are not lawyers are encouraged to read the definition of treason at the “Lectric Law Library” website. In particular, I call attention to the phrase, “in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort.” Does this sound familiar?
In addition, when I read of or watch opponents of the president uttering criticisms that would clearly seem aimed at lowering the morale of the U.S. military, I begin to believe that it might be necessary to consider re-instituting the U.S. Sedition Act of May 16, 1918. Such legal provisions to nip internal erosion of the war effort actually stem from the Sedition Act of 1798.
More than once in the history of our great country, it has been necessary for Congress and/or the Executive Branch to instigate legal measures to protect the nation from within. Recall, President Abraham Lincoln was forced to suspend the writ of habeas corpus – one of the most sacrosanct legal pillars in western law – because of the security needs of prosecuting the Civil War.
I would submit that it may well be time to examine the need for such strict measures again.
J. David Galland is Deputy Editor of DefenseWatch. He can be reached at defensewatch02@yahoo.com. Send Feedback responses to dwfeedback@yahoo.com.
http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=DefenseWatch.db&command=viewone&op=t&id=562&rnd=61.22581127154947
Ellie
While Americans Vacillate, Soldiers Die
By J. David Galland
Only days after the vicious attacks on America and its sovereignty on Sept. 11, 2001, President Bush pleaded for the support of the nation in defending our homeland.
The president calmly explained that the task in bringing terrorists to justice would be long, difficult, and not without cost. With that, he earned the approval of the voters as well as almost 100 percent of our elected officials in Washington, D.C. He got the nod to go after and destroy – whatever it took – the perpetrators of 9/11.
Remember the poignant scene at the U.S. Capitol? Even before the embers began to wane in New York City, at the Pentagon and in the rural Pennsylvania countryside, a never-before seen event unfolded on the steps of the Capitol building. There, a bipartisan group of Senators and Representatives gathered to sing patriotic songs, including “God Bless America.”
Today, however, many of those who sang that night are vehemently opposed to the president and criticize his efforts to preserve our nation so that it can continue as the benchmark of freedom on earth. Those who disingenuously supported Bush nearly three years ago are now attempting to pull the rug out from under the very effort to preserve our democracy, sustain freedom, and kill terrorists.
Why? Don’t believe them when they say it is because Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) were not readily located in Iraq. Their reasons are quite different.
Many people would observe that the harsh criticism leveled at the administration is merely politics as usual. With a presidential election only months away, it appears that a sizable segment of society accepts and expects this form of politically motivated sniping and backstabbing.
I strongly and emphatically disagree. With the United States still at war with the Iraqi insurgents, the remnants of the Taliban, and a reconstituted al Qaeda terror network, such business as usual is dangerous to our national security in general and our military forces in particular.
I would also assert that under a conservative interpretation of federal law, this bitter name-calling, innuendo, and near-defamation approaches the definitions of both treason and sedition.
Those of you who are not lawyers are encouraged to read the definition of treason at the “Lectric Law Library” website. In particular, I call attention to the phrase, “in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort.” Does this sound familiar?
In addition, when I read of or watch opponents of the president uttering criticisms that would clearly seem aimed at lowering the morale of the U.S. military, I begin to believe that it might be necessary to consider re-instituting the U.S. Sedition Act of May 16, 1918. Such legal provisions to nip internal erosion of the war effort actually stem from the Sedition Act of 1798.
More than once in the history of our great country, it has been necessary for Congress and/or the Executive Branch to instigate legal measures to protect the nation from within. Recall, President Abraham Lincoln was forced to suspend the writ of habeas corpus – one of the most sacrosanct legal pillars in western law – because of the security needs of prosecuting the Civil War.
I would submit that it may well be time to examine the need for such strict measures again.
J. David Galland is Deputy Editor of DefenseWatch. He can be reached at defensewatch02@yahoo.com. Send Feedback responses to dwfeedback@yahoo.com.
http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=DefenseWatch.db&command=viewone&op=t&id=562&rnd=61.22581127154947
Ellie