Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

TREASON!!!

Posted By: sm on 2008-11-02
In Reply to:

He tells you one thing and secretly does another -


http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/09/15/treason/


 


 




Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

treason

Wouldnt outing a CIA operative be classified as treason, especially in war time?  What are the penalties?  Wasnt it at one time death?  Rove..tsk..tsk..karma is catching up to you..what goes around comes around..


It is treason. nm
x
Really? Treason? Do you hear yourself?
dictionary first and after that, consult the constitution.
NY Times Accused of Treason.sm


Neocons Accuse “Liberal” New York Times of Treason
Monday June 26th 2006, 8:05 am

Michelle Malkin, neocon blogger and concentration camp advocate, has posted a spate of converted WWII posters on her site, taking the New York Times to task for reporting the news, albeit a year late.


According to Malkin and New York representative Peter King, the New York Times stands accused of treason “for reporting last week about a secret financial-monitoring program used to trace alleged terrorists” and disclosing “a secret domestic wiretapping program,” according to CBC News, never mind both programs violate the spirit and the letter of the Constitution. “No one elected The New York Times to do anything,” King told the New York Daily News. “They’re breaking the law to satisfy their own arrogant, liberal agenda.”


In Bushzarro world, newspapers are “elected” to report the news. If newspapers report the trashing of the Constitution, this is treason. In Malkin’s world, it follows that traitors should be thrown in concentration camps, especially if they resemble in any way Arabs or Muslims.


It would seem Mr. King and Malkin suffer from memory loss. It was Judith Miller’s “arrogant, liberal agenda” that brought us the neocon lies about illusory Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. As Antony Loewenstein writes for the Sydney Morning Herald, the “vast majority of [Miller’s] WMD claims came through Ahmed Chalabi, an indicted fraudster and one of the leading figures in the Iraqi National Congress (INC), the group keen to militarily overthrow Saddam. Miller relied on untested defectors’ testimonies (usually provided by Chalabi) to write several front-page stories on this information,” stories that did not pass the smell test at the time and have found the memory hole since.


Ahmed Chalabi, convicted bank fraudster installed as a deputy prime minister in Iraq, was a neocon darling. His Iraqi National Congress, created by the CIA, was the primary source of Judith Miller’s “journalism.” In short, Judith Miller was a hack for the neocons, thus making the New York Times a neocon conduit for lies and propaganda.


Even though the New York Times serves as a shameless shill for the “arrogant, liberal agenda” of the neocons, this does not change the fact the newspaper is protected under both the First Amendment and statutory procedure (see the Supreme Court case, Bartnicki v. Vopper). In 1971, the Supreme Court ruled in a per curiam decision that prior restraint (censorship) was not warranted in a government effort to stop the New York Times from publishing the Pentagon Papers. “There’s a tone of gleeful relish in the way they [the Bush neocons] talk about dragging reporters before grand juries, their appetite for withholding information, and the hints that reporters who look too hard into the public’s business risk being branded traitors,” Bill Keller, New York Times Executive Editor, told the Washington Post.


King and Malkin, of course, have nothing but contempt for Supreme Court rulings. It is irrelevant that NSA whistleblower Russell Tice (the source behind revelations published in the New York Times) is protected by federal law. King and Malkin believe the unitary decider and his Machiavellian operatives have the right to look through your financial, medical, and library records, listen in on your telephone calls, read your email, and sneak and peek your computer hard drive and while they’re at it rifle through your underwear drawer because “we are at war” with an enemy never sufficiently documented or designated, an enemy who worked for the CIA in Afghanistan and is not specifically “wanted in connection” with the nine eleven attacks, as his FBI wanted poster reveals.


Obviously, King and Malkin, and the whole of the neocon choir, believe the phony “war on terror,” rechristened the “long war”—i.e., it will last a century or more, or long enough to provide obscene profits for the death merchants—gives the “permanent revolution” Jacobins the right to trash the Constitution.


Quite naturally, this brings to mind Hitler’s Ermächtigungsgesetz, or Enabling Act, an element of the Reichstag Fire Decree nullifying the civil liberties of German citizens after the Reichstag was torched (a fire planned by Goebbels and executed by Göring, according to SA man Karl Ernst).


Bush, not unlike Hitler, feels he has the authority to by-pass Congress (mostly corporate purchased whores, so this is a moot point) and use the Constitution as a doormat where the unitary decider wipes off his shoes, mucky with the blood a few hundred thousand Iraqis.




Moral Treason: Who's guilty?

President Theodore Roosevelt, 1918:  To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.


Senator Robert A. Taft (also known as Mr. Republican), 1941 (after Pearl Harbor):  I believe that there can be no doubt that criticism in time of war is essential to the maintenance of any kind of democratic government..... Too many people desire to suppress criticism simply because they think it will give some comfort to the enemy.... If that comfort makes the enemy feel better for a few moments, they are welcome to it as far as I am concerned because the maintenance of the right of criticism in the long run will do the country more good than it will do the enemy, and it will prevent mistakes which might otherwise occur.


Treason!!! Get behind our President, you Judas!
nm
Treason? You have a real problem. It is STILL a
nm
Unpatriotic, Treason, Republican...
And the Answer is:  What 3 words are synonyms? 
"Traitor, terrorist, treason, liar, off with his head"
You think this happened only in one place?

http://blogs.reuters.com/trail08/2008/10/16/missouri-voter-sues-over-mccain-campaign-hate-speech/

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Grandmother_sues_McCain_for_hate_speech_1017.html

You could try googling "hate speech McCain rallies" and sift through the 516,000 hits yourself.