President AND Congress Engage In High Treason

In case you missed this innocuous Reuters report:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The defense bill President Barack Obama will sign into law on Wednesday contains a new provision that would pay Taliban fighters who renounce the insurgency, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin said on Tuesday.

I'm going to break this down for you all.

In order for this "war" to end, the government has come to the conclusion that it must pay the Taliban to fight for us.

Why?

Because since the Taliban’s inception, they have been nothing but a mercenary force disguised as a militant religious group.

Let us not forget who created the Taliban. It was the US very own CIA that funded and trained the original group of warlords in a bid to prevent Russia from acquiring access to oil in Afghanistan. If you look at old pictures of the Taliban, they are all carrying US arms.

Now we are at war with an enemy of our own creation – and a war of our own creation – which has devolved to a point where we have now concluded the proper way to end it is to simply start buying their loyalty back. Of course, this means actively paying Taliban members with US tax dollars taken from the very troops who are engaged in fighting them.

While the war is a total joke and needs to end immediately, what the US government is engaged in is nothing short of high treason against the State. Aiding and abetting our enemies on the field of battle is spelled out as high treason in the constitution, the only such crime to actually be spelled out in the constitution.

Our military leaders should be tried, convicted, and shot.

To put the report in context lets change the wording a little:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The defense bill President Barack Obama will sign into law on Wednesday contains a new provision that would pay Taliban fighters who renounce the insurgency..

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The defense bill President Barack Obama will sign into law on Wednesday contains a new provision that would pay Crips gang members who renounce the gang..


For those of you still not convinced:

US Constitution, Article III, section 3.

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.

The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.


The US government has decided its better to start funding our enemies than to simply withdrawal and defend our borders.

How about we start paying illegals not to come over the border?

How about we start paying drug smugglers not to smuggle drugs?

How about we start paying gang members not to be in a gang?

How about we start paying axe murders not to murder people with axes?



I have given my full opinion on my blog fascistsoup. I am unable to give my full opinion here due to forum rules against profanity.




I am a former US military gulf war veteran.


[edit on 29-10-2009 by mnemeth1]

Gen Petreus himself said that they did the same thing in the latter stages of the war in Iraq with great success. He contended that it was far more const effective to pay these people off than fight them. So maybe we should run his butt up the pole for treason, too, eh?

Man, that is the dumbest thing Ive ever heard. Does he really think that the jihadi's will just give up if you pay them? Its such crap. They will funnel the money elsewheres right into the hands of the enemy. Awesome.

And if Gen Petreus did this himself as well, he should be tried as well. YOU CANNOT GIVE MONEY TO THE ENEMY. It goes against the constitution of this country. If he believes this will work for terrorists, he is horribly mistaken. It might work for a couple, but for the vast majority they will say they quit, take the money, return to the war and repeat. Stupid as hell.

Edit: Shoulda read the op's post a little better

[edit on 29-10-2009 by dizzie56]

Originally posted by jtma508
Gen Petreus himself said that they did the same thing in the latter stages of the war in Iraq with great success. He contended that it was far more const effective to pay these people off than fight them. So maybe we should run his butt up the pole for treason, too, eh?

How about we pull our troops out, put them on our borders where they belong, and not pay them anything?

I know, its a pretty radical idea, but its worked before in our past.

Lets pretend I'm Muhamed, an active member of the Taliban insurgency. I hear on the shortwave that the US is going to pay Taliban fighters who renounce the insurgency. I'm running short on cash for ammo and I need some weapons upgrades. Hmmm, where could I get some quick dough?

Of course paying them works, they are mercenaries. We bought them in the past. Except this time they are actively engaged in fighting our own troops.

The US government is confiscating money from the troops by force through taxation, then handing that money to the very people who were just trying to kill them on the field of battle.

HIGH TREASON

I would rather spend a smaller amount of money to pay the Taliban off than having the war and get our troops the hell out of there. Aside from that, our entire government stinks.

[edit on 29-10-2009 by really]

1. Surely if the taliban are paid

2. The war ends

3. We pull out our troops

4. The Afgans are left in charge

4. 20-30 years passes

5. We start all over again

I personaly dont think this is the right course of action, it is a waste of life already lost, a waste of money (that we dont have) because it is not a long term answer (unless we keep paying) which means this war will never be over, a waste of life to come.

Will this bloodshed ever be over?

Live long ,regards S_G

Seems to me that the U.S. Military is gambling on the idea that the taliban army is made up of primarily conscripts who are fighting just to put food on the table. I had heard this rumor before. If this is the case, then it's a brilliant move. Hire the enemy's soldiers right out from under them.

It is also a risky move. If they hire the wrong people then suddenly we are providing a back door funding to the very enemy we are fighting. This is pretty easy to counter, though. Everybody we hire gets moved onto a US controlled base and kept somewhat isolated there. No plan is perfect, but this seems about on par with ancient roman tactics such as what they did in britania, etc.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

How about we pull our troops out, put them on our borders where they belong, and not pay them anything?

I know, its a pretty radical idea, but its worked before in our past.

But then they get to keep the oil, right?

Was that not 'realy' what this was all originaly about?

Should have just paid for their oil in the first place, would have save ourselves a lot of bloodshed.

Originally posted by xSMOKING_GUNx

Originally posted by mnemeth1

How about we pull our troops out, put them on our borders where they belong, and not pay them anything?

I know, its a pretty radical idea, but its worked before in our past.

But then they get to keep the oil, right?

Was that not 'realy' what this was all originaly about?

Should have just paid for their oil in the first place, would have save ourselves a lot of bloodshed.

That's true. It is all about the oil. In the context of Afghanistan, it's all about a pipeline for the oil. Let our troops die for corporate America. What a wonderful world.

Originally posted by xSMOKING_GUNx

Originally posted by mnemeth1

How about we pull our troops out, put them on our borders where they belong, and not pay them anything?

I know, its a pretty radical idea, but its worked before in our past.

But then they get to keep the oil, right?

Was that not 'realy' what this was all originaly about?

Should have just paid for their oil in the first place, would have save ourselves a lot of bloodshed.

Oil?

You know the US has massive reserves that US companies are barred from extracting right?

The US has enough oil to fuel itself should our leadership decide to let anyone drill for oil where ever they like.

We also have absolutely massive reserves of natural gas and oil shale.

Our reliance on foriegn oil is a relatively new thing in terms of history and it is solely caused by government regulations.

My roommates family owns a large reserve of land in OK with a ton of oil beneath it which they are currently barred from extracting and there are a lot more people like his family out there that could bring a ton of US oil to market, but are barred from doing so.

Of course, sending troops to die over oil is totally unethical and fascist anyways, so even if the US didn't have its own oil the point is moot. Good countries don't invade other countries for resources, only evil empires conduct business in such a fashion.

I personally don't want to be part of an evil empire.



[edit on 29-10-2009 by mnemeth1]

reply to post by mnemeth1


Why exactly do you think they are barred from extracting that oil? Are you familiar with the diamond trade? Same deal. The people making the money from oil (I mean the BIG money) have to control inventory and availability. It's a scam and always has been. TPTB are up to their butts in this scam. Go read Gen Smedley Butler's take on war. 'nough said.

And this is different because......?
This kind of payout policy has been going on forever. The CIA doles out money all the time, has been for decades. Big deal.
Does it work? Maybe, maybe not.
This is the principle reason Bin Laden escaped Afghanistan, we paid local warlords to catch him. They kept the money, dawdled around, he escaped
Does money buy loyalty, probably not!.

Originally posted by jtma508
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

Why exactly do you think they are barred from extracting that oil? Are you familiar with the diamond trade? Same deal. The people making the money from oil (I mean the BIG money) have to control inventory and availability. It's a scam and always has been. TPTB are up to their butts in this scam. Go read Gen Smedley Butler's take on war. 'nough said.

I'm well aware of this.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
Oil?

You know the US has massive reserves that US companies are barred from extracting right?

I am fully aware of that point, and so is everyone else.

But if you forcefully take and use other nations oil first then your own oil will be worth many times as much in the future.

You still have your own oil left when everyone else's has gone.

Regards S_G

Originally posted by xSMOKING_GUNx

Originally posted by mnemeth1
Oil?

You know the US has massive reserves that US companies are barred from extracting right?

I am fully aware of that point, and so is everyone else.

But if you forcefully take and use other nations oil first then your own oil will be worth many times as much in the future.

You still have your own oil left when everyone else's has gone.

Regards S_G

Are you serious or just a paid troll?

I won't pass judgment either way, on whether this was treason.
However, I will point out that the US has been doing this sort of thing for a long time. Look at Operation Paperclip, in 1945, where we brought over Nazi scientists to work for us, on rocket research and development. There were the same scientists that developed the V1 and V2 rockets that rained down on England and killed so many allied citizens.
Of course, of more recent affairs, there is the Iran Contra debacle, where the US sold weapons to Iran, an enemy of ours who held US hostages, to secure the hostage release, and to fund rebels to fight the Nicaraguan Sandinistas.

reply to post by mnemeth1


I totally agree it is treason, While it was effective for certain tribes in Iraq, this is Afghan, and they don’t need American Money they need jobs and other things. While Americans are losing their Jobs by the thousands everyday, we are paying these assclowns to not shoot at Soldiers? Fook that, pack it up come on home.... I use to believe the military was the last bastion of freedom in this country, but the current leadership has left me scratching my head... Is there no hope?


Disclaimer I fight in both Iraq and Afghan

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

I totally agree it is treason, While it was effective for certain tribes in Iraq, this is Afghan, and they don’t need American Money they need jobs and other things. While Americans are losing their Jobs by the thousands everyday, we are paying these assclowns to not shoot at Soldiers? Fook that, pack it up come on home.... I use to believe the military was the last bastion of freedom in this country, but the current leadership has left me scratching my head... Is there no hope?


Disclaimer I fight in both Iraq and Afghan

Thank you

3%

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Are you serious or just a paid troll?

I wish somebody would pay me! lol

You are getting me all wrong, It no longer is an issue why we went there in the first place.

I agree with you 100% that we need to bring our troops, freinds and relatives home.

And pay them? thats just a joke right?

Isnt money worthless when it comes down to it?

We can win a war by dishing out a few bits of green paper?

Bring em home and look after our own!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Regards S_G

This is nothing new.

Not to mention that this is far more effective than dropping bombs and shooting bullets, either way, we're still throwing money at them.

It should also be noted that you can't kill an entire system of religious and regional beliefs with bombs and bullets, no matter how hard we try.

Throwing actual cash money at them is also far more effective. Why do you think the "Surge" in Iraq was so effective, we bribed the various tribal and political leaders not to attack American assets.


Again, either way, weather we're throwing bombs and bullets, or hard cash, we're still just throwing money at them.