I mean seriously. We used to treat traitors a lot differently in this country. I have serious doubts about the ability of this Union to hold when we can’t execute some of the simplest and most essential laws necessary to the survival of a nation. Being a traitor bears the death penalty in, pretty much, every country, “civilized” or not, military personnel or otherwise. She was a traitor. She should be hanged, or I should say she should have been hanged by now. But she wasn’t. Why? Well the most popular theory I can find is that the Justice Department under Richard Nixon was too scared to bring her to trial for fear that she might win or that the trail would be an O.J. Simpson type of affair.
So, the government was afraid to uphold a law spelled out in the Constitution. (Treason is defined in the Constitution folks!) Which tells me, as a citizen, one thing and one thing only. If I want to try and break up the Union, or carve my own little country out of the U.S., or propose anarchy, then as long as I can do it while I have the government’s balls in my pocket, then I can walk away with Texas scot-free. I think I’d be able to do it way easier under the current administration than I would have been able to under the last one, but heck who knows.
And another thing: how come some half-crazed Vietnam vet hasn’t hauled off and shot her yet? Seriously, we have to lose John Lennon to a crazy fan with a gun, but Jane Fonda can’t be offed? Seriously, America? Come on! I mean hell, if someone did shoot her they might even be able to get the “she f*&king deserved it, your honor” defense to work. Given the right judge and the right prosecutors, it might work. I wonder when she’ll be in Texas next, or even better Oklahoma. Hell, someone should shoot her ass next time she’s out of the country, especially somewhere that we don’t have an extradition treaty with. I’m just saying, talking about all this is just talking.
Then again, it would be nice to see the Justice Department step up and do their f-ing jobs. Maybe actually try the B-I, and if she gets off then good for her, but I’m just say she should have her day in court and if need be, which I think needs be, she should be hanged for treason.
First off, the Constitution does *not* define treason as an offense, it only places restrictions on what can be considered treason and says that only the traitor can be punished for it (aka his/her family can’t be punished as well). Treason is legally defined by 18 U.S.C. § 2381 which says “whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”
Second of all, while I wouldn’t call her loyal or a patriot, she still never took any overt action against the United States. You can rant and rave all day about how horrible America is, but if you don’t *do* something, you aren’t guilty of treason (that part /is/ in the Constitution, see “overt Act”). That’s just free speech. The Justice Department isn’t willing to try her for treason for the simple fact that she isn’t guilty of it. While her words may have been seditious, she took no traitorous action.
As to why someone else hasn’t shot her, perhaps our veterans realize that one of the reasons they fought is so people like her can speak up without fear of getting shot in the street.
Are you kidding? She didn’t just exercise free speech by speaking out against the war. She very clearly “adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort”. Just read the post imprisonment reports of the U.S. vets who she visited while they were in North Vietnamese P.O.W. camps. Seriously, did you even do a Google search on this one? I mean I’m not claimed to have been around when this happened, but from all I’ve seen of this and read about her actions, she is very clearly prosecutable for treason.
On another note. I don’t advocate killing people because they exercise free speech. I’m advocating the prosecution, imprisonment, and execution of people who aid and abet the enemies of the United States of America. I’m pretty sure Ms. Fonda falls into the category of the treasonous.
A) Asking someone who quotes the U.S.C. if they did a Google search seems odd. No one has that thing memorized.
B) Looking through reports and papers, it seems clear that any accusation of action taken beyond going to North Vietnam, taking pictures, giving speeches, and visiting the POWs is either in serious question or has been refuted (see the “slips of paper” incident and it’s denial by the supposed victims). So yes, she created propaganda for the NVA, but that can be said about a lot of people.
Including Walter Cronkite, as it happens. General Giap, commander of the NVA, explicitly lists (in his book, /Military Art of People’s War: Selected Writings/) Cronkite’s broadcasts after the (from their perspective failed) Tet offensive as inspiring them away from a negotiated surrender and toward holding out for the American public to win the war for them. Especially since those broadcasts included false information making it seem like the NVA had done better than it actually had (such as the report of taking the embassy–some troops on embassy grounds were killed, but it was never taken). His mistaken words could be considered to have contributed to the American death toll rising from 10,000 to 50,000+ due to protractment, and yet there are no calls for treason for him.
In the end, yes, Fonda’s speech was seditious, and her actions were questionable at best. I’m not even going to say she’s innocent of criminal acts–she very well may be criminally liable for the things she said and did over there, and I would venture many of her statements would *not* be protected by the First Amendment. But “consummate dumbass” describes her far better than “traitor.” She did not leak military secrets, she did not give them money or material, she did not interfere with military operations. She did nothing that in any *real* way aided or abetted North Vietnam.
Especially not compared to the other 18 people who have been convicted of treason in the history of the US. The only two people to be convicted of treason because of propaganda did direct radio broadcasts as /employees/ of Nazi stations, and their comments were true propaganda, not the anti-war musings of an ignorant hippie. Gillard had to give 5 straight years of broadcasts before she gave a single one that made a treason charge stick. Best was a dumbass and represented himself in court against 10 treason charges–go figure, they all stuck–so no good comparison there, but the point is nothing Fonda said was anywhere near the treason level.
C) While I agree that Fonda should have been prosecuted for *something* because of her actions, I strongly believe that the bar for treason was set as high as it was for a reason, and I would rather her go without the brand of traitor if it means laws like the Patriot Act can’t invoke the charge whimsically. Because there are always those in power who would like to be able to remove people they don’t like, and the charge of treason is the old standby for getting rid of those people.
To be concise:
Jane Fonda was treasonous, however, she is not guilty of Treason.