brian

They werent "peace activists"
They were traitors who should never have been allowed back in to the US.

thweatt

: WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Two American peace activists who went to Iraq
: (news - web sites) as "human shields" against the war now face fines
: of up to $10,000 from the U.S. Treasury Department (news - web sites)
: for violating a ban on travel to Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s
: Iraq.

They broke the law. They got fined. BFD. They should have thought about
that before they went to Iraq.

--
--
William "Dave" Thweatt
Robert E. Welsh Postdoctoral Fellow
Chemistry Department
Rice University
Houston, TX
thweatt@ruf.rice.edu
dave.thweatt@us.army.mil

brian

They have publicly and without compulsion confessed to what should be rightfully called "Treason".

Your gov't wouldnt let your citizens support and protect your enemies either.

William> They broke the law. They got fined. BFD. They should have thought about
William> that before they went to Iraq.

What enumerated power under the Constitution does the
Federal government have to restrict the travel of the
citizens of the United States?


--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in talk.politics.misc...)

gogarty

In article <3F3A8F6E.F9F0F3C9@erols.com>, olinshooter@erols.com says...


rightfully


Your definition of treason is remarkably broad and flexible. Iraq was not
"the enemy" and we were not at war -- our war, let me remind you -- when those
people went there.

And as I recall, it was Canada that got a bunch of Americans out of Iran at
the time of the hostage crisis, at great risk to the Canadians.

brian

And this is relevant to these traitors in what way?

genomeman

Nowhere. Did they get fined for merely "traveling" to Iraq?

I didn't think so.

thweatt

: William> William PF (war_criminal@gov.con) wrote:
: >> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Two American peace activists who went to Iraq
: >> (news - web sites) as "human shields" against the war now face fines
: >> of up to $10,000 from the U.S. Treasury Department (news - web sites)
: >> for violating a ban on travel to Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s
: >> Iraq.
: William> They broke the law. They got fined. BFD. They should have thought about
: William> that before they went to Iraq.

: What enumerated power under the Constitution does the
: Federal government have to restrict the travel of the
: citizens of the United States?

The power to make treaties.

--
--
William "Dave" Thweatt
Robert E. Welsh Postdoctoral Fellow
Chemistry Department
Rice University
Houston, TX
thweatt@ruf.rice.edu
dave.thweatt@us.army.mil

thweatt

: >
: >
: >They have publicly and without compulsion confessed to what should be : rightfully
: >called "Treason".

: Your definition of treason is remarkably broad and flexible. Iraq was not
: "the enemy" and we were not at war -- our war, let me remind you -- when those
: people went there.

Wrong. We had been at war with Iraq for twelve years.

--
--
William "Dave" Thweatt
Robert E. Welsh Postdoctoral Fellow
Chemistry Department
Rice University
Houston, TX
thweatt@ruf.rice.edu
dave.thweatt@us.army.mil

gogarty

In article <bheaui$b9n$7@joe.rice.edu>, thweatt@rice.edu says...


No, you are wrong. In fact, there never was a war because Congress did not
declare war. There was a military action that ended, at least as far as Iraq
was concerned. Since there was no war, there could be no peace treaty. The
Korean War still exists too, by the way. Indeed, I think there may be a whole
bunch of unresolved conflicts out there. Are we at war with all of them and is
travel restricted to all of them? Grenada, Somalia, Panama, Cuba, Serbia,
Vietnam, North Korea...?