Us government and terrorist......suppressive decent?

Question

Are "traitors" treated the same by US government as well as terriost organizations?

Well at least are there similarities

Answer 1

No, or the staff at the NYT would be at Gitmo.

Answer 2

You misunderstand. You are only seeing the illusion of opposition maintained by those actually on the same team, with the same objectives as the government. Ever since the 2004 election, when we had a "choice" between one member of Yale's death cult "Skull and Bones Club" or another, we have been under a plan implemented by many. These many are playing roles of pretend opposition to con us into thinking that we still have a participatory government. Think about it--the one with the better GPA wins an election that was hardly contested by his "opponent." They don't need to suppress dissent because they know it already is powerless to accomplish anything.

Say hello to the new boss, the same as the old boss.

Answer 3

LOL @ JennoftheJungle's answer. Luv it!

But to the question:

No, it's not. American citizens convicted of treason are still citizens and therefore given certain rights in the constitution.

'The United States Constitution, Article Three, Section Three defines treason and its enforcement.

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 Constitution defines treason as specific acts, namely "levying War against [the United States], or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort". A contrast is therefore maintained with the English law, whereby a variety of crimes, including conspiring to kill the King or "violating" the Queen, were punishable as treason. In Ex Parte Bollman (1807), the Supreme Court ruled that "there must be an actual assembling of men, for the treasonable purpose, to constitute a levying of war".

Under English law effective during the Ratification of the U.S. Constitution, there were essentially five species of treason. Of the five, the Constitution adopted only two: levying war and adhering to enemies. Omitted were species of treason involving encompassing (or imagining) the death of the king, certain types of counterfitting and fornication with women in the royal family of the sort that would call into question the parentage of successors. One important distinction is that the encompassing the death species of treason was most used by the English government to silence political opposition and was expressly excluded by the authors. In fact, James Wilson wrote the original draft of this section, and he was involved as a defense attorney for some accused of treason against the Patriot cause.

Section Three also requires the testimony of two different witnesses on the same "overt" act, or a confession by the accused in open court, to convict for treason. This rule was derived from an older British law, the Treason Act 1695. In Cramer v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that "every act, movement, deed, and word of the defendant charged to constitute treason must be supported by the testimony of two witnesses". In Haupt v. United States, however, the Supreme Court found that two witnesses are not required to prove intent; nor are two witnesses required to prove that an overt act is treasonable. The two witnesses, according to the decision, are required to prove only that the overt act actually occurred.

Punishment for treason may not "work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person" so convicted. The descendants of someone convicted for treason could not, as they were under English law, be considered "tainted" by the treason of their ancestor. Furthermore, Congress may confiscate the property of traitors, but that property must be inheritable at the death of the person convicted.'

Those that are arrested for terrorism do not recieve the rights of an American citizen. For instance, if our police forces within the US arrest someone on terrorist charges, they do not read the Miranda Rights to them. They do not have the right to remain silent, etc.

Answer 4

Nah, ist deal with people who disagree with them by sawing their heads off. Very very few ist whom we have captured are .