Aren't there still laws on the books against sedition? If not there should be. Why is it ok to give such great hope to those few who spread violence in the middle east?
2007-04-21 13:16:05 · 19 answers · asked by netjr 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Where does "free speech" and "sedition's" line cross? How far can one take "free speech" in this world and time of war?
By the way celtisax...enjoy your flag.
2007-04-21 13:23:37 · update #1
He is just an old fool and not deliberately seditious.
2007-04-21 13:22:10 · answer #1 · answered by vegaswoman 6 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Currently, there is no law which prohibits sedition. On a few occasions in United States history, like World War II and the Civil War, the United States did have laws that prohibited sedition. These laws were only in effect while the nation was in a state of war. Such laws are rare in the United States.
2007-04-21 20:53:32 · answer #2 · answered by msi_cord 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Spoken like a true fascist.
Why hasn't the Bush administration been tried for violating the constitution, or war crimes, or crimes against humanity?
Perhaps in your black and white view of the world, you define patriotism as those who follow their leaders without question. Perhaps you also believe the ends justify the means as well.
But who can blame you? The same tactics worked for Nazis, Mussolini, and Stalin.
Besides, he couldn't be charged with sedition as we have never officially declared war. As far as our laws go, this is just a "police action", which is also technically a violation of our laws.
~X~
2007-04-21 21:07:48 · answer #3 · answered by X 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No--there are no laws against "sedition." That term simply means that someone says something that those in power don't like.
And "anti-sedition" laws are thus nothing more than an effort to silence dissent. The correct term for that is not "anti-sedition." It is tyranny.
2007-04-21 20:52:10 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Maybe because what he said is true? Is America now so far down the road of Fascism that the truth should treated as Sedition.
Bush said he was bringing Freedom to Iraq, Now he is building walls around Baghdad. How does that sit in with Freedom.? The Freedom to roam? the freedom of association?
When are the Lemmings going to realize that this family had friendship links with Hitler and know nothing about Freedom??? WHEN????????
2007-04-21 20:39:13 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
sedition,, Bush does not wear a CROWN,, he is the ineffective president,, an unfortunate situation for the United States Government.. the "decider" not the "provider" of any solutions to the fiasco in Iraq, his invasion and occupation of the sovereign nation that was Iraq, is now a De facto Democracy..
2007-04-21 20:29:53 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
You may not like it but it's not sedition. It also echos the results of a poll taken of our military. Half of them say that success in Iraq is unlikely.
2007-04-21 20:51:29 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
oh he most definitely is!! but apparently, the very definition has changed...what reid and the rest of that reprehensible bunch are engaged in IS treason and sedition, and if you found a lawyer to take it, you just might have a case with teeth. but it's never going to happen...until a democrat is president and a republican dare utter what these pukes have been vomiting that is. then, seditious traitors will be everywhere...lol.
2007-04-21 20:29:21 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Harry Reid is a soft spoken and concerned American. His message was heard loud and clear. Turns out the Emperor has no cloths.
2007-04-21 20:52:12 · answer #9 · answered by GO HILLARY 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Free speech--Democrats can say anything they want. Sedition--When Democrats say it is. Usually, it's not one of them.
2007-04-21 20:32:14 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Republicans said the same thing about Bosnia during the Clinton administration. Get real.
2007-04-21 20:32:58 · answer #11 · answered by Gemini 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋