For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world-rulers of this darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in high places.  Ephesians 6:12


 But know this, that in the last days grievous times shall come.
 For men shall be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, haughty, railers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
 without natural affection, implacable, slanderers, without self-control, fierce, no lovers of good,
traitors, headstrong, puffed up, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of Yahweh;

  2 Timothy 3:1-4



High Treason
{From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia}

High treason, broadly defined, is an action which is grossly disloyal to one's country or sovereign. Participating in a war against one's country,
attempting to overthrow its government, and attempting to kill its head of state are perhaps the best known examples of high treason.

Historically, high treason was differentiated from petty treason, which was the act of killing a lawful superior (such as a servant killing his master or mistress). It was, in effect, considered a more serious degree of murder. The concept of petty treason gradually faded, however, and today, use of the word "treason" generally refers to the same thing as "high treason". The law of some countries does not distinguish the two — for example, the Constitution of the United States defines treason as something which, historically, would have been called high treason.


Article Three of the United States Constitution

Section 3: Treason
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."

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. In Cramer v. United States, the 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 only required to prove 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.



The question is?  Are these men (along with others) working treason against the United States of America?  Whatever happened to the spirit of men like Patrick Henry?  Have we forgotten our purpose?  Have we turned our country over to infidels and perverts?



The American Revolution
Patrick Henry's “Liberty or Death” Speech
March 23, 1775


Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just G-d who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged. Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable — and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come!
It is vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, peace, peace; but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?

Forbid it, Almighty G-d — I know not what course others may take; but as for me — give me liberty or give me death!

Treason: Gillars v. United States, 182 F.2d 962

Treason is thankfully a rarely litigated crime in the U.S., but the closest cases seem to be the Axis propaganda cases. Consider Gillars v. United States, 182 F.2d 962 (D.C. Cir. 1950), which upheld the treason conviction of Mildred Gillars, a U.S. citizen who worked for the Nazi propaganda service during World War II, and who recorded the “Vision of Invasion” broadcast while working for the Nazis:

This program was a radio play of an hour’s length broadcast in the month before the Allied invasion of Europe. The scenes alternated between soldiers on a ship in the invasion and the home of an American soldier. The ship is sunk, the soldier is killed and he appears in a dream of his mother. The general theme is expressed in the following colloquy between the American mother and father:

“Mother: But everyone says the invasion is suicide. The simplest person knows that. Between seventy and ninety percent of the boys will be killed or crippled for the rest of their lives.

“Father: What can we do about it?

“Mother: Bah. We could have done a lot about it. Have we got a government by the people or not? Roosevelt had no right to go to war.”

Witnesses who participated in the broadcast testified that the purpose was to prevent the invasion of Europe by telling the American people and soldiers that an attempted invasion would be risky with respect to the lives of the soldiers.


When anyone in a high US Government position defends the aberrant behavior of homicidal terrorists, they are actually condoning their malevolent activities. They are in turn, guilty of treason.  Those individuals posted in the above picture are behaving themselves very badly.  It seems apparent to the average citizen, these men (I use the term loosely) are espousing hatred against the USA.  Shouldn't they be supporting the USA as duly elected officials?   Or?  Should they support the enemies of the USA?  Read the following oath of office taken by elected officials to offices of President, Senator and Congressman. They swear or affirm their allegiance to the USA!


Oath of Office for
President of the United States,
U.S. Senator and U.S. Representative

President of the United States

United States Constitution

Article 2

Section 1.

The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same term, be elected, as follows:

Paragraph 7

Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

U.S. Senator & U.S. Representative

House of Representatives (Oath or Affirmation)

I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me G-d. This oath is mandated by Article VI of the Constitution and its text is set by statute (5 U.S.C., Sec. 3331).

US Senate (Oath or Affirmation)

(Same Rule III Oaths The oaths or affirmations required by the Constitution and prescribed by law shall be taken and subscribed by each Senator, in open Senate, before entering upon his duties.)

Oath Required By The Constitution And By Law To Be Taken By Senators:

"I, A__ B__, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me G-d." (5 U.S.C. 3331.)


Now you tell me in all good conscience, these individuals (along with many of their companions in office) have followed this oath of office to the letter!  Have they supported the enemy?  Have they given aid and comfort to the enemy?  Have they spoken against this countries official policies, constitution, and in particular the office of the President of these United States of America?  Have these individuals displayed treasonous behavior or not? 


In war against the enemies of the USA, everyone should be in total support of their government, especially those in high government offices.  I urge you to write your Senators and Congressmen.  Write your elected officials and complain about the treasonous behavior of these elected officials.  These people were elected by the people, and for the people.  They must answer to those who elected them to office.  If the tables are turned in this regard, we will have returned to *tyrannical rule, and everything has been in vain!


*ty·ran·ni·cal (tĭ-răn'ĭ-kl, tī-) also ty·ran·nic (-răn'ĭk)
1. Of or relating to a tyrant or tyranny: a tyrannical government.
2. Characteristic of a tyrant or tyranny; despotic and oppressive: a tyrannical supervisor.


If you have any comment on the above article, write: Truth On The Net Form Mail.



Yours in Yahshua, Hawke




 ©  Truth on the Net Dot Com 2006-217