"No government is respectable which is not just. Without unspotted purity of public faith, without sacred public principle, fidelity, and honor, no machinery of laws, can give dignity to political society." Daniel Webster
Treason (tri:z'n) n. an attempt to overthrow by illegal means the government to which a person owes allegiance; the act or attempted act of working for the enemies of the state; betrayal of trust, disloyalty (to a cause, friend, etc.). - New Webster's Dictionary
With the aiding and abetting of the current federal administration, mainland China has begun, in earnest, the economic, military and political conquest of the United States. The Chinese are smart. They have already won the media war. They have already conquered the executive branch of the U.S. government. They are poised to hijack a major American seaport in Long Beach, Calif.
They have already modernized their nuclear weapons technology and missile delivery system. They have already nurtured nuclear weapons alliances with Pakistan and Iran, supplying those nations with nuclear technology and expertise. In so doing, they have already pushed India into a preemptive nuclear defense mode and have triggered dangerous nuclear testing on both sides of the India-Pakistan border.
They have already purchased the American electoral process. They have already bought and paid for the Democratic Party. They have already co-opted the Oval Office and rewarded President Clinton's backers with lavish economic rewards. These backers, in turn, stuffed Democratic National Committee (DNC) coffers full of soft-money campaign cash.
If this not be treason, then what be it?
Treason is a nasty word. The concept has become archaic. It no longer seems to be an understandable concept in this age of feel-good, globalist, New World Order types who take a dim view of such outdated concepts as "sovereign borders" or "national heritage." Originally, under English law, "high treason" was once so broad a term that it was used until well into the 19th century to justify punishing all sorts of people who were arbitrarily judged to be "enemies of the monarch."
England used charges of "treason" as a weapon against revolutionary-minded colonists in the late 18th century. When it became impossible to find juries that would convict anyone of treason as the English monarchy fell into deep disfavor on this side of the pond, the use of military force ensued and the American Revolution was born.
That is why the Constitution presents a far narrower interpretation of "treason" and states: "No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open court." Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall made use of this provision in 1807 while adjudicating the trial of Aaron Burr, who was charged with treason for allegedly plotting to establish an independent nation in the newly acquired Louisiana Territory.
Burr was acquitted because the prosecution could not prove Burr guilty of "an overt act of levying war."
However, that is not the case with the current Chinese disaster. China has missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons aimed at U.S. cities. China has provided Pakistan and Iran with nuclear capability, and Pakistan has already flexed its nuclear muscles in the form of tests that came on the heels of India's nuclear testing. India tested its nuclear weapons, feeling the heat from China's advanced weapons delivery capability made possible by U.S. help, most notably from Loral, an ultra-rich U.S. defense contractor and leading manufacturer of satellite equipment and high technology.
China is most certainly capable of "levying war" against almost anyone it wants, including the mighty United States. President Clinton has been "levying war" against people in Iraq, the Balkans and even against some Americans that he has referred to as "domestic terrorist groups." Waco and Oklahoma City have stained his administration. Sexual hijinks aside, the act of "levying war" is soon about to happen, with the Oval Office right at ground zero. It is time for Americans to act.
From Treason to Dictatorship
On May 14, President Clinton tried to sneak past an executive order while in England. The original White House web page version of this "EO" had neither an EO number, nor any indication that the document's language had even originated in this country [ensuing versions of the EO on that web page did add a number, 13083, and changed its origin to Washington, D.C., but only after alert Internet-literate patriots fished out the original draft and squirted it into cyberspace].
The lack of a number sent up a red flag among most patriot newsgroups and bulletin boards. Overwhelmingly, the fact that a number had been left off that EO sent Americans the message that this might be the first crack in the administration's poise, and that a forceful seizure of power might be imminent.
Forest Durland, owner of a lively patriotic Web page http://www.uhuh.com, was instantly alarmed, stating: "Please take this [EO] seriously, folks. Our Constitution and its inherent Bill of Rights are about to suffer another serious setback. We are about to lose it!
"On May 14, President Clinton signed an Executive Order that gives federal regulators power over state and local governments. This is just about as anti-Constitution as it can get. You just don't do that.
"It will be the end to America as we old-timers once knew it. If you think it's bad now, think what it will be June 14. That is when it will automatically become law if Congress doesn't stop it.
"The time-honored tradition of allowing a presidential EO to "become law" stretches back to the Lincoln administration, when, in 1861, President Lincoln issued the first-ever such "executive order" that essentially suspended all powers of Congress after the Southern states seceded. That first-ever EO has never been rescinded. President Franklin Roosevelt wrote out EOs in order to illegally seize gold from U.S. citizens in a desperate attempt to pull the nation out of a floundering depression in the 1930s.
Overall, more than 13,000 such "EOs" have been issued by presidents, and most become "law" if Congress does not intervene in 30 days.Is this yet one more way to keep Americans pretty much in the dark and set the stage for martial law in the days ahead?
Loral's High Treason
Loral and its CEO, Bernard Schwartz, have committed the old-fashioned "high treason" once fancied by English law. Loral has given China the ability of "levying war" against anyone, including the United States. Loral also gave the DNC $2 million in campaign donations, which had the effect of bankrolling the 1996 Clinton-Gore reelection campaign.
The company gave those sums because of the economic gains to be made by beating U.S. technology companies - especially space technology companies - to the potentially massive Chinese marketplace. Satellites are Loral's specialty, and Schwartz wanted to save big bucks by having Chinese missiles put those satellites into orbit. However, a failed Chinese launch destroyed a multimillion-dollar Loral satellite, and the company bypassed all manner of national security protocols to "help" the Chinese solve their missile guidance problems.
In so doing, Loral triggered the current nuclear arms spiral on the Indian subcontinent. India, the world's largest democracy with a population of nearly one billion, also has a no-nonsense, hard-line Hindu government in place. India has long feared China's steadily growing nuclear arsenal and ability to easily hit Indian cities that are in range of Chinese missiles.
Hindus and Muslims usually don't get along, either, and neighboring Pakistan is a Muslim nation. But, oops! China has been selling missile and nuclear weapons technology to the Pakistanis since 1991 - missile and nuclear technology acquired, directly or indirectly, from the United States.
Proof exists with Loral's own documents. On http://www. freerepublic.com/forum/a302091.htm, their own web page, is an April 1996 letter to Liu Jiyuan of the China Aerospace Corporation, the state-owned space agency for China, from Wah L. Lim., Senior Vice President of Loral Space Systems. This letter states, in part:
"Thank you very much for your letter dated April 15, 1996. I feel truly honored for having been asked to chair the independent review committee (I.R.C.) that you organized to review the failure of the Intelsat 708 launch on a LM-3B. The Great China Wall, Intelsat and Space Systems/Loral's team had worked very hard over the past three years preparing for that launch. The failure is heartbreaking to all of us. My sympathy also goes to the family of those who lost their lives and to those who got hurt due to the accident.
"... Launching satellites is a very difficult process; every element has to work just right. There is no margin for error. ... The I.R.C. will do everything in its power to complete the review and recommendation in a timely manner. Equally important, I believe, is the task of using this failure as an opportunity to insure that the Long March launch vehicles have the best reliable record in the future ..."
Excerpts of this letter appeared in the New York Times in its Saturday, June 6 editions, as reporters Elaine Sciolino and Jeff Gerth continue to pursue this tale of widespread U.S. corporate and government treason. However, the most damaging aspects of the story have been purposely published on Saturdays in order to soften public outcry. So far, the Saturday releases have done just that -not many folks are even aware of this story and its staggering national-security implications.
Treason? How much more proof does the American public need?
Yes, It Does Get Worse
On its web page, http://www.softwar.net/, the high-tech watchdog group Softwar has unleashed a devastating report citing frenzied attempts by the U.S. administration to rein in Chinese efforts to stock up on massive supercomputers necessary for nuclear weapons research. This story, now belatedly banging around U.S. broadcast network newsrooms, is damning not only to President Clinton's "team," but to other U.S. companies besides Loral who have given the Chinese the capability to destroy this continent.
In fact, U.S.-Chinese negotiations over the inspection and verification of U.S. supercomputer exports to China have broken down. Softwar claims to have obtained an e-mail addressed to Bill Reinsch, U.S. Director of the Bureau of Export Administration (BXA), in which U.S. negotiators detail a failed Jan. 20 meeting with Chinese government officials.
The meeting concerned before-and-after inspections of supercomputers sold to China. U.S. officials want to verify these computers are not being used for nuclear weapons research. Chinese representatives rejected U.S. efforts and were described as "unwilling" to discuss any verification inspections.
In 1993, President Clinton decided to loosen export restrictions on supercomputers sold to China. However, some of the U.S. supercomputer exports were diverted by the communist government into military research on nuclear weapons development. Last year, Bill Reinsch testified before the Senate that there were at least 47 supercomputers sold to China and perhaps "dozens more." Congress reacted by passing stricter regulations on supercomputer exports to China, requiring end-use inspections to verify the intended user was not military.
However, the barn door was shut long after all the horses ran off into the sunset.
Since then, the Chinese have stalled and hemhawed around, ducking these inspections. Sound familiar? Remember how the Iraqis kept ducking U.N. inspectors searching for "weapons of mass destruction" that almost set off another Persian Gulf War? Duplicity, it seems, exists everywhere in U.S. foreign policy.
"The People's Republic of China has no intention of cooperating with any verification effort, before or after the sale," Softwar concluded. "The Clinton administration cannot verify the exact location of these systems in China."
The great result of all this is that our beloved president is rewarding Chinese conniving, and his own administration's corruptive tendencies, with a state visit to Tianenmen Square as this month's edition of Media Bypass goes to press.
Enough is enough. Impeach and impale, in that order. Please. Before it's too late.
Freedom School is not affiliated with the links on this page - unless otherwise stated.
Freedom School information served for educational purposes only, no liability assumed for use. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. Freedom School does not consent to unlawful action. Freedom School advocates and encourages one and all to adhere to, support and defend all law which is particularly applicable.