Treason or...

Panther · Post by **Panther** » Sat Apr 05, 2003 1:16 am

In light of the current happenings with some reporters in Iraq, I ask for opinions...

Gene DeMambro · Post by **Gene DeMambro** » Sat Apr 05, 2003 4:19 am

Can the authorities bar entry to the US and/or revoke citizenship to a natural born citizen?

Gene

Don Rearic · Post by **Don Rearic** » Sat Apr 05, 2003 11:59 am

From what I understand, Geraldo directed the cameraman to point the camera in the sand and he more or less outlined Iraq, Baghdad and then where the 101 was. From what I hear, the C/O of the Unit did not have a problem with that and everything is up in the air about it at the moment. The Pentagon can make a C/O change their mind as well.

I don't think Geraldo meant to do it in a way that would get anyone, he was there with them as well, injured or killed.

Arnett, on the other hand...should be charged.

Panther · Post by **Panther** » Sat Apr 05, 2003 2:17 pm

Don,

I saw the report and I've seen the fuzzed-out replays. If Geraldo mapped out merely the city of Baghdad and the 101st in the sand (which ALL reporters were specifically told not to give troop positions), I might go along with you. BUT, he mapped out other divisions as well as patrols he knew about and proceeded to start tell what they were going to do from his understanding. You say the CO didn't have a problem with it, the original report ended with the CO coming over rather irate, spreading the sand with his boot and ending the report right then! So... I don't think the CO was too happy with it.

Don Rearic wrote:Arnett, on the other hand...should be charged.

What do others thing of that? Should we hold these reporters accountable for their actions which harm us or our troops? How about "entertainers" who go on foreign soil and say/do anti-American things? Should they be held accountable? Is it treason? If yes, should they be charged or not allowed back in?

And the answer, Gene, is Yes... There is even precident fot it.

Don Rearic · Post by **Don Rearic** » Sat Apr 05, 2003 4:16 pm

Big Cat,

Just going by what I have read and heard so far, I heard the C/O did not have a problem with it. If it came down as you last posted, he should be ejected by the Gov and his employment terminated by FOX News. Sean Hannity was reporting something else the other day with regard to this, but he has told some woppers in the past (which is why he will probably not get as popular as Big Daddy Rush at the end of the day...).

If it came down as you stated, he should also be prohibited from ever participating in such a Gov Program or whatever in the future as well.

Charged with treason? I don't think so, treason is a horrible thing and Arnett is certainly guilty of giving aid and comfort to the enemy as Jane Fonda did during the Vietnam Conflict. But I don't think Geraldo is guilty of treason, just being sensational and incredibly stupid.

Gene DeMambro · Post by **Gene DeMambro** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 2:17 am

Really, Panther? Well you learn something new everyday....

Do you have more info, for a purely academic interest?

Gene

Kevin Mackie · Post by **Kevin Mackie** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 3:45 pm

The main phrase here is "intention to relinquish".

Being merely stupid does not show intent.

Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, states that U.S. citizens are subject to loss of citizenship if they perform certain acts voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Briefly stated, these acts include:

(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (1) INA);
(2) taking an oath, affirmation or other formal declaration to a foreign state or its political subdivisions (Sec. 349 (a) (2) INA);

(3) entering or serving in the armed forces of a foreign state engaged in hostilities against the U.S. or serving as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer in the armed forces of a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (3) INA);

(4) accepting employment with a foreign government if (a) one has the nationality of that foreign state or (b) a declaration of allegiance is required in accepting the position (Sec. 349 (a) (4) INA);

(5) formally renouncing U.S. citizenship before a U.S. consular officer outside the United States (sec. 349 (a) (5) INA);

(6) formally renouncing U.S. citizenship within the U.S. (but only "in time of war") (Sec. 349 (a) (6) INA);

(7) conviction for an act of treason (Sec. 349 (a) (7) INA).

Panther · Post by **Panther** » Mon Apr 07, 2003 12:29 am

Gene,

Look for info about "a man without a country"...

Don,

Well someone walked over and told him to stop. maybe it wasn't the CO... it wouldn't be the first time I was wrong... regardless, someone in uniform told him that it was a no-no and they smoothed out the sand. I haven't seen that part of the report since.

And I gotta say it...

Here we are debating a second or third rate reporter (at best, I'm being kind) who pulled something that at the very least was as dumb as a rock... while other reporters, who have done excellent and admirable jobs have lost their lives alongside the troops they were embedded with. BTW, Geraldo wasn't embedded as part of the reporter's program. I heard it was because he wanted the "freedom" to move between divisions to get the "big picture"... that's the only reason he had the knowledge of troop whereabouts that he did.

Gene DeMambro · Post by **Gene DeMambro** » Wed Apr 16, 2003 7:45 pm

Look for info about "a man without a country"...

I;ve read to story, and your directive pushed me to look it up agan. But it's a work of historical fiction.

I found this article. Patriot II's attack on citizenship, which lists many of the things Kevin wrote. And it goes into the history of denaturalizations.

Gene

Deep Sea · Post by **Deep Sea** » Wed Apr 16, 2003 8:24 pm

Hanoi Jane was in a class all by herself and if I remember correctly, it wasn't for her daddy's influence she would have been tried for trason, as she should have been. I don't think any American has come close to her antics in this war.

My opinion is that Geraldo acted out of stupidness and with ignorance for the sake of sensationalism rather than with the intent to aid and abet. For that he should NOT be tried for treason, rather I go along with other consequensis like job loss, etc. That's MY take. However, if what he did reveal resulted in actions against the US forces I would feel entirely less amicable about the situation.

As always in wartime it's loose lips sink ships, and that's what he had.

Treason or...

Is Geraldo Rivera guilty of treason?

Treason or...