Treason Revisited
Published on Rosenberg Fund for Children (http://www.rfc.org)
Treason Revisited [1]
Submitted by Robert Meeropol on Thu, 05/30/2013
Tweet [2]
The subject of treason came up in a rerun of the television series I was watching last week.
Naturally, the heroes got involved in foiling a terrorism plot. While being given classified
government information during a briefing they were told that if they divulge anything about it they
would be committing treason. I didn’t think anything of this at the time, perhaps because recently
I’ve heard similar statements on several other TV shows.
Later that night it dawned on me: “Since when does divulging classified information constitute
treason?” I’ve studied what is defined as treason under the United States legal system because
many people mistakenly believe my parents were charged with Treason rather than Conspiracy to
Commit Espionage. I addressed the definition in my memoir, An Execution in the Family [3]:
“Treason and politics are inextricably entwined…. The Founding Fathers recognized this and defined
the crime in our Constitution to minimize its potential abuse for political purposes. The Constitution
defines treason as follows: ‘Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war
against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort,’ ” (page 271).
Nothing in this definition includes revealing classified information. It could be argued that doing so
aids the enemy, but prior court rulings have made it clear that a defendant must give aid directly. In
other words, you can’t commit treason merely by publishing classified information. This is probably
why Bradley Manning was not charged with treason. (My parents weren’t charged with treason
because, among other things, they were accused of aiding the USSR when it was our ally during
World War II.)
I wonder whether the repeated broadcast of this erroneous definition of treason is part of a
government propaganda campaign to demonize those who disclose classified information. My
suspicions are aroused because I’m aware that the government has influenced the content of
television shows since the McCarthy period. Such a campaign today would fit together well with the
massive expansion of what is considered classified which began during the Bush administration. It
also fits perfectly with the Obama administration’s prosecution of Bradley Manning, who like my
parents is charged under the Espionage Act of 1917, but is portrayed by government officials as a
terrorist.
The attack on those who divulge previously secret government information goes beyond Bradley
Manning. Here’s what Christopher Hedges wrote in Truthdig on May 19th [4] in response to the
recent “AP scandal”:
“Seizing the AP phone logs is part of the corporate state’s broader efforts to silence all voices that
defy the official narrative…. The person or persons who provided the classified information to the AP
will, if arrested, most likely be prosecuted under the Espionage Act. That law was never intended
when it was instituted in 1917 to silence whistle-blowers. And from 1917 until Barack Obama took
office in 2009 it was employed against whistle-blowers only three times, the first time against Daniel
Ellsberg for leaking the Pentagon Papers in 1971. The Espionage Act has been used six times by the
Obama administration against government whistle-blowers….The government’s fierce persecution of
the press—an attack pressed by many of the governmental agencies that are arrayed against
WikiLeaks, Bradley Manning, Julian Assange and activists such as Jeremy Hammond—dovetails with
the government’s use of the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force to carry out the
assassination of U.S. citizens; of the FISA Amendments Act, which retroactively makes legal what
under our Constitution was once illegal—the warrantless wiretapping and monitoring of tens of
millions of U.S. citizens; and of Section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act, which
116 Pleasant St, Suite 348, Easthampton, MA 01027
[email protected] | Phone (413)529-0063 | Fax: (413)529-0802
Page 1 of 2
Treason Revisited
Published on Rosenberg Fund for Children (http://www.rfc.org)
permits the government to have the military seize U.S. citizens, strip them of due process and hold
them in indefinite detention….”
Given this, is it so far-fetched to believe that the government might also be attempting to brainwash
the public using primetime television? Of course, crime shows seldom accurately reflect the
constitutional rights of defendants, so it is possible that misrepresenting what actions constitute
treason is not part of a conscious government plan.
However, we’re unlikely to discover if my suspicions are justified anytime soon. This is especially so
because any such campaign is probably classified and anyone who exposes it would likely be
charged under the Espionage Act and treated as if he or she were a traitor.
---------------To receive a notification whenever there is a new post to Out on a Limb Together,
subscribe now [5].
Copyright © 2008 Rosenberg Fund for Children, Inc.
Privacy Policy
Source URL: http://www.rfc.org/blog/article/1349
Links:
[1] http://www.rfc.org/blog/article/1349
[2] http://twitter.com/share
[3] http://www.rfc.org/memoir
[4] http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/rise_up_or_die_20130519/
[5] http://www.rfc.org/blog/feed
116 Pleasant St, Suite 348, Easthampton, MA 01027
[email protected] | Phone (413)529-0063 | Fax: (413)529-0802
Page 2 of 2