rather that a murderer be released from prison than a traitor go
unpunished: As our armed forces prove with their sacrifices,
freedom is more precious than life itself.
So that treason would no longer be used as a
purely political charge, the Founders of our nation gave us this
in Article III, Section 3 of our Constitution: "Treason
against the United States, shall consist only in levying War
against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid
[In my opinion,] Even by that narrowest of
definitions, Mr. John Walker Lindh has committed treason.
Can he be convicted? The Constitution continues:
"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." Perhaps Mr. Lindh would be man
enough to confess in open court what he has proclaimed in the
media, that he fully supports the terrorist actions taken
against our country by the forces with whom he fought.
Need he be executed? Not necessarily; and
personally, I hope not -- there's been enough bloodshed. The
most important thing, however, is not to set a disastrous
precedent by allowing treason to go unrecognized.
And when taking into account such "mitigating
factors" as Mr. Lindh's youth, consider that Captain Nathan
Hale was just one year older when he uttered his last words: "I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my
God bless our patriots. God have mercy on our