No statue for Robert E Lee but black ex-con Marion Barry gets one.

[ShootSpeeders]

[
The issue is using tax payer's funds to erect and maintain statues of murderous traitors .
.

Most people think lincoln is the murderous traitor. He started a war that killed 620,000 soldiers. The South just wanted to leave and then lincoln invaded and they had to defend themselves. You know nothing of history but what you were taught in third grade.

BTW - the south always claimed the tenth amendment gave states the right to secede and they have a good point.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Well, one was fighting against the US military, committing treason and things like that.

The other was just a mayor who smoked something the people who believe in small govt want to say you can't do. Oh, and a civil rights activist.

You don't see the difference?

I'm sure you do. One was white and one was black and you don't understand why they'd want a statue of a black person, right?

Lee wasn't treasonous. It was about sovereignty. Are you a moron or just completely intolerant?
Barry was a scam artist. Neosegregationist racist blacks bought into his scam.

Yeah right, unless of course you READ THE US CONSTITUTION, in which case he's a guilty as sin.

The constitution made the federal gov the culprit.

And how on earth do you figure that one out? Did the US govt go and fight against the US armed forces?

No!!!!!

Usurpation of state rights by an overreaching fed.

Even if you think this, it's still treason. I know you don't want it to be treason, I know you'll try and find any old loophole because it goes against your agenda, but the US Constitution is very specific about what treason is. If you are an American and you fight against the US govt it's treason. Nothing you can do or say can change this.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Lee wasn't treasonous. It was about sovereignty. Are you a moron or just completely intolerant?
Barry was a scam artist. Neosegregationist racist blacks bought into his scam.

Yeah right, unless of course you READ THE US CONSTITUTION, in which case he's a guilty as sin.

The constitution made the federal gov the culprit.

And how on earth do you figure that one out? Did the US govt go and fight against the US armed forces?

No!!!!!

Usurpation of state rights by an overreaching fed.

Even if you think this, it's still treason. I know you don't want it to be treason, I know you'll try and find any old loophole because it goes against your agenda, but the US Constitution is very specific about what treason is. If you are an American and you fight against the US govt it's treason. Nothing you can do or say can change this.

It's not treason if their allegiance is to an entirely different country. George Washington was an American patriot, not a british traitor.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yeah right, unless of course you READ THE US CONSTITUTION, in which case he's a guilty as sin.

The constitution made the federal gov the culprit.

And how on earth do you figure that one out? Did the US govt go and fight against the US armed forces?

No!!!!!

Usurpation of state rights by an overreaching fed.

Even if you think this, it's still treason. I know you don't want it to be treason, I know you'll try and find any old loophole because it goes against your agenda, but the US Constitution is very specific about what treason is. If you are an American and you fight against the US govt it's treason. Nothing you can do or say can change this.

It's not treason if their allegiance is to an entirely different country. George Washington was an American patriot, not a british traitor.

Well, yes, if they were from Germany or something then it wouldn't have been treason. However in 1861 the South was still a part of the USA. It never actually left. The Confederates declared, but it never actually happened. So they were still Americans and still committing treason.

Again, nothing you can say can change this fact.

 

[Asclepias]

Yeah right, unless of course you READ THE US CONSTITUTION, in which case he's a guilty as sin.

The constitution made the federal gov the culprit.

And how on earth do you figure that one out? Did the US govt go and fight against the US armed forces?

No!!!!!

Usurpation of state rights by an overreaching fed.

Even if you think this, it's still treason. I know you don't want it to be treason, I know you'll try and find any old loophole because it goes against your agenda, but the US Constitution is very specific about what treason is. If you are an American and you fight against the US govt it's treason. Nothing you can do or say can change this.

It's not treason if their allegiance is to an entirely different country. George Washington was an American patriot, not a british traitor.

Bullshit. Washington was a traitor to the British. He was a British subject educated in British schools. He spent more of his life as a British citizen than an american. He commanded British troops in the French and Indian war as a British general. The ****** spoke with a British accent. If he had of lost he would have been hanged as a traitor.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

The constitution made the federal gov the culprit.

And how on earth do you figure that one out? Did the US govt go and fight against the US armed forces?

No!!!!!

Usurpation of state rights by an overreaching fed.

Even if you think this, it's still treason. I know you don't want it to be treason, I know you'll try and find any old loophole because it goes against your agenda, but the US Constitution is very specific about what treason is. If you are an American and you fight against the US govt it's treason. Nothing you can do or say can change this.

It's not treason if their allegiance is to an entirely different country. George Washington was an American patriot, not a british traitor.

Well, yes, if they were from Germany or something then it wouldn't have been treason. However in 1861 the South was still a part of the USA. It never actually left. The Confederates declared, but it never actually happened. So they were still Americans and still committing treason.

Again, nothing you can say can change this fact.

Nope. The south seceded just as the colonies did. They became their own country.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

The constitution made the federal gov the culprit.

And how on earth do you figure that one out? Did the US govt go and fight against the US armed forces?

No!!!!!

Usurpation of state rights by an overreaching fed.

Even if you think this, it's still treason. I know you don't want it to be treason, I know you'll try and find any old loophole because it goes against your agenda, but the US Constitution is very specific about what treason is. If you are an American and you fight against the US govt it's treason. Nothing you can do or say can change this.

It's not treason if their allegiance is to an entirely different country. George Washington was an American patriot, not a british traitor.

Bullshit. Washington was a traitor to the British. He was a British subject educated in British schools. He spent more of his life as a British citizen than an american. He commanded British troops in the French and Indian war as a British general. The ****** spoke with a British accent. If he had of lost he would have been hanged as a traitor.

You just hate anybody who is white.

 

[Asclepias]

And how on earth do you figure that one out? Did the US govt go and fight against the US armed forces?

No!!!!!

Usurpation of state rights by an overreaching fed.

Even if you think this, it's still treason. I know you don't want it to be treason, I know you'll try and find any old loophole because it goes against your agenda, but the US Constitution is very specific about what treason is. If you are an American and you fight against the US govt it's treason. Nothing you can do or say can change this.

It's not treason if their allegiance is to an entirely different country. George Washington was an American patriot, not a british traitor.

Bullshit. Washington was a traitor to the British. He was a British subject educated in British schools. He spent more of his life as a British citizen than an american. He commanded British troops in the French and Indian war as a British general. The ****** spoke with a British accent. If he had of lost he would have been hanged as a traitor.

You just hate anybody who is white.

Bullshit. John Brown's my nigga. This is the mofo that needs a statue.

 

[frigidweirdo]

And how on earth do you figure that one out? Did the US govt go and fight against the US armed forces?

No!!!!!

Usurpation of state rights by an overreaching fed.

Even if you think this, it's still treason. I know you don't want it to be treason, I know you'll try and find any old loophole because it goes against your agenda, but the US Constitution is very specific about what treason is. If you are an American and you fight against the US govt it's treason. Nothing you can do or say can change this.

It's not treason if their allegiance is to an entirely different country. George Washington was an American patriot, not a british traitor.

Well, yes, if they were from Germany or something then it wouldn't have been treason. However in 1861 the South was still a part of the USA. It never actually left. The Confederates declared, but it never actually happened. So they were still Americans and still committing treason.

Again, nothing you can say can change this fact.

Nope. The south seceded just as the colonies did. They became their own country.

They TRIED to secede, but they didn't.

The Colonialists were traitors, but they got away with it because they won the war.

The Confederates were traitors and they lost.

They betrayed the country they were a part of, seceding illegally is treason no matter how you want to dress it up.

You could look on treason positively or negatively.

For example in the Catalan issue, no doubt those who are doing things to get independence are committing treason. That doesn't mean they shouldn't do it. In fact I support their treason.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Usurpation of state rights by an overreaching fed.

Even if you think this, it's still treason. I know you don't want it to be treason, I know you'll try and find any old loophole because it goes against your agenda, but the US Constitution is very specific about what treason is. If you are an American and you fight against the US govt it's treason. Nothing you can do or say can change this.

It's not treason if their allegiance is to an entirely different country. George Washington was an American patriot, not a british traitor.

Well, yes, if they were from Germany or something then it wouldn't have been treason. However in 1861 the South was still a part of the USA. It never actually left. The Confederates declared, but it never actually happened. So they were still Americans and still committing treason.

Again, nothing you can say can change this fact.

Nope. The south seceded just as the colonies did. They became their own country.

They TRIED to secede, but they didn't.

The Colonialists were traitors, but they got away with it because they won the war.

The Confederates were traitors and they lost.

They betrayed the country they were a part of, seceding illegally is treason no matter how you want to dress it up.

You could look on treason positively or negatively.

For example in the Catalan issue, no doubt those who are doing things to get independence are committing treason. That doesn't mean they shouldn't do it. In fact I support their treason.

Nope. They seceded and were overrun by the north. If Lee, et al, had attempted, as americans, to undermine the USA they'd be guilty of treason. But just as the colonials did, the south had established themselves as a nation state and fought to preserve that status.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Even if you think this, it's still treason. I know you don't want it to be treason, I know you'll try and find any old loophole because it goes against your agenda, but the US Constitution is very specific about what treason is. If you are an American and you fight against the US govt it's treason. Nothing you can do or say can change this.

It's not treason if their allegiance is to an entirely different country. George Washington was an American patriot, not a british traitor.

Well, yes, if they were from Germany or something then it wouldn't have been treason. However in 1861 the South was still a part of the USA. It never actually left. The Confederates declared, but it never actually happened. So they were still Americans and still committing treason.

Again, nothing you can say can change this fact.

Nope. The south seceded just as the colonies did. They became their own country.

They TRIED to secede, but they didn't.

The Colonialists were traitors, but they got away with it because they won the war.

The Confederates were traitors and they lost.

They betrayed the country they were a part of, seceding illegally is treason no matter how you want to dress it up.

You could look on treason positively or negatively.

For example in the Catalan issue, no doubt those who are doing things to get independence are committing treason. That doesn't mean they shouldn't do it. In fact I support their treason.

Nope. They seceded and were overrun by the north. If Lee, et al, had attempted, as americans, to undermine the USA they'd be guilty of treason. But just as the colonials did, the south had established themselves as a nation state and fought to preserve that status.

Firstly, seceding is treason if done without the consent of the country.

So the rest of your fantasy doesn't matter. They committed treason.

I know how much you want this to be true, but the problem is you can only successfully secede from a country IF YOU WIN THE WAR or the other country lets you go.

Catalonia has seceded from Spain, they declared independence. So, why doesn't anyone accept their independence?

Also, the laws of the USA are what are important here. The Confederates were seen as US citizens by the US government and therefore committed treason as defined by the US government.

Since the South lost, and ended up back in the USA, they therefore committed treason. Those AMERICANS who support the Confederacy are supporting treason. Again, there's no way out of this. If a Russia supported the Confederacy, they wouldn't have committed treason. A Russian now who flies the confederate flag is not supporting treason.

 

[Asclepias]

Even if you think this, it's still treason. I know you don't want it to be treason, I know you'll try and find any old loophole because it goes against your agenda, but the US Constitution is very specific about what treason is. If you are an American and you fight against the US govt it's treason. Nothing you can do or say can change this.

It's not treason if their allegiance is to an entirely different country. George Washington was an American patriot, not a british traitor.

Well, yes, if they were from Germany or something then it wouldn't have been treason. However in 1861 the South was still a part of the USA. It never actually left. The Confederates declared, but it never actually happened. So they were still Americans and still committing treason.

Again, nothing you can say can change this fact.

Nope. The south seceded just as the colonies did. They became their own country.

They TRIED to secede, but they didn't.

The Colonialists were traitors, but they got away with it because they won the war.

The Confederates were traitors and they lost.

They betrayed the country they were a part of, seceding illegally is treason no matter how you want to dress it up.

You could look on treason positively or negatively.

For example in the Catalan issue, no doubt those who are doing things to get independence are committing treason. That doesn't mean they shouldn't do it. In fact I support their treason.

Nope. They seceded and were overrun by the north. If Lee, et al, had attempted, as americans, to undermine the USA they'd be guilty of treason. But just as the colonials did, the south had established themselves as a nation state and fought to preserve that status.

They didnt have permission to secede and thats why they got beat into submission.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

It's not treason if their allegiance is to an entirely different country. George Washington was an American patriot, not a british traitor.

Well, yes, if they were from Germany or something then it wouldn't have been treason. However in 1861 the South was still a part of the USA. It never actually left. The Confederates declared, but it never actually happened. So they were still Americans and still committing treason.

Again, nothing you can say can change this fact.

Nope. The south seceded just as the colonies did. They became their own country.

They TRIED to secede, but they didn't.

The Colonialists were traitors, but they got away with it because they won the war.

The Confederates were traitors and they lost.

They betrayed the country they were a part of, seceding illegally is treason no matter how you want to dress it up.

You could look on treason positively or negatively.

For example in the Catalan issue, no doubt those who are doing things to get independence are committing treason. That doesn't mean they shouldn't do it. In fact I support their treason.

Nope. They seceded and were overrun by the north. If Lee, et al, had attempted, as americans, to undermine the USA they'd be guilty of treason. But just as the colonials did, the south had established themselves as a nation state and fought to preserve that status.

Firstly, seceding is treason if done without the consent of the country.

So the rest of your fantasy doesn't matter. They committed treason.

I know how much you want this to be true, but the problem is you can only successfully secede from a country IF YOU WIN THE WAR or the other country lets you go.

Catalonia has seceded from Spain, they declared independence. So, why doesn't anyone accept their independence?

Also, the laws of the USA are what are important here. The Confederates were seen as US citizens by the US government and therefore committed treason as defined by the US government.

Since the South lost, and ended up back in the USA, they therefore committed treason. Those AMERICANS who support the Confederacy are supporting treason. Again, there's no way out of this. If a Russia supported the Confederacy, they wouldn't have committed treason. A Russian now who flies the confederate flag is not supporting treason.

Nope. The south were loyal to their states first just as the colonists were loyal to their colonies. Neither were acting to undermine their states/colonies. They were acting to protect their sovereignty.
You're indoctrinated.

 

[frigidweirdo]

It's not treason if their allegiance is to an entirely different country. George Washington was an American patriot, not a british traitor.

Well, yes, if they were from Germany or something then it wouldn't have been treason. However in 1861 the South was still a part of the USA. It never actually left. The Confederates declared, but it never actually happened. So they were still Americans and still committing treason.

Again, nothing you can say can change this fact.

Nope. The south seceded just as the colonies did. They became their own country.

They TRIED to secede, but they didn't.

The Colonialists were traitors, but they got away with it because they won the war.

The Confederates were traitors and they lost.

They betrayed the country they were a part of, seceding illegally is treason no matter how you want to dress it up.

You could look on treason positively or negatively.

For example in the Catalan issue, no doubt those who are doing things to get independence are committing treason. That doesn't mean they shouldn't do it. In fact I support their treason.

Nope. They seceded and were overrun by the north. If Lee, et al, had attempted, as americans, to undermine the USA they'd be guilty of treason. But just as the colonials did, the south had established themselves as a nation state and fought to preserve that status.

They didnt have permission to secede and thats why they got beat into submission.

Well it's not why they got beaten, they could have won. But yes, they didn't have permission.

Personally this irritates me that people need to have permission from people that want to control them.

Like in Spain right now. The arrogant Spanish government demands that they control these people, doesn't give a damn about these people, and yet lords over them.

 

[Asclepias]

Well, yes, if they were from Germany or something then it wouldn't have been treason. However in 1861 the South was still a part of the USA. It never actually left. The Confederates declared, but it never actually happened. So they were still Americans and still committing treason.

Again, nothing you can say can change this fact.

Nope. The south seceded just as the colonies did. They became their own country.

They TRIED to secede, but they didn't.

The Colonialists were traitors, but they got away with it because they won the war.

The Confederates were traitors and they lost.

They betrayed the country they were a part of, seceding illegally is treason no matter how you want to dress it up.

You could look on treason positively or negatively.

For example in the Catalan issue, no doubt those who are doing things to get independence are committing treason. That doesn't mean they shouldn't do it. In fact I support their treason.

Nope. They seceded and were overrun by the north. If Lee, et al, had attempted, as americans, to undermine the USA they'd be guilty of treason. But just as the colonials did, the south had established themselves as a nation state and fought to preserve that status.

Firstly, seceding is treason if done without the consent of the country.

So the rest of your fantasy doesn't matter. They committed treason.

I know how much you want this to be true, but the problem is you can only successfully secede from a country IF YOU WIN THE WAR or the other country lets you go.

Catalonia has seceded from Spain, they declared independence. So, why doesn't anyone accept their independence?

Also, the laws of the USA are what are important here. The Confederates were seen as US citizens by the US government and therefore committed treason as defined by the US government.

Since the South lost, and ended up back in the USA, they therefore committed treason. Those AMERICANS who support the Confederacy are supporting treason. Again, there's no way out of this. If a Russia supported the Confederacy, they wouldn't have committed treason. A Russian now who flies the confederate flag is not supporting treason.

Nope. The south were loyal to their states first just as the colonists were loyal to their colonies. Neither were acting to undermine their states/colonies. They were acting to protect their sovereignty.
You're indoctrinated.

They had no sovereignty and were taught that lesson in clear and concise terms.

 

[Asclepias]

Well, yes, if they were from Germany or something then it wouldn't have been treason. However in 1861 the South was still a part of the USA. It never actually left. The Confederates declared, but it never actually happened. So they were still Americans and still committing treason.

Again, nothing you can say can change this fact.

Nope. The south seceded just as the colonies did. They became their own country.

They TRIED to secede, but they didn't.

The Colonialists were traitors, but they got away with it because they won the war.

The Confederates were traitors and they lost.

They betrayed the country they were a part of, seceding illegally is treason no matter how you want to dress it up.

You could look on treason positively or negatively.

For example in the Catalan issue, no doubt those who are doing things to get independence are committing treason. That doesn't mean they shouldn't do it. In fact I support their treason.

Nope. They seceded and were overrun by the north. If Lee, et al, had attempted, as americans, to undermine the USA they'd be guilty of treason. But just as the colonials did, the south had established themselves as a nation state and fought to preserve that status.

They didnt have permission to secede and thats why they got beat into submission.

Well it's not why they got beaten, they could have won. But yes, they didn't have permission.

Personally this irritates me that people need to have permission from people that want to control them.

Like in Spain right now. The arrogant Spanish government demands that they control these people, doesn't give a damn about these people, and yet lords over them.

I enjoy the fact it happened to the southern losers. Other people that want to secede should be granted permission as long as they arent trying to bring slavery back.

I have a buddy over there in Catalonia now. They even have their own language.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Well, yes, if they were from Germany or something then it wouldn't have been treason. However in 1861 the South was still a part of the USA. It never actually left. The Confederates declared, but it never actually happened. So they were still Americans and still committing treason.

Again, nothing you can say can change this fact.

Nope. The south seceded just as the colonies did. They became their own country.

They TRIED to secede, but they didn't.

The Colonialists were traitors, but they got away with it because they won the war.

The Confederates were traitors and they lost.

They betrayed the country they were a part of, seceding illegally is treason no matter how you want to dress it up.

You could look on treason positively or negatively.

For example in the Catalan issue, no doubt those who are doing things to get independence are committing treason. That doesn't mean they shouldn't do it. In fact I support their treason.

Nope. They seceded and were overrun by the north. If Lee, et al, had attempted, as americans, to undermine the USA they'd be guilty of treason. But just as the colonials did, the south had established themselves as a nation state and fought to preserve that status.

Firstly, seceding is treason if done without the consent of the country.

So the rest of your fantasy doesn't matter. They committed treason.

I know how much you want this to be true, but the problem is you can only successfully secede from a country IF YOU WIN THE WAR or the other country lets you go.

Catalonia has seceded from Spain, they declared independence. So, why doesn't anyone accept their independence?

Also, the laws of the USA are what are important here. The Confederates were seen as US citizens by the US government and therefore committed treason as defined by the US government.

Since the South lost, and ended up back in the USA, they therefore committed treason. Those AMERICANS who support the Confederacy are supporting treason. Again, there's no way out of this. If a Russia supported the Confederacy, they wouldn't have committed treason. A Russian now who flies the confederate flag is not supporting treason.

Nope. The south were loyal to their states first just as the colonists were loyal to their colonies. Neither were acting to undermine their states/colonies. They were acting to protect their sovereignty.
You're indoctrinated.

It doesn't matter where they thought their loyalties lay.

The simple fact is that under US LAW, they committed treason. Spinning it any which way doesn't make it right.

I'm not indoctrinated at all. If you feel the need to say such things, it must be that you're struggling with your weak argument.

If an American declares themselves independent of the US (ie, not a US citizen) and then commits a crime, do they not actually commit the crime because they're not a US citizen?

Or to ask another way, if a Mexican kills someone, have they not committed a crime under US law?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Nope. The south seceded just as the colonies did. They became their own country.

They TRIED to secede, but they didn't.

The Colonialists were traitors, but they got away with it because they won the war.

The Confederates were traitors and they lost.

They betrayed the country they were a part of, seceding illegally is treason no matter how you want to dress it up.

You could look on treason positively or negatively.

For example in the Catalan issue, no doubt those who are doing things to get independence are committing treason. That doesn't mean they shouldn't do it. In fact I support their treason.

Nope. They seceded and were overrun by the north. If Lee, et al, had attempted, as americans, to undermine the USA they'd be guilty of treason. But just as the colonials did, the south had established themselves as a nation state and fought to preserve that status.

They didnt have permission to secede and thats why they got beat into submission.

Well it's not why they got beaten, they could have won. But yes, they didn't have permission.

Personally this irritates me that people need to have permission from people that want to control them.

Like in Spain right now. The arrogant Spanish government demands that they control these people, doesn't give a damn about these people, and yet lords over them.

I enjoy the fact it happened to the southern losers. Other people that want to secede should be granted permission as long as they arent trying to bring slavery back.

I have a buddy over there in Catalonia now. They even have their own language.

Well, there's that moral issue too. I can't say I feel sorry for the South.

However I've supported Kosovan independence, I was there, I was in a protest march a year before they gained independence. Do I like Islam? No, not at all. Did I support the trade in body parts the KLA were taking part in? No.

However I also understand that the Serbs were not treating the Kosovan Albanians as they should have been doing.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Nope. The south seceded just as the colonies did. They became their own country.

They TRIED to secede, but they didn't.

The Colonialists were traitors, but they got away with it because they won the war.

The Confederates were traitors and they lost.

They betrayed the country they were a part of, seceding illegally is treason no matter how you want to dress it up.

You could look on treason positively or negatively.

For example in the Catalan issue, no doubt those who are doing things to get independence are committing treason. That doesn't mean they shouldn't do it. In fact I support their treason.

Nope. They seceded and were overrun by the north. If Lee, et al, had attempted, as americans, to undermine the USA they'd be guilty of treason. But just as the colonials did, the south had established themselves as a nation state and fought to preserve that status.

Firstly, seceding is treason if done without the consent of the country.

So the rest of your fantasy doesn't matter. They committed treason.

I know how much you want this to be true, but the problem is you can only successfully secede from a country IF YOU WIN THE WAR or the other country lets you go.

Catalonia has seceded from Spain, they declared independence. So, why doesn't anyone accept their independence?

Also, the laws of the USA are what are important here. The Confederates were seen as US citizens by the US government and therefore committed treason as defined by the US government.

Since the South lost, and ended up back in the USA, they therefore committed treason. Those AMERICANS who support the Confederacy are supporting treason. Again, there's no way out of this. If a Russia supported the Confederacy, they wouldn't have committed treason. A Russian now who flies the confederate flag is not supporting treason.

Nope. The south were loyal to their states first just as the colonists were loyal to their colonies. Neither were acting to undermine their states/colonies. They were acting to protect their sovereignty.
You're indoctrinated.

It doesn't matter where they thought their loyalties lay.

The simple fact is that under US LAW, they committed treason. Spinning it any which way doesn't make it right.

I'm not indoctrinated at all. If you feel the need to say such things, it must be that you're struggling with your weak argument.

If an American declares themselves independent of the US (ie, not a US citizen) and then commits a crime, do they not actually commit the crime because they're not a US citizen?

Or to ask another way, if a Mexican kills someone, have they not committed a crime under US law?

If the intent was to undermine the north then your have treason, perhaps. But just as the colonists had no intention of overrunning the UK but rather desired to free themselves from British shackles, the south tried to do the same regarding an overbearing Fed.
Attaining sovereignty is not the equivalent of overthrow. The south wasn't overthrowing the USA.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

I know you'll try and find any old loophole because it goes against your agenda, but the US Constitution is very specific about what treason is. If you are an American and you fight against the US govt it's treason. Nothing you can do or say can change this.

No liar, that's not what the constitution says. It says "Treason against the united states shall consist only of waging war against them". Does not say US govt. THINK