Sheehan, Code Pinkers Break The Law

• August 6, 2006

Ugh…

AMMAN (JT) — A group of American anti-war hunger strikers are scheduled to arrive in Jordan today to meet with Iraqi parliamentarians to discuss peacemaking in the war-ravaged country.
The group, which includes peace activist Cindy Sheehan, have staged a month-long hunger strike in protest at the existence of American troops in Iraq.
“After 28 days of fasting, anti-war hunger strikers received a breakthrough victory for their sacrifice. Members of the Iraqi parliament invited fasters to join them to discuss their plans for peace in Iraq,” according to a press release received on Wednesday.
The Iraqi parliamentarians agreed to meet with the activists after their attempts to hold talks with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki during his recent visit to Washington were rebuffed.
The parliamentarians also expressed concern for the hunger strikers’ health.
In addition to Sheehan, whose son was killed in active service in Iraq last year, the group includes Retired Colonel Ann Wright, Iraq war veteran Geoffrey Millard, Politician/Writer Tom Hayden, CODEPINK co-founders Medea Benjamin, Jodie Evans, Gael Murphy and Diane Wilson.

It would seem to me that this visit is a direct violation of U.S. Code Title 18, Part I, Chapter 45 Section 953:

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Put bluntly, private American citizens are not allowed to discuss foreign policy matters with representatives of other countries. We elect politicians to represent this nation in the international community, and I don’t remember voting for Cindy Sheehan, Medea Benjamin or anyone else from Code Pink.
Also, for those Iraqi leaders who are worried about Cindy Sheehan’s health, given the size of her spare tire I think her all-ice cream diet is serving her just fine.

Tags: Asshats, Letters, National Heritage Area

http://Array Puzzlefeet

You’re right Rob, I was just pointing out the dependent clause that you must read with the beginning of the sentence. My block quote was not meant to be taken alone, but in conjunction with the rest of the sentence. Sorry if there was a misunderstanding but you have to read what is in my quote with the entire statement.

We aren’t in a controversy with the Iraqi government, Bush has set that policy. Where there is controversy is between US citizens and our own government on what we are doing in Iraq. There is a difference, Rob.
gawaine

I could be wrong, but I think the in-comment controversy is because Puzzle is reading this as an “and”, as opposed to an “or” – believing that all three clauses need to be met. Not trying to tell you what you think – but asking if this is why you’re making your statement.

On the other hand if the author is reading the law as a list, with the or after the last comma of the clause (but before the comma ending the clause):

with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof,
OR
in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States
OR
or to defeat the measures of the United States

Then you don’t have to satisfy all three clauses, just one. Is that the confusion? If so, does someone have a citation handy of a time this law was actually enforced that could make it clear, or a reading of similarly written laws, or even a just a law degree so they don’t have to preface their answer with IANAL? I think the or, after the Oxford comma, is understandable, but perhaps I’m just convinced by context.
Puzzlefeet

Gee rob, thanks for telling me what I think. so whenever you put up another post why don’t you just go ahead and write my response as well.

with your reasoning, Iraq is a puppet government of the US since apparently they are not as sovereign as many have claimed on this blog. How many times have we heard that there have been three democratic elections. But now you are saying that:

there are on-going disagreements and disputes as to how Iraq is to proceed forward and how America is to be a part of that.

So now you claim that Iraq can’t proceed without US approval.

The only one with a knee jerk reaction is you. While I agree that these people shouldn’t be there I doubt there will be any arrests, since Sean Penn and Jesse Jackson have never been arrested. My only point Rob was that you must read the entire sentence together including the dependent clauses and it is doubtful it applies to them.

I hardly think that Pres. Bush thinks it is in a controversy with Iraq. That would definitely be news to him.
robert108

P: Of course they are; it’s their avowed purpose. You didn’t know that?
Puzzlefeet

Not that I’m in favor of Sheehan and company being in Iraq at all, I don’t believe that it violates the statute you cited.

relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States,

I don’t believe that the US is in a dispute with the Iraqi government nor are they (Sheehan and company) trying to defeat the measures of the US.
http://bullwinkleblog.com/ bullwinkle

Jesse Jackson has been doing it for years and never been prosecuted. Traitor Kerry did it without going to jail. I doubt anyone but the idiots of the left will take the media whore and her commie friends seriously or charge them with a crime. The best possible outcome would be them being added to the no-fly list so they can’t bring their lunacy back here.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

Puzzle, go back and read the law carefully again.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

The bolded section is a list of things Americans may not do with relations to foreign governments.

They may not a) influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government b) communicate in relation to any disputes or controversies or c) work to defeat the measures of the United States.

And yes, America is in a controversy with Iraq. Iraq is a sovereign nation, and while the leadership of that country and this one may be on friendly terms there are on-going disagreements and disputes as to how Iraq is to proceed forward and how America is to be a part of that.

This law was expressly written so that the only parties to those disagreements are our elected leadership and the leaders in Iraq. Not Medea Benjamin and Cindy Sheehan.

Your knee-jerk reaction to defend these morons (couched as it is in tacit disapproval of what they’re doing) is a telling indication to me of your rank partisanship. Oh you make noises disapproval, but ultimately they’re undermining Bush and you love that. Even if it also undermines American foreign policy.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

Puzzle, the law must be taken in totality. We can just pay attention to the small parts you select.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Obviously Code Pink/Sheehan intends to infeluence agents of the Iraqi government.

And after all your griping about Iraq, are you really going to suggest that our dealings with the country aren’t a controversy for the U.S.?
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

Gee rob, thanks for telling me what I think. so whenever you put up another post why don’t you just go ahead and write my response as well.

Where did I tell you what to think? I’m just responding to the things you’re actually saying. If you think I’m wrong, please explain why.

with your reasoning, Iraq is a puppet government of the US since apparently they are not as sovereign as many have claimed on this blog. How many times have we heard that there have been three democratic elections. But now you are saying that:

there are on-going disagreements and disputes as to how Iraq is to proceed forward and how America is to be a part of that.

So now you claim that Iraq can’t proceed without US approval.

I am sitting here shaking my head and marveling at how I can make a very clear statement and how that statement can go sailing about five miles over your head.

Iraq and the United States are engaged in on going discussions and debates as to how that country will proceed. The very reasons these debates are taking place is because Iraq is a sovereign nation. If Iraq wasn’t a sovereign nation there would be no debating. Bush would just dictate how things are going to happen.

And yes, Iraq must consult the U.S. on how to go forward because a) we liberated the country and b) we have 130,000 or so troops in the country. For the forseeable future our foreign policy is entwined with theirs, so both nations must work together.

The only one with a knee jerk reaction is you. While I agree that these people shouldn’t be there I doubt there will be any arrests, since Sean Penn and Jesse Jackson have never been arrested. My only point Rob was that you must read the entire sentence together including the dependent clauses and it is doubtful it applies to them.

It does apply to them. The fact that our government is likely to enforce the law isn’t neither here nor there.

It is also illegal for newspapers to print illegally leaked government information, but the Justice Department doesn’t enforce that one either.

I hardly think that Pres. Bush thinks it is in a controversy with Iraq. That would definitely be news to him.

Controversy doesn’t have to be a negative thing. It can mean simple disagreement, and I think it’s clear that at times the leaders in Iraq and the leaders here at home are at odds as to what should happen in Iraq.

Which is exactly why Sheehan and Code Pink shouldn’t be meddling.

SayAnythingBlog.com

Sheehan, Code Pinkers Break The Law

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments