Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 06:13:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Drew Bittner <drewbitt at yahoo.com>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: The end of a Washington mystery
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>

--- "Mike B." <yahoo at omniphile.com> wrote:

> At 01:59 PM 6/2/05 -0400, dicconf wrote:
> >
> >To betray a trust is not to be a traitor in the
> Constitutional
> >definition, which is the only one that applies in
> American law.
> >("Treason to the United States shall consist only
> in levying war against
> >them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them
> aid and comfort...")
>
> Hmmm...I wonder if going to the Soviet Union and
> engaging in protests
> against the United States during the Cold War years
> would fit that definition?
>
> -- Mike B.
> --
> The cream rises to the top.  So does the scum.

No, it wouldn't. Neither did Jane Fonda's
ill-considered visit to North Vietnam. It isn't
treason to express an opinion overseas. It IS treason
to provide material assistance to an enemy (sorry,
photo ops don't necessarily qualify), be it in terms
of information or merchandise or what have you.

Ann Coulter's definition of treason as being
equivalent with liberal is slander (oh, wait, that's
another one of her book titles!)-- and is just more
right wing apoplexy over whatever has them outraged
this week.

Drew

__________________________________

online.html