Moral equivalence? Gworld, I do not hate my country. I'm well aware that you do. You have a year's worth of posts to reflect your hatred of America, Christians and Jews.
Or, blind hatred toward the leaders of that country. Some have argued that. However, that is not the argument here. I'm am not concerned about the history of Latin America. It does not apply to the NYT's treason. I am not interested in Dutch or French treason for moral equivalence, it has no bearing on the NYT's treason. Alternatively, you seem to suggest there is no such thing as treason. The Constitution makes clear what treason is. If you do not support the Constitution, that is your choice. There was no mistake in what the NYT did or what their goal was. This is evident by our government working tirelessly to convince them not to expose details of a secret legal program that had congressional oversight to fight the enemies of our country. In fact, this clearly shows the NYT's deliberate attempt to harm our country by giving details to our enemies. And with no reason as to why you came to such a conclusion? How would exposing such a program benefit the US? So in your opinion, giving away secrets to our enemies is beneficial to our country? What other secrets would you like the NYT to give away to our enemies? And you are making the claim, with no foundation, that they did not commit treason. Defend your claim and defend why you believe giving secrets to our enemies is beneficial. I would enjoy seeing why you approve of the NYT giving away details of a secret legal program whose purpose is to fight enemies of our country and why you believe the NYT should give away other secrets. Most especially, I would enjoy reading why you believe treason is an honorable thing for the NYT to commit.
Good point Lorien. There is no benefit to the US (unless one is specifically looking for the demise of their country, which may be willy's hidden agenda) in giving aid and comfort to our enemies. In the NYT's quest to sell our country out, they put the lives of those entrusted to protect our country at grave risk, intentionally.
Just like a liberal to claim they care about soldier's welfare in one post, but we see how you really think about soldiers over here: The army is mostly for people who have trouble with careers, or need help paying for college, and dumb people. Yeah, you care about those "dumb soldiers" ferret
You're right there is nothing wrong with stopping terrorists. The problem occurs when you throw out the principles that make this a free country in order to do so. Rights belong to all people regardless of nationality. Crimes? I'd say that right now under this administration the US is as close to becoming an autocrasy as it ever has been. I myself believe in America and our way of government. I also believe in the limitation of office term and will be delighted to see this administration's term come to its end.
You just keep making speeches without saying anything, have you forgotten that you are a corporal and not a general, making speeches is not part of your job.
I don't care, I think joining the army to get sent to Iraq is dumb, and most people who join the army do join because they need money, That doesn't mean they should die over there, because someone fell for some BS some recruiter shoved down his throat in the cafertria in hight school doesn't mean they should die over there. I noticed your kid didn't sign up for the army GTech, wonder why? Nice ad hominem attack though, so you understand thinking joining the army is dumb carreer move != wants to see soldiers die Pretty much the terrorist already knew people where watching finacial records, the presdient even said in speeches we would be targeting their finances, so all this treason stuff is just posturing and BS.
Your are correct, it has to do with your use of the word treason. No, if you read my points carefully I suggested that treason consists of more than failing to show allegience to one's leaders. Leaders are not the Country. The Citizens are the Country, at least in our system. You know, all that For the people, by the people stuff There you go confusing the current regime with the Country again. Perhaps we need to define our terms? The way you are confusing terms, one might think that for you "Bushites = USA". Surely you do not base your arguments on such a tenuous proposition as that, do you? No, in my opinion a free press that keeps the Citizens of this Country informed of what their leaders are up to is one of the principals on which our Country was founded. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." Again, you are not confusing our Citizens with our enemies, are you? Courage is overcoming one's fear to do what is right, even at the risk of personal loss, injury or death. Courage is very different than bravado. People who live their lives practicing the principles of courage, commitment, honesty and integrity are honorable. The use of the word treason has still not been justified. It is nothing more than an opinion. However, having the courage to act on principals such as informing the people of our great Country, protecting personal liberties, upholding the Constitution in its entirety, those are indeed honerable acts.
You make me SICK. Whether you support the war or not you need to support the troops that have no choice, once enlisted, whether to go over there or not. Even though some of them don't support the war, they're fighting so you can say stupid things like this. Joining the air force is no less admirable. I think somebody should send YOU to Iraq and let's see what you think then. Uh, no he didn't. Care to cite? What!!?? You think that commiting treason is good because it shows bravery??? So do you think terrorist suicide bombers are admirable because it shows courage?? Do you think that fighting the support for the war on terror is good because it shows you know how to complain? Treason has been defined in this thread already. Go read back a few pages.
My son signed up for the Air Force and I'm very proud of him. You're right, you don't care and you never have. So don't use them in your political rhetoric to pretend to care about them when it's convenient, then turn around and stab them in the back. Were you talking about your attack on soldiers by referring to them as dumb? If not, then I'll correct your usual dishonesty: I said it equals to not caring and you validated that. No where did I suggest "dumb carreer move != wants to see soldiers die" Work on your integrity. They also know the stealth bomber can avoid radar. But they don't know how it avoids because the NYT hasn't gotten around to disclosing those secrets yet. Knowledge of a program, as illustrated, and knowledge of the details of how it work, when it's a secret legal program with congresssional oversight are two very distinctly different things. It is no secret the US goes after spies and it seems like almost every year, finds a major spy operation taking place. But it is not known the methods by which they go after spies. Partly, because the NYT hasn't gotten around to exposiing it yet. By your standard, since Iran knows it will get it's ass kicked if it continues going down the same course of action means that it's OK for the NYT to publish secret battle plans of how, when and where we are going to attack.
It's really wierd how libs hate to tell of any good news or great times during the presidency of Mr. Carter, by far the worst US president in modern history. Hands down!!
Dude whatever, those troops should be home with their families, or in afganstan hunting bin laden, not driving around as targets in Iraq. You seem to think "supporting the troops" must equal send them to their deaths with a smile. Sorry I know its part of your guys religion to glorify the military , but I don't see that way Here it on the whitehouse website http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/11/20011107-4.html
These troops cannot go to their commander and say "Aw, I wanna go home now!" They are there until they are done with their duty, defending people like YOU that do nothing but tear down their morale. If you met a soldier, would you say "Thanks" or would you slap him. That article you cited is different; it is not saying "we are scanning your transactions", but is warning the institutions that if you do business with terrorists - which is treason - you are not doing business with the USA. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has no political activity, unless it concerns the nature of the family or urgent Church-freedom matters. You are wrong in your statement.
Of which I use from the Constitution. Am I to understand correctly that you only selectively support the Constitution? But the problem with that suggestion is that I do not, nor have I, submitted that treason is failing to show allegience to one's leaders. In fact, quite the opposite. I have suggested that this is not a "Bush" issue nor is it a republican or democrat issue (though it's becoming apparently clear that liberals do approve of selling their country out based upon their hatred for a president). In which, the point you are trying to make is nothing more than a red herring. Current regime, eh? That's pretty much what I thought all along, was just waiting for you to slip up and expose the real reason why you support the treason of the NYT. In fact, it was about Bush all along, hidden in an abundance of nuance that had no bearing on the issue. Bush derangement system rares it's ugly head once again Apparently I was wrong. Patriotism does have a four year shelf life, at least with liberals. But this is not what the NYT was doing. A free press that exposes secret legal programs that had Congressional oversight (note that word, Congressional, meaning that duly elected leaders of the people were informed and took part in) and were used to fight the enemies of our country is not what our country was founded on. Since Congress isn't printing Bibles and distributing them to the masses, there's no issue there. The press does not have the freedom to expose national secrets to our enemies, therefore that doesn't apply. I believe there are protests schedule outside of the NYT's offices today, so no issue there, and the issue does not involve petitioning the government for a redress of grievances. In summary, I'm to conclude this is yet another red herring. Are you suggesting our enemies should have the right to know of secret legal programs that have Congressional oversight and are used to combat them? So you are suggesting the NYT does not have courage, since the right thing to do would have been not to expose secret legal programs that have Congressional oversight and are used to fight the enemies of our country? Giving aid and comfort to our enemies pretty much sums up what the NYT did. Treason is more than justified here. It's also justified when they gave information to enemies of an impeding arrest that put the lives of people who protect our country in jeopardy. There is no honor or courage involved in selling out one's country. The Constitution makes no mention that treason is honorable, but it does describe what it is. Some questions you avoided: How would exposing such a program benefit the US? So in your opinion, giving away secrets to our enemies is beneficial to our country? What other secrets would you like the NYT to give away to our enemies? No comment? Of course, now that I know what drives your position (current regime), I know what I suspected all along. BDS.
What people are they defending? , how is saying they should be home going to tear down their morale, why would you think I would "slap him"
You obviously hate them for joining the armed forces to fight, as you would call it, "this stupid one-sided terrorist battle". They are defending the freest country on the planet, they're defending YOU so you can SAY stupid things that you do. You are tearing down their morale by not supporting them. Vietnam vets were spat on when they came back... you would do the same if you met a soldier in Iraq right now. THAT is why I think you would probably slap them. Where there is smoke there is fire.
Why would hate someone for signing up? A lot of my family have been in military, I don't have anything against military people, I just don't idolize them, like some people. Yeah, don't really agree with that, I don't agree with the war in Iraq, I think it was huge gamble by the president which is going badly, and has cost tons of lives and tons of money. your crazy, and don't know that you are talking about
I don't idolize them either; I just support them and hate to see people dying for a great cause then people like you ripping on them. WW2 cost lives #s in the millions. Quit complaining. War is inevitable. Wars help the economy. Costing money or not, would you rather be speaking German right now? And not allowed to have the freedoms do you have? Then just shut up for once and let us get back to an intelligent debate.
Right, you're just being honest when you say they are dumb and try to compare all of their service to a few. Nothing like good, honest opinions, right ferret?