Has someone changed the definition of Treason? How are our top officials not guilty for willful misinformation
94573
I guess you refer to the USA president and its government. This is a good question... but it should yet have been asked and resolved years ago!! Poor USA.
781099
I'm surprised to read people saying that there are more important things to do.  What's more important than at least investigating an executive who broke US and international law?  If we ignore that it sets a very dangerous precedent in my opinion.
883510
They apparently posture for there constituents and always feel that they need to be perceived as omniscient. They need to realize that there first plan of action is not always correct. Also, they must realize that it is unethical to manipulate the general public with statistical fallacies to waive the public's decisions in their favor. There is apparent substantial evidence that they lie and it is also public knowledge that they are pathological liars, so then the question is why do we insist on continuing to elect them as our leaders. Is the general public in fear of change or simply not intelligent enough to rebel against popular belief.\nThis is a question worth asking.
472130
Because this is a difficult crime to prove.  You have to prove the material was classified, that it had not been declassified by the President, that the person knew the information was classified, and that the person used their position to obtain classified information and then released that information to the media. Futhermore, if he obtained the information from a non-classified source, such a reporter told him, then he could reveal it. The Intelligence Idenities laws are extremely difficult to prove.  That is why no one has been indicted on them. Instead, Libby has been charged with perjury for atlerting his testimony to federal officers.  The chances of getting someone on this are slim, and I think are pretty rare, if its ever happened at all.
461707
First the president would have to committ a crime, as he can only be tried by the senate (the house draws the articles).  There's no precedent for a coup without fault.  As many people would like to think, Bush has broken no laws.  Lying isn't against the law, unless it's under oath, and he never was.  Deal with it.  If he breaks the law, then we'll talk
30688
The current controversy really boils down to how much evidence & authorization agencies like the CIA need in order to justify spying on someone.\n\nHistorically (in recent decades, anyway), it has never been 'official' policy to authorize spying without probably cause (evidence & good reason to believe someone is engaged in illegal activity), and approval from a judge - this is all part of the USA's system of checks & balances on our government.\n\nCurrent laws & policy statements circumvent these balances of power, and could allow the 'secret' agencies of our law enforcement system to spy on innocent citizen without justification.\n\nThe most disturbing developments have been recent claims from the White House which imply that the current administration considers itself above the law - saying that it does not need to seek approval from the legislative & judicial branches to carry out such activities (even though our Constitution, laws, and legal precendence say that it does).
488865
Definitions of treason on the Web:\n\na crime that undermines the offender's government \ndisloyalty by virtue of subversive behavior \ntreachery: an act of deliberate betrayal \nwordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn\n\nIn law, treason is the crime of disloyalty to one's nation. A person who betrays the nation of their citizenship and/or reneges on an oath of loyalty and in some way willfully cooperates with an enemy, is considered to be a traitor. Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as: "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." \nen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason\n\nA Planet Called Treason, a science fiction novel by Orson Scott Card, was originally published in 1979 by St Martin's Press and Dell Publishing Co. After being heavily revised, the book was republished in 1988 under the title Treason by St. Martin's Press. \nen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason_(novel)\n\nbetraying one's country, whether in peacetime or during a war. Allowing (or hiring?) a group of terrorists to attack the largest buildings in the nation's largest city and the military's headquarters is an act of treason.\nwww.oilempire.us/dictionary.html\n\nthe betrayal of one's country.\nlibrary.thinkquest.org/J003358F/terms.html\n\nA crime against the government of a country. When citizens of a country try to set up their own government and get rid of the government in power, they are often charged with treason.\nwww.collectionscanada.ca/confederation/kids/h2-1800-e.html
854603
I agree. The excuse for invasion changes as soon as the one before it has been proven to be illogical. The problem here is that the Bush administration is extremely powerful. I don't even know why they bother providing any justification at all. They simply don't have to. Nobody yet has had the strength to stop them. But still, even if they cannot be stopped from making illogical policy decisions, it is the duty of citizens to question authority and at least try to make an effort to hold their leaders accountable.
104391
I got into a large argument about this with a friend that I soons after made not-my friend.Their seems to be 2 types of people that react to this question in 2 different ways.\n\n1.A large group of people who under all evidence totally refuse to even ponder the question and usually attack the people asking this question of a con-theory/inside job.These people often get very angry and also can become violent about it.There point of view is that this is absurd and that asking such a thing is silly and unfounded.There P.O.V is accepted and they have the right to say what they want,just as I have a right to ponder if it was an inside job.BUT-They seem to want to outlaw or "Silence" people asking this question.They are hyocrites because under the guise of there supposed "Patriotism"they forget that patriotism in itself is partially based on the right to question the goverment you live under.Also they compound their hypocrisy by becoming violent about the actual right of someone to ask a question about the goverments possible role in corruption.\n\n2. The open minded person who is also a patriot but just has reservations about their government and wantss to understand factual things about a national event that don't correspond with what the government told us happened.This person is NOT a communist,NOT a "Conspiracy theorist,NOT crazy,and most importantly just a loyal citizen wanting to know the truth.
1179308
I'm surprised to hear that name again! Of course he was a treasonous sack of s**t! By the way, what's that a**hole been up to lately?
401544
IT'S FISHY.\n\nBUT THIS IS THE COVERUP ADMINISTRATION.
804934
You have asked an extremely complex and legal question. If the United States Government was in fact responsible for the events leading up to and on 9/11, then Treason at the highest levels of government was committed.\n\nThe popular mechanics issue that was referred to prior has been debunked by scholars for the 9/11 truth as improbable. In fact their are many PHD scholar's in the various fields that have raised question, viewed evidence and raised interesting questions on the official government story. PBS attempted to recreate the pancake theory and could only do so if the 40 interior columns were removed from the WTC towers. The collapse of building 7 has yet to be explained. There is documented proof that evacuations of the world trade centre had taken place prior to the attacks. The weekend before 9/11 the world trade centre was closed and all electrical power was turned off so new Internet cable could be installed. This meant all security systems were down for The entire weekend. On Sept 8th all remaining bomb sniffing dogs were removed from the WTC and services were no longer required. On the morning of Sept 11th, there was a live fly exercise taking place over the North East quadrant of the United States. This was part of a series of war games taking place throughout the United states, Canada and Greenland, all under the control of Dick Cheny.\n\nAt the same time FEMA was on pier 29 in lower Manhattan running operation tripod two. This was a simulation of a chemical  and biological attact on New York. How interesting that FEMA would have a fully operational command post in place on 9/11. Operation vigilant guardian was the live fly exercise simulating hi-jacked airliners moving towards New York City.\n\nOn the morning of 9/11 air traffic controllers were dealing with 19 hi-jacked airliners in the live fly scenario with all transponders turned off. They in effect could not distinguish between the real hi-jacked planes and those involved in the war game. To further complicate matters, there were only eight fighters left to protect the North East quadrant of the United States. Fighters travel in a formation of two, so technically they could only cover four hi-jacked airliners when dispatched. No fighters were dispatched until after all planes had found their targets. What is interesting to note here, is that Vice President Cheney was given a 45 minute heads up on the approaching hi-jacked airliner moving to the pentagon. As the man in charge of the war games underway he would have known which airliners was part of the operation versus the real hi-jacked airliners. \n\nThe Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was established in spring 1997. The nonprofit organization declared that its goal was “to promote American global leadership.” PNAC, which has been inactive since late 2005, was an initiative of the New Citizenship Project, whose chairman is William Kristol, PNAC described itself as a “nonprofit educational organization supporting American military, diplomatic, and moral leadership.”  PNAC's board of directors had the following members, as listed on its website as of May 26, 2006: William Kristol (chairman), Robert Kagan, Bruce Jackson, Mark Gerson, and Randy Scheunemann. Staff members: Ellen Bork (acting executive director), Gary Schmitt (senior fellow), Thomas Donnelly (senior fellow), Reuel Gerecht (director of the Middle East Initiative), Timothy Lehmann, (assistant director), and Michael Goldfarb (research associate). 1\nPNAC's 1997 “Statement of Principles” set forth a new agenda for foreign and military policy that William Kristol and Robert Kagan described as “neo-Reaganite.” Signatories of this charter document said that they aimed “to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.” 2 Excerpts from the statement follow: \n“We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan administration's success: a military that is strong and ready to
46758
Yes, of course he has broken the law.  Regardless of his representations to the contrary, there is no such authorization in the Constitution, in case law, or in the statutes or regulations.  His behavior is impermissible and he should most definitely be impeached for illegal wiretapping and, if found guilty, be removed from his office in disgrace.
573144
It's called perjury.\n\nAnd it's lied.
1139540
the most concise guide to lies, deception, and mistakes of logic in loose change:\nhttp://www.ccdominoes.com/lc/LooseChangeGuide.html\n\n\nNow try and give me a good argument, or shut the hell up.
411484
Actually a person can only be charged with treason during war time, which requires an act of Congress. Offically we are not at war right now, the last war as approved by Congress was WW2. So he would obviously be removed from office, and if found out he leaked secrets then he would be placed in prison.
983646
i don,t believe so.  one is stupidity and one in immoral.  i don,t think that politicians know the difference.  they all seem to be able to lie about anything and everything. there a just a few who seem honest and trustworthy, but, maybe they just haven't been caught.