Accidental Treason by Democratic Congressmen

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter russ_watters
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of a 2002 congressional delegation trip to Iraq that was allegedly organized by a U.S. citizen working for Saddam Hussein. Participants explore the potential for treason, the motivations behind the trip, and the actions of the Congress members involved, with a focus on the political and ethical ramifications of their involvement.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the Congress members were unwitting victims of a scheme and question whether "accidental treason" can exist without evidence of actions that harmed U.S. interests.
  • Others suggest that the trip was part of a larger lobbying effort by Iraqi factions and question the role of U.S. intelligence agencies in monitoring such activities.
  • A participant claims that the Congress members acted as agents of the Iraqi intelligence service, despite not being charged with any crime.
  • Some express skepticism about the notion of treason in this context, emphasizing the lack of direct evidence linking the Congress members to actions against U.S. interests.
  • There are conflicting views on whether the Congress members' actions could be seen as heroic or detrimental, with some framing them as inadvertently aiding Iraqi propaganda efforts.
  • Participants challenge each other's interpretations of the events and the implications of the indictment, with some insisting that the article does not support claims of treason.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the characterization of the Congress members' actions, the existence of "accidental treason," and the implications of their trip to Iraq. No consensus is reached regarding the legal or moral culpability of the individuals involved.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions regarding the definitions of treason and the specific actions that would qualify as harmful to U.S. interests. The discussion also reflects varying interpretations of the motivations behind the trip and the nature of the relationship between the Congress members and the Iraqi intelligence service.

  • #31
Gokul43201 said:
...It's funny to read the old blogs articles where the Right Wingers now look silly, talking about nukes and al Qaeda, spouting the Bush-Cheney mantra...
You must mean the Bush-Cheney-Tennet-Clinton-Kerry-Edwards-Daschle etc, etc, etc mantra.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
mheslep said:
You must mean the Bush-Cheney-Tennet-Clinton-Kerry-Edwards-Daschle etc, etc, etc mantra.
No, I don't. I'm talking about the Bush-Cheney-Rice-Tenet mantra of imminent threat.
 
  • #33
Gokul43201 said:
No, I don't. I'm talking about the Bush-Cheney-Rice-Tenet mantra of imminent threat.
Implying then that those Senators voted for the war in belief that there was no imminent threat?
 
  • #34
What these Senators did was idiotic. It blows my mind that they are both Senators and clueless as to what they were involving themselves in. Unbelievable.
 
  • #35
mheslep said:
Implying then that those Senators voted for the war in belief that there was no imminent threat?
They didn't vote "for the war"; they voted to authorize the President to declare war after it was determined that all diplomatic measures were exhausted. Also, the resolution provided a couple dozen reasons for military action, most of which were not related to an imminent threat. Finally, the President was privy to a lot more intelligence than anyone in Congress, and much of Congress simply swallowed some or most of the propaganda that he was dousing the people with.

If you go about chanting a mantra and I don't disbelieve it, doesn't make it my mantra unless I start chanting it as well.
 
  • #36
russ_watters said:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9228.html

Oops.

We'll see where this goes, but I expect they will be able to successfully disavow knowledge of the true source of the money, but the fact that they traveled with the spy could prove probematic. Nevertheless, they have exposed themselves as patsies/dupes for our enemy.

"None of the congressional representatives are accused of any wrongdoing, and we have no information whatsoever that any of them were aware of the involvement of the Iraqi Intelligence Service,” Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd said.

it sounds like you are claiming these guys were patsies/dupes and are treasonous just for having a political view that was anti-war. i mean unless you are trying to say they were actually aware they were involved with the iraqi intelligence service, then there is nothing to discuss here about the congressmen themselves.
 

Similar threads

News Should the US intervene in world problems?
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
10K
News Downing Street - New memos released
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
News Bush Administration: My Indictment
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
News Bush Honest & Trustworthy Until How Many Lies?
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
11K