FC: Paul Weyrich: Some jlists, politicos should be charged with treason

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Sat Nov 23 2002 - 15:21:36 PST

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: Transcript of Pentagon briefing on Poindexter's "TIA" program"

    Free Congress Foundation's
    Notable News Now
    November 25, 2002
    The Free Congress Commentary
    One Who Dares Call It "Treason"
    By Paul M. Weyrich
    Back in the days of the Goldwater campaign, the hottest book at the
    grassroots level was a work entitled "None Dare Call It Treason." The
    paperback version sold millions and continued to be purchased long after
    Goldwater had gone down to ignominious defeat. This book struck a chord with
    ordinary folks. They felt that our country was being sold down the river but
    didn't understand how or why. The book gave them an explanation, at least.
    Well, those determined to sell out America are still at it. We are in a war
    against terrorism. Whether you agree that the war is going well or whether
    you think we have lost ground, the fact is we are at war.
    So how does Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-NY) justify holding a reception for the
    Mujahedin-e Kalq?
    The U.S. State Department, since 1994, has listed this group as one of the
    most dangerous terrorist groups in the world. The State Department says that
    this Marxist-Muslim group has killed many Americans and had blown up a
    number of U.S. facilities in Iran. This group participated in the seizure of
    the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in 1979.
    This group had a falling out with the Ayatollah Khomeni, according to The
    Washington Times, so the group fled to Iraq and now is funded by Saddam
    Hussein. The group helped Hussein fight the Kurds in the North of Iraq when
    chemical weapons were used.
    I'm sorry. I know it is politically incorrect these days to use the word
    "Treason," but I'm going to use it. I don't know Congressman Towns'
    intentions. The State Department information on terrorist groups is readily
    available to all Members of Congress, even those who probably wouldn't be
    eligible to a security clearance. Mind you, the State Department has always
    been reluctant to finger groups that have been responsible for terrorism,
    just as it is always reluctant to finger those states that sponsor
    terrorism. So the fact that this group continues to be high on the State
    Department's list should give you a clue that these are first class bad
    The fact is Towns is giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Would we have sat
    by if a Congressman, in 1942, had sponsored a reception for the National
    Socialist Party of Germany, whose leader was Adolf Hitler? I dare say that
    fellow would have been tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail.
    Of course, back then the whole nation was on the same track. There was a
    near-unanimous consensus among Americans that the Axis powers were evil.
    Even Hollywood and the news media portrayed them as such.
    Now, many in the media ridicule the idea of a war on terrorism. Members of
    Congress go to Iraq and say they find Saddam Hussein to be more trustworthy
    than our own President. There was some mild criticism from a few senators
    and congressmen, but no one moved to censure these House Members. Why not?
    Wasn't what they did an act of Treason? And if not, shouldn't at least the
    question have been debated ?
    The notion, promoted by the cultural Marxists of our time, that the United
    States and various terrorist organizations are morally equivalent, is an
    outright lie and absolutely reprehensible.
    Again, would we have tolerated it if Members of Congress suggested that
    President Roosevelt and Adolf Hitler were really morally equivalent? As much
    as I am no fan of the New Deal and of Roosevelt himself, still the idea that
    Roosevelt and Hitler were just two sides of the same coin is so divorced
    from reality that no serious person would utter it.
    So why not moral clarity now? If we are at war, then those who give aid and
    comfort to the enemy should be charged with Treason. Oh, we will be told,
    people who have a different view are entitled to their opinion. Yes, if they
    are arguing strategy. Or even if there should be a war. But when we are at
    war with a specific group, as we are with Mujahedin-e Kalq, then anyone who
    gives aid and comfort to that enemy is committing  a treasonous act.
    Congressman Towns should be so charged, in my opinion. If  the Justice
    Department would go after the Congressman, or some of the "Media Quislings"
    who support the enemy, they might not win their cases but the charges
    themselves would bring moral clarity to the situation.
    The term Treason needs to be resurrected. The way things are now, no matter
    what you do, even if helps the terrorists, it is considered acceptable. That
    cannot continue to be the case or we will not win this war.
    None dare call it Treason. Excuse me. I do.
    Paul M. Weyrich is CEO and Chairman of the Free Congress Foundation.
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
    Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
    Recent CNET News.com articles: http://news.search.com/search?q=declan

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Nov 24 2002 - 01:47:34 PST