treason

Republicans like claiming they are tough on terrorism, but the evidence shows they are weak when it comes to combating terrorism. Osama bin Laden is still free as a bird and al-Qaeda stronger than ever. Terrorism has grown throughout the world while Bush remains friendly with Saudi Arabia, one of the nations that helps fund and train terrorists.

But some Republicans go further than this it seems. One Republican in particular has been indicted for actually helping al-Qaeda...which strikes me as outright treason.

From Truthout:

A former congressman and delegate to the United Nations was indicted Wednesday as part of a terrorist fundraising ring that allegedly sent more than $130,000 to an al-Qaida and Taliban supporter who has threatened U.S. and international troops in Afghanistan.

The former Republican congressman from Michigan, Mark Deli Siljander, was charged with money laundering, conspiracy and obstructing justice for allegedly lying about lobbying senators on behalf of an Islamic charity that authorities said was secretly sending funds to terrorists.

A 42-count indictment, unsealed in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Mo., accuses the Islamic American Relief Agency of paying Siljander $50,000 for the lobbying - money that turned out to be stolen from the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Looks like yet another in a long line of Halliburton Republicans is guilty of crimes. Scooter Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, has been found guilty by a jury. From Salon.com:

Eleven jurors -- the 12th was dismissed after being exposed to press reports about the case -- found Libby guilty of 1) obstructing justice by lying to the grand jury about how he learned and whom he told about Plame; 2) making a false statement by lying to the FBI about a conversation he said he had about Plame with NBC's Tim Russert; 3) committing perjury by lying to the grand jury about his conversation with Russert; and 4) committing perjury by lying about his conversation with Cooper and other reporters.

What was left off that list of charges was treason. Libby was part of a conspiracy that revealed the identity of a covert agent who was involved in the War against terrorism. Revealing that identity compromised our defense against terrorism and constitutes treason. That is the real charge that should have been leveled against Libby.

Now, what was Dick Cheney's role in all of this? Was his underling acting alone or under direction? Is Dick as guilty of treason as Libby? I think that deserves some investigation, don't you? Maybe Congress wants to look into it?

Snippet of trial documents found at FindLaw.com

I have never been so disinterested in a "big news trial" as I am with the Scooter Libby trial. I'm sorry but, as corrupt as the man is, he is taking the fall for Dick Cheny and Karl Rove. I want to see Dick Cheney's ass on that defendant's seat, not a man with the nickname of a popular children's vehicle.

So, enlighten me. What's hot and what's not about the Libby trial?

President Bush's tactics prove crude. He marked his terrority in Iraq by urine washing the sand, monkey style. He wiped his ass with our constitution and waves his accomplishments in the air alongside that organ grinder, Dick Cheney. And now he must have decided to go full force with the monkey functions by spewing his diarrhea of the mouth to convince millions of Americans that despite the wishes of Congress, it is his duty to send those 21,000 troops to Iraq BY GOD. (Hey, I'm a southerner; I can get away with the phrase because I don't sound nasal.) Anyway, today I felt such disgust with the state of my country that I thought about what it would be like to put President Bush and his fellow upset tummy tree dwellers on trial for war attrocities and financial crimes.

This subject provokes a lot of ire. I figure I am past the point of worrying about ruffling a few feathers. I mean, that attitude helped Bush gain eight years in office. So let's get real and talk about what you think he should be tried for and why. And if you don't agree he should be put on trial, why not?

And by trial, I don't mean impeachment. That may be the first step, but I hope not the last. I mean on criminal trial here in the States for both charges. I think that is a stronger statement; I have yet to witness an impeachment that impressed me. I realize he could be tried by the International Criminal Court, but they usually only intervene when a country is unable to hold the trial itself. However, doing it internationally might send a meaningful message.