Is Obama guilty of treason by providing material support for terrorism?
By Taskr36
@Taskr36 (13963)
United States
June 21, 2010 1:48pm CST
Now take a serious look at the law, look at where our president has been sending hundreds of millions of dollars, and really think about this.
By law, it is treason to be "Providing foreign terrorist groups with material support in any form," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts, "furthers terrorism by straining the United State's relationship with its allies and undermines cooperative efforts between nations to prevent terrorist attacks."
Now, lets look at the names of some terrorist organizations.
"Groups listed as "foreign terrorist organizations" by the State Department include al Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah."
http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/06/21/scotus.terror/index.html?hpt=T2
Good, still with me? Now many of you probably know where this is going, but I'll continue anyway. Who is Hamas? Well aside from being a terrorist organization, they have been the ruling class of the Palestinians since 2006 after winning the democratic elections and being CHOSEN by the Palestinian people.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/27/international/middleeast/27mideast.html?_r=1
Ok, so giving material support to terrorists = treason
Hamas = Terrorists
Palestinian leaders CHOSEN BY THE PEOPLE = Hamas
Now... who do you think has given more aid and MATERIAL SUPPORT to the Palestinians, INCLUDING HAMAS than anyone else in the world since this law went into effect? Yup, Obama.
"In March 2009, the Obama Administration pledged $900 million in U.S. assistance to the Palestinians to address both post-conflict humanitarian needs in Gaza and reform and development priorities in the West Bank. The pledge was exceeded by appropriations made in the Omnibus Appropriation Act, 2009 (P.L. 111-8) and the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009 (P.L. 111-32). P.L. 111-32 also included a provision that applies different conditions than those applied by previous FY2008 and FY2009 appropriations legislation to possible U.S. assistance to a Palestinian power-sharing government THAT INCLUDES HAMAS. P.L. 111-117, which provides $500
million in bilateral assistance to the Palestinians for FY2010, applies the same conditions as P.L. 111-32 did for FY2009 supplemental funding."
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RS22967.pdf
So there you go. Our own president, giving $900 million in material support to a terrorist organization. Pretty scary huh?
What are your opinions on this?
1 person likes this
11 responses
@dboman (457)
• United States
21 Jun 10
Well, my feelings on Obama are clear. However, I think you are forgetting the fact that neither you nor I voted for Mr. Obama. Technically, we elected him, but realistically WE did not. So, should we be punished for the mistakes of our countrymen?
I'm not an expert on the Palestinians, but apparently they are hurting there...and not all of them elected Hamas. I assume a large majority of those who need help are the ones that did NOT vote for Hamas (just as it seems many of us who are suffering from Obama's policies did not vote for him).
I definitely see your point, and I am in favor of cutting off the Palestinians and many other foreign nations (and some US citizens) who "need humanitarian aid." Just playing devil's advocate.
@mrscallands22 (2852)
• United States
22 Jun 10
I feel like everyone needs to stop blaming Obama for the state that the country is in. It was ALREADY LIKE THIS when he became elected. All he is trying to do, is try to the best of his abilities to fix the big mess that BUSH and HIS ADMINISTRATION put us in. But, it's funny how no one ever mentions Bush anymore or the negative impact he had on this country. Only he can walk away and leave a country in shambles and no one even look up. Smh.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
22 Jun 10
The country wasn't on a downward spiral for the whole 8 years. 9-11 was a big hit, but the first few years still weren't that bad. It was the last 2 or 3 years of Bush's presidency where things really got bad. Saying his "administration" isn't entirely accurate since congress isn't part of his administration and with democrats having a majority the last few years and happily using filibusters to prevent such basic things as appeals court nominees out of spite, he really didn't have the power to direct congress the way Obama did with a supermajority upon entering office, and just 1 senator shy of that supermajority now.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
22 Jun 10
He didn't just step into office. He's been there for almost a year and a half now. Instead of trying to undo what was done while Bush was president, he's extended, expanded, and made everything worse. He's quadrupled the deficit, failed to reduce unemployment, actually watching it get worse, EXTENDED the Patriot Act, and continued and backed the corruption that he promised to end.
FYI, Bush wasn't to blame for everything that went wrong. Congress bears the majority of that responsibility and THEY are the ones who get to leave the country in shambles without anyone holding it against them.
@mrscallands22 (2852)
• United States
22 Jun 10
I'm aware that it isn't entirely Bush's fault... that's why I said him and his ADMINISTRATION lol. However, Obama's problem is that he's trying to please EVERYONE. Everyone can't be happy.. someone's toes have to be stepped on. And I understand that things aren't getting much better, but the citizens should understand that even though Obama has been in the chair for a year and a half. It took eight years for us to get to this point... so I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have been cleaned up that quickly because Bush did leave the country in SHAMBLES. however, i am optimistic that things will look up regardless. Obama probably won't be reelected, but I'm not even mad at that. I just hope that his successor does a better job.
@Destiny007 (5805)
• United States
23 Jun 10
That is not the only treasonous act that 0bama has committed... there is lots more.
Everytime he badmouths the US to any other country he is committing treason, and he has been doing that since day one.
Everytime he ignores the will of the people, then he is committing treason.
Then there is the failure to follow our laws, and the takeover of private business... his bribery and corruption.... the list is endless.
Now we have an election official from Hawaii claiming the there is no BC and never was one, and that the government and that state are well aware of it and have been lying and otherwise providing cover for the fraud that has been perpetrated on every American by this Kenyan born piece of crap.... then there is the Egyptian Official that says 0bama told him that he came from a Muslim family and that he was raised Muslim and still is a Muslim... which goes a long way towards explaining the messed up foreign policy decisions that he has been making... including turning against Israel and the rest of our friends and allies in favor of our enemies.
Yet we have moonbats blindly supporting 0bama like he is some kind of messiah... well he isn't, and even the media is starting to lose there infatuation with this empty suit.
0bama is so toxic that the democrats don't even want him campaigning for them, for fear that he will hurt their chances during the coming election... like they haven't already done that for themselves...
@Destiny007 (5805)
• United States
25 Jun 10
Wow, you are really a clueless moonbat.
I know the Constitution... giving aid and comfort to our enemies is treason... and these terrorists are our sworn enemies who seek our destruction.
Here is the definition of treason...
1. Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
2. A betrayal of trust or confidence.
Here is the link... http://www.answers.com/topic/treason
You might also want to check out the article at the bottom part of the page entitled "US Military History Companion:Treason" as a partial cure for your excessive ignorance.
You will find that you are the clueless one.
@TheMetallion (1834)
• United States
24 Jun 10
Wow, you really have no idea what treason is. Amazing. Most people who want to think of themselves as patriots trouble themselves to learn our Constitution.
@Maggiepie (7816)
• United States
21 Jun 10
Well, you already know I've called BO a (pardon the deliberate pun) stinking traitor. And don't they shoot those?
Maggiepie
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves." ~ William Pitt
@snapdragons (91)
• United States
21 Jun 10
LOL, that is a great pun! I don't know if they shoot them anymore but wouldn't that be a sight?
1 person likes this
@Maggiepie (7816)
• United States
22 Jun 10
Seriously, I don't want that because it would turn this slug into a martyr, & his worshipers already have blind faith in him. I think it might set off a really ugly race war, something not good for the country.
What I'd really like to see is all his crimes exposed so clearly that he could no longer keep lying his way out, & the "mainstream" (
) media no longer able to cover his sorry butt for him. THEN I'd like to see him arrested & then, once it's proven he lied about his birthplace, his records, his Communist/Marxist/Socialist radical associates (100s of them!) revealed, to see him deported from this nation to whomever will take him, & an AMERICAN (& America-loving) person in the White House!
That's all I want. 
You? 
Anyway, thanks for the compliment on my pun. I love a good one! ;o)
Maggiepie
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves." ~ William Pitt
) media no longer able to cover his sorry butt for him. THEN I'd like to see him arrested & then, once it's proven he lied about his birthplace, his records, his Communist/Marxist/Socialist radical associates (100s of them!) revealed, to see him deported from this nation to whomever will take him, & an AMERICAN (& America-loving) person in the White House!
That's all I want.
You?
Anyway, thanks for the compliment on my pun. I love a good one! ;o)
Maggiepie
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves." ~ William Pitt @TheMetallion (1834)
• United States
22 Jun 10
The error in your analysis is in your first assertion -- Roberts is expressing a personal opinion, not the law, in the quote you provide. Treason is defined in the Constitution and Roberts isn't quoting it.
Leaving that aside for the moment, I'm curious if it is also your contention that George W. Bush committed treason when in 2007 he provided funding to Hamas-led Palestine.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
22 Jun 10
Justice Roberts was simply voicing the majority opinion regarding constitutionality of the part of the Patriot Act that made it a crime to provide any material assistance. The interesting thing is that Obama really wanted them to make this decision.
Initially the title of this thread was going to be Are Obama and Bush guilty... but while researching this it looked like Bush cut off funding to the Palestinians after Hamas became the ruling group in 2006 and only funded non-profits and relief workers that helped the people without any of the money going through government channels. If you have information showing that Bush did provide funding to Hamas-led Palestine then everything I said above would apply to him as well.
@TheMetallion (1834)
• United States
22 Jun 10
@Taskr36: "Justice" Roberts may have been voicing the majority opinion about the elements of a crime, but the crime wasn't "treason." If you want to try to make the case that Presidents Obama and Bush are guilty of the crime "providing material support to a terrorist organization," we can have that discussion. But words mean things, and "treason" is not the same crime as "providing material support to a terrorist organization."
Here's a 2007 Administrative Order to provide funds to Hamas-led Gaza and the West Bank: http://scr.bi/9IMKi8. If you look for others, you'll find them.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
22 Jun 10
Well the issue at hand is the part of the Patriot Act that makes it a crime to provide material support to terrorist groups. Now many presidents, such as those you've listed, have done that. As we all know the US did help al Quaeda against the Russians in Afghanistan. Since this legislation has only been in effect for the last 8 years or so, the presidents preceding Bush 43 aren't really the issue at hand.
Also, Israel regardless of your personal feelings, is not legally considered a terrorist organization, or even a country that sponsors terrorist organizations.
Now it's possible that Bush 43 is guilty of violating this same part of the Patriot Act, I just haven't found anything where he specifically gave aid to Palestine through Hamas yet. The reason I've only brought this up now is because this was being challenged as unconstitutional and was recently deemed constitutional with Obama backing it.
@TTCCWW (579)
• United States
22 Jun 10
There were laws already on the books before the "repeat" patriot act language, about supporting anyone on the State Department list.
We give huge sums of money to Israel (one example) and they funnel it to organizations that are also on that list.
Every President since Nixon with the exception of Ford has made some kind of financial deal with Hamas and the have been listed as a terrorist org for decades.
It seems to depend on when you need them and what are your options for dealing with the problem at hand. It was completely illegal for Reagan to go to war with Hamas and nobody brought that up except in some of the Iran Contra hearings.
Any discussion that involves the middle east gets very complicated and I think the poor quality job our representatives did during the passing of the Patriot Act is a fine example of why we have to hold our representatives to a much higher standard.
@rogue13xmen13 (14403)
• United States
23 Jun 10
There is a article in the Daily Bulletin in California, and right now a lot of people, both Liberals and Conservatives are skeptical about Obama. He seems to show little to no emotions when it comes to important issues. Honestly, I wonder about this president.
@nzinky (822)
• United States
22 Jun 10
If this can be proven I say Try him, Impeach him, and kick him out of office...Why should our so called President be giving aid to our enemy's..........When is this crap going to end........
Is he that stupid to put stuff like that in writing......He's really dumber than I thought.......
@whiteheather39 (24403)
• United States
21 Jun 10
If all this is true. I do not think there is anyone who can break through the walls that Obama has built to protect himself. So far any law suits against him have been squelched by lots of money paying very clever lawyers.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
21 Jun 10
You want to know what the funny thing is? This wouldn't be an issue if he hadn't extended the Patriot Act. The whole "material support to terrorists" issue is part of the Patriot Act. If that thing would have expired as it should have last year, this thread would have never been written.
@nitu1952 (286)
• India
22 Jun 10
i think Obama is not guilty of treason by providing material support for terrorism. now we take a serious look at the law, look at where our president has been sending hundreds of millions of dollars and really think about this.. by law , it is treason to be"providing foreign terrorist groups with material support in any form,".
@snapdragons (91)
• United States
21 Jun 10
I had never thought of it that way but you're right, Hamas is in charge over there and the US gives them aide which is authorized by the president. I think there is a connection to treason here.
