The definition is:
n 1: a crime that undermines the offender's government [syn: high treason, lese majesty] 2: disloyalty by virtue of subversive behavior [syn: subversiveness, traitorousness] 3: an act of deliberate betrayal [syn: treachery, betrayal, perfidy
2006-08-17
06:33:38
·
13 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
treason
n.
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.
Function: noun
Etymology: Anglo-French treison crime of violence against a person to whom allegiance is owed, literally, betrayal, from Old French traïson, from traïr to betray, from Latin tradere to hand over, surrender
: the offense of attempting to overthrow the government of one's country or of assisting its enemies in war; specifically : the act of levying war against the United States or adhering to or giving aid and comfort to its enemies by one who owes it allegiance
2006-08-17
06:35:11 ·
update #1
Thank you! I don't understand what their whole Bush committing treason thing is anyways - just the kick they are on this week, I suppose.
2006-08-17 06:39:25
·
answer #1
·
answered by Fortune Favors the Brave 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
First. we don't have a soverign. We have an elected(sort of) executive. Second, treason is an act carried out against a country, not an individual and is the responsibility of any citizen of that country to report. Third, if treason is committed, then the person responsible is no longer a "soverign" but a usurper and should be shot at dawn. I believe he is a traitor, but do not know all the facts. An investigation is warranted on any suspected traitorous acts and has been avoided by the current political leaders So much has been said about this subject. Remember, the republican line has always been, "Where there is smoke. there is fire" How come they conviently ignore that when talking about their own party?
2006-08-17 13:59:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by steelman_gary 1
·
0⤊
2⤋
In law, treason is the crime of disloyalty to one's nation or state. 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]." In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aided or involved by such an endeavour.Traitor may also mean a person who betrays (or is accused of betraying) their own political party, family, friends, ethnic group, religion, or other group to which they may belong. Often, such accusations are controversial and disputed, as the person may not identify with the group of which they are a member, or may otherwise disagree with the group leaders making the charge.
2006-08-17 13:53:52
·
answer #3
·
answered by jdfnv 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
No one can commit "treason" in the US by badmouthing the government because of "freedom of speach" So no I'm sorry I don't know that and I will continue to trash what ever politican I choose. Especially if I got out to vote for or against that person. Unfortunatly in this world you don't always know what you're going to get until you got it. And I believe we all choose the "lesser of the evils" And although I'm not happy with Bush I'm not sure I would have been anymore happy with the other guys. Truth be told I'm not sure I'm real happy with anyone in office because "I know "I" could do it better" Along with everyother person in here. Oh if only the world would listen to me...
2006-08-17 13:53:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by Tara R 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
So I'll make a deal with you. I am willing to go on trial for my "treason" which seems to consist only of my calls for his impeachment, his trial in the Hague, and his role in the "terrorist" attack 9/11.
Now what's the deal? Bush goes on trial for (1) his treasonous acts including the War on Iraq, (2) spying on American citizens, (3) the detaining of American citizens without charge or access to attorneys, (4)his abdication/dereliction of duty during Hurricane Katrina, (5) his role in the "terrorist" attacks of 9/11 and (6) supporting terrorist organizations in Pakistan and Iraq.
You can try me in front of a jury of Bush's peers and Bush will be tried in front of a jury of my peers. Hey, if he ain't got nothing to hide what's he afraid of. Right?
Send this to DHS immediately. Oh never mind, they already got it!
2006-08-17 14:37:54
·
answer #5
·
answered by Edward K 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
So isn't Ken Starr guilty of treason for contributing towards the impeachment of Bill Clinton? And all the Congressmen who approved the articles of impeachment?
2006-08-17 13:59:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by badgerlicious03 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
I agree with you, 100%....
The thing is, half of these morons in here who condemn our President, dont have the slightest idea on what they are talking about, in the first place....
2006-08-17 20:02:29
·
answer #7
·
answered by Katz 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
You need to read your own statement again. I believe you used the word 'Country'. Disagreeing with an extremely unpopular president has nothing to do with undermining our Country. It is us, those who stand up against those leading our country in the wrong direction who are the patriots. The rest of you sit behind your religion like it's a shield instead of opening your eyes to the damage this man has done. It's amazing to me how stupid the people in this country are. People in other countries see what a moron he is and even take time out of their lives to protest his visiting of their countries. Wake up sheepole - this man is ordering the deaths of thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Civilians so he can obtain more power!
Plus...I bet when Clinton was in office, you were talking major smack against him which makes you a hypocrite, just like the rest of you Neo-Cons.
2006-08-17 13:47:39
·
answer #8
·
answered by allyson71377 3
·
0⤊
4⤋
Good to know that all the Muslims have been thrashing him can we send them home. Back to the holy land in Mecca
2006-08-17 13:38:22
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Well isn't that stupid.
So this country is based off of the idea that if the government is corrupt we can overthrow it and that we can speak our minds... just not if it is against the government. Oh, sounds like Communist Russia to me!
Gee lady, thanks... For someone who's for Bush you sure do sound like Himmler.
Howabout letting us speak our minds like you do yours ok? I love my freedom of speech and I won't have you take it away because you have a definition that proves nothing.
2006-08-17 13:39:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 5
·
0⤊
4⤋