To R.F.K, Jr, “treason” means disagreeing with him on Anthropogenic Global Warming:
Blissfully unaware of how hot the irony burned, Robert Kennedy Jr. yesterday took to a public protest to rail avidly in favor of censorship. The United States government, Kennedy lamented in an interview with Climate Depot, is not permitted by law to “punish” or to imprison those who disagree with him — and this, he proposed, is a problem of existential proportions. Were he to have his way, Kennedy admitted, he would cheer the prosecution of a host of “treasonous” figures — among them a number of unspecified “politicians”; those bêtes noires of the global Left, Kansas’s own Koch Brothers; “the oil industry and the Republican echo chamber”; and, for good measure, anybody else whose estimation of the threat posed by fossil fuels has provoked them into “selling out the public trust.” Those who contend that global warming “does not exist,” Kennedy claimed, are guilty of “a criminal offense — and they ought to be serving time for it.”
Fascinating. I would have thought the man was at least educated enough to know that the Constitution of the United States defines treason, but maybe he thinks that since the Constitution doesn’t mean anything, “treason” is anything he wants it to be.
To be fair, though, his thinking is in line with a well known medieval concept which died out in the West, but is still quite in the Middle East:
Those who contend that God does not exist are guilty of a criminal offense.
You’d think Global Warming was the new God.
Comments
7 responses to “‘Tis treason to disagree!”
If you climate change denighers are wrong it will be worse then treason!
>If you climate change denighers are wrong it will be worse then treason!<
yes it means a longer growing season.
One wonders if Eric was as thoroughly outraged when this book came out:
http://www.amazon.com/Treason-Liberal-Treachery-Cold-Terrorism-ebook/dp/B000FBFNYW/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1411752998&sr=8-4&keywords=treason
This is definitely a door that swings both ways.
Jenny, is that comment about Ann Coulter?
“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”
RFK Jr. is dead serious. Ann Coulter, on the other hand, has a touch of the comic, of the mocker. Consider some of her book titles: “How to Talk to a Liberal [If You Must]” or “If Democrats Had Any Brains, They’d be Republicans.”
On the serious side: AGW, contrary to RFK Jr.’s claim, is at this point rather debatable. The treason of such figures as Alger Hiss and Harry Dexter White, most likely cited in the Coulter book TheAJ mentions, is fact- unless you happen to subscribe to The Nation. Funny how liberals defended those two for decades- I grew up hearing it.