IS AL GORE A TRAITOR TO THE USA

Recent remarks by former Vice-President Al Gore that
the United States had treated Arabs in a disgraceful
way has resurrected the idea that his remarks may have
been traitorous. Historically ex-presidents and other
former high ranking governmental officials have obeyed
a fundamental rule of decorum to withhold criticism of
US policy and policymakers when traveling outside the
United States. Some politicians have not had the grace
to follow this rule. Bill Clinton while attending
Oxford University in England as a Rhodes Scholar
demonstrated against the United States’ war in North
Vietnam. Of course, Clinton was just another student
at the time. (It should be noted that he failed to
finish his studies at Oxford. He must have
disappointed his mentor, Senator Fulbright, who more
than likely got him the scholarship in the first
place.) It has also been the lot of Jimmy Carter to
bring dishonor to his country while traveling abroad.
He only received the Nobel Prize because he hated the
Bushes so much.

While on this subject, there are several unwritten
rules of courtesy ex-high ranking officials observe
when they leave office: One, they do not directly
criticize in public the person who took their place.
Two, they never criticize the US or its high ranking
officials while traveling abroad. And Three, they do
not seek to undermine the policies of the USA while
traveling abroad. Jimmy Carter has broken all these
rules as well as a few others (remember Coretta Scott
King’s funeral).

Back to AL Gore. While visiting Saudi Arabia recently,
he stated that the USA had treated the Arabs badly.
There is no doubt that the USA is at war with a large
segment of the Arab population, since most of the
terrorists with whom we are at war are Arabs.. 

The United States Constitution is very clear as to the
definition of a traitor. ARTICLE III, SECTION 3 of the
Constitution states very plainly that “Treason against
the United States, shall consist only in levying War
against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving
them Aid and Comfort.” One reason the definition of
“treason” is so explicit is that so often when Great
Britain was ruled by monarchs who had practically
absolute power, treason could be defined as almost any
act or thought against the monarch. One of the most
explicit examples in English History was the actions
of Henry Vlll. He divorced his first queen because she
could not give him a male heir and had his second
queen beheaded for the same reason. His third queen
gave him a male heir, but the heir died shortly after
assuming office. The fourth queen was beheaded for
stepping out on him. The Americans wanted to define
the act of treason in a very specific way so that no
one in authority could have another killed on trumped
up charges of “treason”. 

Al Gore is plainly a traitor based on the phrases
“adhering to their enemies,” and “giving them “Aid and
Comfort”. There is no doubt that Al Gore is guilty on
both these counts, plainly spelled out in the
Constitution. The word “adhering” comes from the word
“adhere”, defined in the dictionary as follows: “to be
a devoted follower or supporter.” 
Thus, when Al Gore criticizes the US for treating the
Arabs badly, he is ignoring the fact that most of the
Arab world opposes the policies of the United States,
and in many cases the Arab countries are either
antagonistic toward us or enthusiastically supporting
that minority of Arabs who are conducting overt terror
against the United States and its citizens. The irony
of all of this is that while Saudi Arabia rulers want
to shield their hatred for the US, they nevertheless
allow the terrorists to train on their soil, and
encourage some of their “princes” to support the
terrorists in their evil endeavors. If you want to
know more about these “princes” and their methods,
read Greg Rucka’s novel, “A gentleman’s Game.” While
admittedly, this is a novel, there is a lot insight
given into the Saudi thinking on the subject of
terrorism against the US and our allies. 

Also in SECTION lll of the constitution, is the
phrase, “giving them “Aid and Comfort.” Here Al gore
is plainly guilty. His remarks about the US’s treating
the Arabs badly fits the definition of treason to a
“T”. (No pun intended.) It would be interesting to
ascertain whether Al Gore is on the payroll of the
Saudi government or some large corporate Saudi entity.
I’m not saying that he is, only that his connection
with the Saudi’s should be investigated.

The humorous side of the Al Gore story is his ability
to lie with a straight face. We saw this in the first
set of Presidential debates between him and George
Bush. The occasion arose when one of the questioners
on the panel asked Bush if he could say anything
positive about the Clinton-Gore administration. Bush
spoke up and said he thought FEMA had done some pretty
good work in the aftermath of some hurricanes that hit
Texas. Gore spoke up and said that he was on some of
the planes that the FEMA people used to survey the
damage which the hurricanes caused in Texas. It turned
out that Gore was not on these planes. Bush was
gentlemen enough not to call Gore’s hand on that one,
although Bush looked at Gore like he, Gore, was an
idiot.

The fundamental problem with Gore is the fact that he
can’t get over the presidential election of 2000,
which gave the popular vote to him, but the electoral
vote to Bush. And no matter how much the democrats
squeal, Bush won fair and square according to the
rules laid out in the Constitution of the United
States.

An even sorrier situation is the total breakdown of
the rules of courtesy which, as mentioned above,
hitherto were observed by former high officials of the
United States. The worst violator of these courtesy
rules is Jimmy Carter. One only has to review what he
said at the Coretta Scott King funeral to understand
the depths of evil to which this one-time Baptist
Sunday School teacher has plummeted.

Will Gore be punished for his indiscretions? Probably
not. May God help us to elect future leaders who rise
above the “Gore” level of iniquity.