Terrorist group funds Democrats trip to Sri Lanka - Page 3

Stylerod · 08-25-2006, 04:37 PM

Ok. so back on topic. In the story he ADMITS he knew the group that funded his trip was in league with terrorists. Doesn't it seem a little odd he would still accept a free ride from them???? Wouldn't you consider that the wrong thing to do? I would.

Thorgrim · 08-25-2006, 04:41 PM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

Ok. so back on topic. In the story he ADMITS he knew the group that funded his trip was in league with terrorists. Doesn't it seem a little odd he would still accept a free ride from them???? Wouldn't you consider that the wrong thing to do? I would.

Depends what its for, if Hezbollah wanted to give me a trip to Beirut so I could meet with christian charity groups, I wouldn't see a problem

Now, if they wanted to take me to Scotland to golf with them and overlook some Hezbollah brochures, that'd be wrong

Stylerod · 08-25-2006, 04:52 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Depends what its for, if Hezbollah wanted to give me a trip to Beirut so I could meet with christian charity groups, I wouldn't see a problem

Now, if they wanted to take me to Scotland to golf with them and overlook some Hezbollah brochures, that'd be wrong

Let's make it a little more real life. Let's say Hezbollah wanted you to meet with the people that have lost homes because the latest war and meet with the soldiers and leaders of Hezzbollah. Would you accept that kind of trip paid 100% by them and do you think the people at home would want you to?

Thorgrim · 08-25-2006, 04:57 PM

I'd say I can't meet with the leaders...because I don't think I am authorized by my government

I wouldn't want a soldiers tour, I think a non-partisan Red Crescent tour would be better

Just thinking outloud here...

Stylerod · 08-25-2006, 05:08 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

I'd say I can't meet with the leaders...because I don't think I am authorized by my government

I wouldn't want a soldiers tour, I think a non-partisan Red Crescent tour would be better

Just thinking outloud here...

Now. I'm really trying to be fair here. I think a trip there to talk to the populace would even be fine. But pay for it yourself. He admits he KNEW the people that sent him there were affiliated with the terrorist group. And it was wrong to accept their handout. He should have never done it.

Thorgrim · 08-25-2006, 05:10 PM

See, but, what's the harm in an educational trip...its CERTAINLY not TREASON

Stylerod · 08-25-2006, 05:12 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

See, but, what's the harm in an educational trip...its CERTAINLY not TREASON

No (I never said it was), but it was a bad decision. He shouldn't have done it.

6SpeedTA95 · 08-25-2006, 05:16 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

See, but, what's the harm in an educational trip...its CERTAINLY not TREASON

If a republican had taken a trip from an organization that took money from the KKK and it was an "educational" trip the media and left would be up in arms but because its a terrorist organization it should just be swept under the rug

Thorgrim · 08-25-2006, 05:21 PM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

If a republican had taken a trip from an organization that took money from the KKK and it was an "educational" trip the media and left would be up in arms but because its a terrorist organization it should just be swept under the rug

I am defending him being called out as a traitor and all sorts of terrible things

I am not saying he deserves a gold star

now, to refer to your example, I would not call someone a traitor if a racist organization through another organization sponsored a congressmans tour of all the homes destroyed by Katrina

Stylerod · 08-25-2006, 06:49 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

I am defending him being called out as a traitor and all sorts of terrible things

I am not saying he deserves a gold star

now, to refer to your example, I would not call someone a traitor if a racist organization through another organization sponsored a congressmans tour of all the homes destroyed by Katrina

But you also aren't saying he was wrong. Which is interesting but expected.

Thorgrim · 08-25-2006, 06:54 PM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

But you also aren't saying he was wrong. Which is interesting but expected.

What do you mean expected?

Stylerod · 08-25-2006, 07:01 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

What do you mean expected?

I knew you wouldn't say what he did was the wrong thing to do. You haven't.

Thorgrim · 08-25-2006, 07:09 PM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

I knew you wouldn't say what he did was the wrong thing to do. You haven't.

Is it possible it wasn't the wrong thing to do?

Stylerod · 08-25-2006, 07:12 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Is it possible it wasn't the wrong thing to do?

No, it's not possible. Not when he admits he knew that group was being supported by the terrorists. And I think you know that.

Thorgrim · 08-25-2006, 07:20 PM

Associated with...not supported

I'd like to see more facts before saying what he did was wrong, considering this is kind of a complicated matter...he did file his papers properly...

Donkey® · 08-25-2006, 09:23 PM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

If a republican had taken a trip from an organization that took money from the KKK and it was an "educational" trip the media and left would be up in arms but because its a terrorist organization it should just be swept under the rug

Diesel66 · 08-25-2006, 10:49 PM

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

Smile all you wan't, but you could say the same about the Bush family dealings with the bin Ladens and many other connections of prominent people.

Meeting with the family who shuns Osama is a bit different then getting a check from the terrorist group's cover organization.

Scrum · 08-26-2006, 01:20 AM

Originally Posted by Diesel66

Meeting with the family who shuns Osama is a bit different then getting a check from the terrorist group's cover organization.

link to proof of cover organization?

I'm sure you wouldn't make such a claim with no proof, right?

Diesel66 · 08-27-2006, 01:16 AM

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

link to proof of cover organization?

I'm sure you wouldn't make such a claim with no proof, right?

He admitted it. He believes the Tamil group is in the right and has campaigned against the Sri Lankan govt.

Another person arrested in the case, Nachimuthu Socrates, was listed as a director in 2004 of the Tamil cultural organization which Davis listed in public disclosure forms as the trip's sponsor, the Federation of Tamil Sangams of North America. Representatives of the federation did not return phone messages on Wednesday.

Davis said he always assumed that the organization had a connection with the Tamil Tigers.

"I knew that they were associated with the Tamil Tigers, yes," he said.

Davis has been an outspoken supporter of the Tamil minority in Sri Lanka.

This month, he issued a statement condemning an Aug.14 Sri Lankan Air Force bombing in Tamil-controlled territory that reportedly killed dozens of girls.

Davis' statement said the facility was an orphanage he had visited during his 2005 trip to Sri Lanka. The government said the site was a former orphanage being used as an LTTE training camp for female recruits.