WAGING WAR ON DOMESTIC TERRORISM
On 11/29/10 the entire Republican Senate caucus threatened to filibuster any legislation that came before the Senate to be voted on unless and until “their” position on tax cut legislation was passed and “their” position was that “all American taxpayers” deserved the continuation of the Bush tax cuts especially those in the top 2 percent who preferred profit at the expense of promoting “the general welfare” for the rest.
Once sent that letter which contained a clear threat to influence government policy it violated Title VIII of the USA PATRIOT Act which defines “domestic terrorism” as those activities which are intended to “influence government policy by intimidation or coercion” and to “intimidate or coerce a civilian population” that are “dangerous to human life”. The word “dangerous” is defined as that which exposes one to risk, harm or peril and “dangerous’ definitely describes the policy pursued by the minority party in the Senate.
It would seem that our society is suffering from a serious case of mass cognitive dissonance characterized by a collective need to ignore the reality that the policy position of these 42 reactionaries in the Senate that helped create the conditions of our current recession, the same policy that claimed would create jobs but didn’t mention the jobs would be created overseas to increase profits for those who would benefit most from this policy, the same policy that will add billions of dollars to an already over extended national debt which would be paid for by slashing the budgets of social programs intended for the “general welfare” and the same policy that resulted in a widening gap between rich and poor that now approximates the same gap which existed during the great depression and provides an example of that which is “dangerous to human life”.
Unless there’s a statute of limitations which already expired then someone in a position of power still has the responsibility to uphold the Constitution by taking advantage of the opportunity to insure that we are indeed a nation of laws and not men. As such those 42 Republican Senators should be charged as “terrorists” by committing an act of “terrorism” because when they threatened to influence government policy they violated U.S. Federal Law 28 C.F.R.Section 0.85.
The act of terrorism that occurred on 9/11/01 generated the question “why do “they” hate us” which was eventually relegated to the dust bin of history without satisfactory resolution. The threat to influence government policy on 11/29/10 begs the question: why are those who committed an act that meets the definition of “terrorism” as defined in U.S. law not charged and prosecuted as terrorists?
I’m going to exercise my First Amendment right “to petition the government for a redress of grievances” by writing to my representative in the “people’s house” and request that he suggest in the strongest terms possible to the chair of the Government Oversight and Reform Committee, Rep. Darrell Issa, to investigate how 42 Republicans violated the
U. S. PATRIOT Act yet no one was ever charged, no one was held responsible, no one was subjected to the applicable forfeiture law and no one was held accountable by the Obama Administration for the act of terrorism committed on 11/29/10.
I’ll post my letter and the response if in fact I receive one from Sen. Schumer, Sen. Gillibrand, or Rep. Tonko. I’m hoping one of them offers a reasonable explanation for this glaring difference between rhetoric and reality. I won’t be surprised by any response which amounts to nothing more than a clever rationalization for the rule of law legitimized by a corrupt political system that attempts to preserve a status quo in which the center can no longer hold but I will be disappointed if not one can explain why they think President Obama said that “the middle class tax cuts were being held hostage” to tax cuts for the wealthy.
