Incredible. Making someone with 57-years-and-running of LIVING PROOF as a peaceable citizen into the Taliban!!!!! This was another telling “seized piece of evidence” by Merced’s goons, taken as a sign a guy is violent—when he never has been and there is no evidence he was going to deviate from that admirable history. None!!!! It is the United States Code defining “terrorism” in the aftermath of 9/11. The suspect had it in his home office in this large font, surely an imminent danger—right? He used it numerous times as a “teaching tool” at the post-secondary level in formats ranging from the one you see here, to transparencies (yes, a bit old-fashioned—and thus the large-font master copy they pounced upon), in PowerPoint presentations too. The objective is to hold this code up to our own conduct, a mirror, in order to detect any hypocrisy and deception in our foreign policies. By the way, using our own code as a measuring device students easily found we emerge as the leading terrorist country—which is not a pleasant reckoning. The students “dug” the guy’s methods of aiding them to thoughtfully analyze our history. The suspect also used it, front and center, in a Merced Sun Star letter to the editor dated May 13, 2011 (also offered here). And he was taken to task by some delightful Mercedians as a “un-American peacenik” for his honest, apparently challenging positions of, well, peace and cooperation. In the “authorities” slight of hand, led by Mark N. Pazin, Matt Serratto, Larry Morse, this “evidence” became a “threat,” a sure sign of instability, and proof positive the guy was planning violence. Worthy of TWENTY MILLION DOLLARS BAIL AND MEDIA SCREAMS. Although they found no plan, or means, or history. Tried to kill the guy. Astonishing. Yes, your laughter at their comical antics would be appropriate IF the “authorities” were not malicious, wasteful and violently abusive of this guy along with the public they deliberately alarmed—with ANY credible foundation. The goons found no indication of violence, no evidence of stalking or threat of any harm. Nothing. They did find evidence of an experienced and thoughtful citizen who did smell a rat or two (corrupt officials), openly and legally sought information, openly tried to bring it to light and get those entrusted to do so to do their jobs and bring minimal accountability. When these rats attacked the citizen and his family, and those who are supposed to hold them responsible continued to do nothing despite numerous requests, he got justifiably pissed and told the rats and others what he thought. Is that a crime, or is the conduct of the threatening rats? Most would say the citizen surely has a right to do this, if not a duty—the sort of thing our founding documents invite! Can you say “Wrongful prosecution”? Can you say “Abuse of authority”? Can you say “EXONERATE!!!” That would make decent sense. As it stands, Merced authorities are unmistakably authoritarian, domestic terrorists (just refer to the code!). That’s where the evidence lands. They, including Sandra Bushman, say this letter and others, and honest intellectual effort to inform them, constitute “threats.” When all of the letters clearly and independently emphasize the virtues of the peaceful pursuit of justice and how damaging violence is—but no threats whatsoever. Ummm, anybody think there’s “inappropriate” behavior going on and that things might be ass backwards? They did this to someone who has NEVER engaged in or advocated violence. Someone who has TWICE stood between the point of guns and innocent people to prevent violence. Someone who protected Sam. Cheryl too. Something just isn’t right. (rev. 1/7/15)
Posted on: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 00:38:27 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015