The administration and the Bush appointed Justice Department are so obsessed with a foreign? ar on terror?that they have chosen to look the other way concerning home-bred terror perpetrated by our own government officials against U. S. citizens. Below is a quote from an American prosecutor that President Bush and Alberto Gonzales?Justice Department believe is just fine,"The last claim involves a statement made to attorney xxxxxxx warning that the defendant would be charged with additional crimes if he did not clam[sic] down.

The statement is a reference to the defendant's continued harassment of the victim and the investigating officer in this case through the court process. The defendant has filed a civil action against the victim because of his participation in this criminal case. The State is currently reviewing a contempt charge against the defendants because of this activity.

The statement was a proper warning made through the defendant's representative. "This is an actual written quote from a powerful republican prosecutor filed in court documents. It is a federal crime to threaten someone for filing civil litigation in federal court or for their participation in federal civil litigation.

Threatening someone with adverse consequences whether it be breaking their arm or threatening them with an illegal and frivolous criminal prosecution is known as extortion and obstruction of justice. The above open-ended threat also constitutes violation of the federal racketeering statutes and federal civil rights crimes. The fact that the criminals in this instance carry government issued badges and guns heightens the terror, which is now also approved by the President and Attorney General Gonzales.

A glance at the legal system? own ethical cannons explain very clearly why threats of this nature against civil proceedings are forbidden and criminal,? The civil adjudicative process is primarily designed for the settlement of disputes between parties, while the criminal process is designed for the protection of society as a whole.

Threatening to use, or using, the criminal process to coerce adjustment of private civil claims or controversies is a subversion of that process; further, the person against whom the criminal process is so misused may be deterred from asserting his legal rights and thus the usefulness of the civil process in settling private disputes is impaired.

As in all cases of abuse of judicial process, the improper use of criminal process tends to diminish public confidence in our legal system. ??bstruction of federal civil litigation by the government itself is not only a crime against individual victims, it constitutes an attack on the integrity of the federal court system signaling a demise of the rule of law and adversary court process in this country.

This trend is advocated by the current administration and the Justice Department. The courts have become a powerful tool for the government to abuse and manipulate. In correspondence, President Bush failed to respond to this issue. Alberto Gonzales and his Justice Department indicated that the conduct was fine and not even a civil rights violation. Senator Elizabeth Dole had an equally callous and unethical response to this crime targeting the federal courts.

The above quote constitutes the on-going threat of violent arrest and incarceration for exercising a right clearly protected by the first amendment? edress of grievances in federal court. Government threats of criminal retaliation for a citizen? pursuit of civil claims in federal court is also an impermissible coercion tactic violative of Due Process.

Constitutional rights of our own citizenry must be secured before preaching abroad concerning foreign constitutions, rights and freedoms. In the same series of correspondences, the President, Attorney General Gonzales and Senator Dole expressed no concern about the threats of violent arrest and incarceration targeting citizens for merely attempting to exercise the clearly established first amendment right to attend and observe courthouse proceedings.

Secret courts are not a precept that should be sheltered or embraced by our President or the Justice Department. While the above instances reveal how this country is evolving into a police state with zero concern for rights, liberties and freedoms, ironically, we hold ourselves up as the example for others to emulate.

President Bush, lets get it right here before we attempt to impose our system on others. Our military is risking their lives in foreign lands to protect rights, freedoms and liberties that currently exist only on paper in this country. The politicians that have directed our troops to engage in foreign conflict are the very same individuals who have waged a war to undermine our constitutional rights within our own borders.

The willingness of those in power to inspire fear in the public with threats of political imprisonment for stating a position, filing a paper in court or merely attending a court proceeding is terrorism. The President and Justice Department? willingness to allow these practices supports and encourages further terror and terrorism. Alberto Gonzales?Justice Department concludes that the above,? oes not involve a prosecutable violation of federal criminal civil rights statutes [18 U.

S. C. ,? 241, 242]. ? See statutes below. In the United States today, the mere exercise of basic First Amendment rights is met with terrorist threats of arrest and political imprisonment reminiscent of Stalinist Russia while the courts have become government manipulated secret tribunals hiding the terror acts.

Scott Huminski

North Carolina

S_huminski@hotmail. comLetters from the Justice Department, Elizabeth Dole and letters to the President, Justice Dept. & Sen. Dole available on request via fax. UNITED STATES CODE Title 18Sec. 241. - Conspiracy against rightsIf two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; orThey shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to deathSec.

242. - Deprivation of rights under color of lawWhoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Author:
Scott Huminski