The Personal Website of Mark W. Dawson

It Appears that I am a Domestic Terrorist

President Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland have released a blueprint on “National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism”. This blueprint contains so many statements that are untrue and ignores many domestic terrorism actions that are true. To properly critique this blueprint requires a lengthy analysis than this shorter article that would point out all its inconsistencies, untruths, and possible Constitutional Rights violations of their strategy. However, I would point out in this shorter article the egregious statements that have provoked my ire.

This blueprint states that “Domestic terrorism poses a serious and evolving threat. A provision of Federal law defines “domestic terrorism” as “activities that involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”

However, this blueprint makes no mention of the recent mob violence in our cities which are meant to intimidate our government leaders into actions that a majority of the American do not support. It, instead, states “It is critical that we condemn and confront domestic terrorism regardless of the particular ideology that motivates individuals to violence”, but it makes no mention of “Progressives/Leftists” rhetoric and violence of organizations such as ANTIFA and Black Lives Matter (BLM) that are carrying out this intimidation. These actions caused the breakdown of civil authority, and deaths and injuries to Americans, as well as the destruction or looting of the property of Americans. These actions frighten the inhabitants of these cities and cower them into silence, which constitutes Domestic Terrorism. No mention is made of organized gangs such as the MS-13 gang and the criminal drug cartels the are flooding illegal drugs into America along with their terroristic actions to control these illegal activities. This report often mentions “from anti–government or anti–authority violent extremists” without defining what this means or the extent of their activities. This lack of definition gives the government broad latitude to label Americans as Domestic Terrorists even if they are acting within their Constitutional rights of “the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” by declaring them as agitators of Domestic Terrorism.

Additionally, the activities of “Wokeness” and “Cancel Culture” also strike fear into many Americans and constrain their Constitutional First Amendment rights of free speech and religious practices. Whenever anyone is in actual fear of exercising their “Natural, Human, and Civil Rights”, they are being terrorized, and anyone who does this is a Domestic Terrorist. Yet this blueprint does not address this issue.

The blueprint states that “Newer sociopolitical developments–such as narratives of fraud in the recent general election, the emboldening impact of the violent breach of the U.S. Capitol, conditions related to the COVID–19 pandemic, and conspiracy theories promoting violence–will almost certainly spur some DVEs to try to engage in violence this year.” However, the possibility of fraud in an election changing the election outcome based on veracious accounts should be a legitimate concern for all Americans. The violent breach of the U.S. Capitol in which no firearms, knives, or explosives were seized, no one was harmed, and the only death was of a protester by a Capitol police officer. These actions were more of trespass and looting and destruction of property than an insurrection. As to the issue of the origins of COVID-19 and the appropriateness and constitutionality of Federal, State, and Local governments’ actions to combat this pandemic, they are all legitimate issues for concern. Most of these concerns have been expressed peaceably, but in any free society, some extremism may occur. However, the extremism of the very few does not justify draconian reactions by the government. It should also be remembered that in America, we investigate, prosecute, and punish people for their actions and not for their thoughts and speech.

This blueprint also states that “Additionally, pursuing the goal of preventing, disrupting, and deterring acts of domestic terrorism means achieving the type of resilience that can prevent domestic terrorists from gaining traction and adherents in the first place. Resilience can take many forms. It can mean raising public awareness of how terrorists deliberately seek overreaction, which can help to avoid precisely that overreaction and instead thwart terrorists’ own strategies. And it can mean, broader still, cultivating the type of digital literacy that can empower the American public to resist those who would use online communications platforms and other venues to recruit, radicalize, and mobilize to violence. Fostering and ultimately attaining these and other forms of resilience is a third goal, and one whose achievement would strengthen the United States against domestic terrorism as well as other threats to U.S. national security.” However, this blueprint does not outline how our Fourth Amendment rights of “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized” is to be protected. This is especially disconcerting within their ‘Strategic Pillars’, as these pillars could possibly violate our Fourth Amendment rights. It, instead, only pays lip service to our Constitutional and Civil Rights without defining the limits of government actions.

This blueprint specifically states that “In a democracy, there is no justification for resorting to violence to resolve political differences.” However, The Declaration of Independence specifically states that “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.” Consequently, if our government oppresses your Natural and Constitutional Rights, then, as The Declaration of Independence states, “it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” Those that believe that there should be no insurrections, even to reinstitute Natural and Constitutional Rights, are in opposition to these rights as they would take no action if these rights were consistently violated. Those people who believe that no insurrection is justified would have been loyalist supporters of the British Crown during the American Revolution, and if they had succeeded, there would have been no United States of America dedicated to Freedoms, Liberties, Equalities, and Equal Justice for All. And insurrections do not need majority support to be justified, as a large minority that believes that they are being oppressed is sufficient, just as it was during the American Revolution, for an insurrection to be morally justified.

This blueprint also states, “So this Strategy is narrowly tailored to focus this is a project that should Unite All Americans together we must affirm that domestic terrorism has no place in our society specifically on addressing violence and the factors that lead to violence – violence that violates the law, threatens public safety, and infringes on the free expression of ideas.” But with its inconsistencies, untruths, and possible Constitutional Rights violations of their strategy, it will in no way “Unite All Americans” as it only addresses one side, the “Progressives/Leftists” side, while not addressing the other “Constitutional Conservatism” side. Indeed, it may pit one side (i.e., Social Justice Warriors – SJW) against the other side (i.e., the Far-Right), with the government only investigating and pursuing the one side of this issue.

The proffers put forth in this blueprint are antithetic to our ideas of “Freedoms, Liberties, Equalities, and Equal Justice for All” and are not worthy of a people dedicated to Freedom and Liberty. That this was put forth by the President and the Attorney General of the United States is disquieting and cause for alarm for everyone who believes in our Natural and Constitutional Rights. It is also a good example of why Progressives/Leftists and the Democrats are not fit to rule a people dedicated to Liberty and Freedom. If these ideas were implemented without the proper safeguards to our rights, they would change the principles of our government and society, and even with the proper safeguards, they would change the character of our country. We would become more of a police state concerned more about words than deeds. Everybody would be looking over their shoulders when they expressed disagreement with the government, in that they may become a suspicious person who the government would investigate for possible domestic terrorism.

As I have, in my Chirps and Articles, raised concerns about our Natural and Constitutional Rights and have warned of the dire consequences of civil unrest and possible civil war if we do not properly address these concerns, I may be considered a rabble-rouser under the precepts of this blueprint. As such, I could possibly be labeled as an agitator of Domestic Terrorism and run afoul of the legal processes outlined in this blueprint.