Merge Left

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
— Abraham Lincoln

Petition Calls For Don Young (R-AK) To Reaffirm Oath of Allegiance After Signing Seditious Letter [New]

Written by

with 9 comments [9 new]

Cross-posted from Dirty Hippies.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, then-Alaska Governor Sarah Palin accused candidate Barack Obama of “paling around with terrorists”, referring to one-time Weatherman Bill Ayers, who has long since become a member of Chicago’s political/policy establishment, regularly rubbing shoulders with establishment Republicans as well as Democrats, primarily due to his involvement in urban education policy.

“It was never a concern by any of us in the Chicago school reform movement that he had led a fugitive life years earlier,” former Illinois state Republican Rep. Diana Nelson, told NPR, in a barely-noticed story that got lost in the flood of wild accusations. Nelson had worked with both Obama and Ayers over the years. “It’s ridiculous,” Nelson said. “There is no reason at all to smear Barack Obama with this association. It’s nonsensical, and it just makes me crazy. It’s so silly.”

But now it turns out that another Alaskan Republican—long-time Congressmember Don Young—has not just been palling around with actual terrorists, he’s even signed one of their seditious documents—a “Letter of Declaration”—calling for “alter[ing] or abolish[ing]” the government should it “seek to further tax, restrict or register firearms”. This is a clear-cut call for sedition, given that all the government actions cited are perfectly constitutional according to the most conservative Supreme Court in 70+ years.

A move is now afoot calling for Young to reaffirm the oath of office that he violated in signing the “Letter of Declaration.” The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence has created a petition calling on Young to re-swear his oath to the U.S. Constitution. As explained in a press release:

CSGV’s petition calls on Rep. Young to immediately re-swear his oath to our Constitution and repudiate the “Letter of Declaration.” It also calls on NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre to publicly repudiate the letter and Young’s signing of it.

Young signed the “Letter”, drafted by Schaeffer Cox of the Second Amendment Task Force/Alaska Peacekeepers Militia, on April 13, 2009, as documented on a video posted online that June. (Copy here) On March 11, Cox was arrested as the ringleader in a planned conspiracy to kill state troopers and at least one named judge. (Indictment here.) On March 12, the Anchorage Daily News reported:

Federal agents made extensive recordings of Fairbanks militia members plotting to kill or kidnap judges and Alaska State Troopers and burn their houses, according to documents filed in court Friday.

Four leaders of the Fairbanks-based Alaska Peacekeeper’s Militia — Francis “Schaeffer” Cox, 26, Lonnie Vernon, 55, his wife Karen Vernon, 64, and Coleman Barney, 36 — are charged with conspiring to commit murder, kidnapping and arson. They are also charged with hindering prosecution and possession of illegal weapons.

Cox’s plan was named “241”, meaning that whatever action the government took, Cox’s milita forces were supposed to respond with double the force, according to undercover survelleince information contained in the indictment:

At that February 12th meeting COX specifically unveiled his ’241′ (two for one) plan which called for his militia to respond to attempts to arrest or kill him by responding against state court or law enforcement targets with twice the forces and consequences as happened to him or his familty. If he was arrested, two state targets would be “arrested” (kidnapped). If he was killed, two state targets would be killed. If his house was taken, two state target houses would be burned. COX spent a considerable amount of time logically (in his mind) justifying his actions, stating that ‘at this point, without any further provocation’ he would be ‘well within my rights to drill [Superior Court Judge] McConahy in his forehead’.

Cox’s ideas and actions have a substantial history behind them. He has a history of associating with and espousing the ideology of the “Sovereign Citizenship” movement, which emerged as part of the “militia movment” during the 1990s. The Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate groups, explains:

Made up of an estimated 300,000 participants, the sprawling sovereign citizens subculture advocates the idea that the sovereigns themselves — not judges, juries, law enforcement or elected officials — get to decide which laws to obey and which to ignore. Most don’t think they should have to pay taxes.

Sovereign citizens have long targeted judges and law enforcement officers Just this past May 20, two law enforcement officers were killed and two others were wounded by a father-son pair of sovereign citizens in West Memphis, Ark. In 1995 in Ohio, a sovereign named Michael Hill pulled a gun on an officer during a traffic stop. Hill was killed. In 1997, New Hampshire extremist Carl Drega shot dead two officers and two civilians, and wounded another three officers before being killed himself. In that same year in Idaho, when brothers Doug and Craig Broderick were pulled over for failing to signal, they killed one officer and wounded another before being killed themselves in a violent gun battle.

Despite openly denying government authority over everything from taxes to traffic laws, “Sovereign citizens” routinely try to pass themselves off as patriots and garden-variety gun-rights advocates, and they are often supported in this by the NRA and conservative politicians. This is exactly what Don Young did, through a spokesman, when his signing of the seditious “Letter of Declaration” came to light, following Cox’s arrest.:

Rep. Young’s communications director, Meredith Kenny, said the video shows Rep. Young signing the letter at an “open-carry day” in Fairbanks in the spring of 2009. At the open carry day, gun rights activists appeared in public openly wearing handgun in holsters.

“Rep. Young attended not because of anything having to do with Cox  – nor is he in any way affiliated with Cox — but because he has always been a vocal and staunch defender of the Second Amendment,” Kenny said.  “Congressman Young stands strong with gun owners of America, and will always defend the 2nd Amendment rights of Americans.”

Young’s casual endorsement of sedition, and the political establishment’s ho-hum attitude toward it so far stand in stark contrast to the official anti-Muslim hysteria being promoted in Congress. On March 11, Representative Peter King held a hearing on the threat of Islamic radicalization, as reported by The National:

Peter King, the chairman of the House of Representatives Homeland Security Committee, who called the hearings, has accused the Muslim community of refusing to cooperate with law enforcement and charged that preaching in some US mosques was leading to radicalisation.

“To combat this threat, moderate leadership must emerge from the Muslim community,”

But that same sort of moderate leadership is precisely what’s missing with regard to the “Sovereign Citizens” movement, and other violent rightwing extremists–particularly in the case of Representative Young, who sits on the NRA’s national board. Indeed, King appears to be badly misinformed about the Muslim community, as a report by report by Charles Kurzman, a sociologist the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, found that “ the largest single source of initial information” in disrupting Muslim terrorist plots was the Muslim community itself, responsible for 48 disruptions out of 120.

When presented with an opportunity to be equally responsible in opposing rightwing extremist violence, Representative Young failed the test of patriotic loyalty. In light of this, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence’s petition seems like a mild-mannered response. As CSGV’s Josh Horowitz put it:

“It is simply unacceptable for a sitting member of Congress to sign a document calling for violence against the government of the United States. We call on Rep. Don Young to do the right thing and repudiate this repugnant document.”

But if Don Young were a Muslim, there seems to be little doubt he would already have been expelled from Congress.

BlahEhMmmmInterestingFantabulous!
 

What Do You Think?

9 Responses to 'Petition Calls For Don Young (R-AK) To Reaffirm Oath of Allegiance After Signing Seditious Letter'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'Petition Calls For Don Young (R-AK) To Reaffirm Oath of Allegiance After Signing Seditious Letter'.

  1. Pingback: Petition Calls For Don Young (R-AK) To Reaffirm Oath of Allegiance After Signing Seditious Letter (Edit)

  2. SpitBall [New]

    Tuesday, 22 Mar, 2011 at 4:16 pm

    I signed. But I’d rather see the guy resign, or be recalled.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  3. Emocrat [New]

    Tuesday, 22 Mar, 2011 at 5:43 pm

    I think something a little stronger than a petition is called for here, as one might surmise by perusing Title 5 of the US Code, Section 7311 (emPHAsis MINE!):

    TITLE 5 > PART III > Subpart F > CHAPTER 73 > SUBCHAPTER II > § 7311
    Prev | Next
    § 7311. Loyalty and striking
    How Current is This?

    An individual may not accept or hold a position in the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia if he—

    (1)advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government;

    (2) is a member of an organization that he knows advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government;

    (3) participates in a strike, or asserts the right to strike, against the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia; or

    (4) is a member of an organization of employees of the Government of the United States or of individuals employed by the government of the District of Columbia that he knows asserts the right to strike against the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia.

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode05/usc_sec_05_00007311—-000-.html

    This seems pretty clear to me. If you advocate the violent overthrow of the US government, you can’t work in said government.

    By signing that letter, he is openly advocating the violent overthrow of the USG. Ergo, he’s violated the law and should be forced out of office, since you cannot hold that position if you hold those views.

    Even censure is completely inadequate. Forget petitions.

    As a side note, I just want to add that in doing the Googling to find this, I came across about a bazillion fundie web sites that think liberals are all violating their oath of office because they don’t take that, “So help me GAWD” line very seriously, because they can’t… because they’re gawdless liberals. Or something like that.

    There’s some really scary people out there, folks.

    Anyway, back to the matter at hand. Yeah, petitions seem like weak tea to me, if you’ll excuse the expression.

    Well Liked: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

    • No argument here.

      Well, at least a petition can help create some buzz.

      If only we had just ONE DOJ official who thought like a prosecutor when it comes to war criminals & their kind as opposed to Bradley Manning.

      Sigh!

      Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

      • Emocrat [New]

        Tuesday, 22 Mar, 2011 at 6:50 pm

        And there you go. That distinction, all by itself, is far more important than even Don Young’s masturbatory mutterings. Bradley Manning is being tortured and he hasn’t even taken a position nearly as radical as Young’s. All he did was release a set of docs available to tens of thousands of people on-line and only 5% of those were even labeled Top Secret, never mind the several higher classifications.

        The fact that people like Don Young have the freedom to openly espouse violent overthrow of the government (along with all the “libruls” who’ll be viewed as enemies) while Bradley Manning is being tortured for “crimes” he hasn’t even been charged with, much less convicted of, tells everyone everything they need to know about how this society of ours operates.

        Don Young and people like him will view these petitions as little more than self-generated target lists. That’s about all the value these things have, aside from creating fund-raising email lists.

        Methinks a blogswarm of some sort would generate more buzz. Or something along those lines anyway. Petitions are largely ignored, but if enough blogs are talking this up, the mediots might even have to sit up and take notice.

        But in any case, there don’t seem to be any easy answers to this.

        Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    • David [New]

      Tuesday, 22 Mar, 2011 at 8:21 pm

      That law is patently unconstitutional. Victor Berger would roll over in his grave.

      I really wish we could clean up the US code.

      On the other hand, I personally have difficulty getting energized over complaining about one member failing to live up to his oath of office when the bulk of them are presently ignoring unilateral presidential lawmaking.

      Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      • Emocrat [New]

        Tuesday, 22 Mar, 2011 at 8:46 pm

        Agreed. Perhaps that’s the real point of all this. The bulk of them are doing it.

        At this point, how many members of congress aren’t violating their oaths in one sense or another? Bill of Rights? Piffle to these people. Constitution? Fit for the shredder.

        But Don Young wouldn’t exactly be a bad place to start.

        Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

        • David [New]

          Tuesday, 22 Mar, 2011 at 9:17 pm

          I don’t mean to suggest people shouldn’t sign.

          I’m just frustrated by the number of people who find unilateral presidential war making powers in the Constitution, or in the War Powers Act, or think the UN can authorize a president to make war without congressional involvement.

          Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • Emocrat [New]

            Tuesday, 22 Mar, 2011 at 9:35 pm

            Of course. Add in the fact congress has abdicated all of their oversight responsibilities. Add in almost everyone in official DC doesn’t give a rat’s ass about torture, indefinite detention or Bradley Manning. The Bill of Rights is almost gone altogether, simply because no one in any branch cares that it even exists anymore. So much for “defending the constitution.”

            They all fit into that category of failing to uphold the Constitution.

            The Rule Of Law only exists when people in power are willing to observe that principle. When that’s gone, so goes legitimacy.

            Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

Leave a Reply