Congress: Antonym of Progress


Correspondence to U.S. House of Representatives regarding the election of a speaker

29 October 2015

I notice that Paul Ryan voted for the 2002 Iraq Resolution, authorizing an invasion based on the absurd falsehood that the secular Ba'ath Party fostered militant groups of religious fanatics. I saw through the lie. I don't understand why Colin Powell and so many other prominent government officials fell for it. I don't trust politicians who are easier to deceive than I am.

I don't know whether Ryan is one of those people who hate religious pluralism, who feel compelled to force the Christians out of Iraq, the Jews out of America, and the Muslims out of Palestine. Regardless, he plays into the hands of intolerant people and arms dealers, to the detriment of millions of people.

Ryan's refusal to meet with his constituents in 2011 indicates that a decade in Congress did not teach him how to face and resolve conflict. He must be a slow learner. I do not believe Ryan is shrewd enough to use high office in a way that will benefit the public. I fear his actions will tend to promote disaster rather than prevent it. His fumbling may endanger the future of the world.

I understand that the House of Representatives is not limited to its own members in the choice of a speaker. There are many people with the talent and experience to excel at that important job. (A number of broad-minded judges come to mind.) I urge you to vote for someone who understands diversity of opinion, the diversity of humankind, and the diversity of life on earth. Paul Ryan is not that person. He does not deserve your support or the vote the people of Virginia's Fifth Gerrymander have entrusted to you.


House rejects religious freedom by endorsing religious state

On 9 January 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives approved, by a 390-5 vote, House Resolution 34 of the 111th Congress,
"Recognizing Israel's right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza, reaffirming the United States strong support for Israel, and supporting the Israeli-Palestinian peace process."

No possessive form of "States"? How can this be grammatical?

Uri Avnery claims Israel is losing the war.

After 13 "Whereas" statements, the House
"(1) expresses vigorous support and unwavering commitment to the welfare, security, and survival of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state with secure borders . . ."

The House apparently feels free to ignore the mandate in Article I of the U.S. Constitution that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" and to commit itself to the survival of a religious government. If the Jewishness of Israel is threatened by conversion of its Jewish inhabitants to other religions, just how far is Ehud Barak (O'Bomber) allowed to go to secure its survival as a "Jewish" state? If Israel has to make a choice between being Jewish or democratic, the House has come down firmly in favor of both.

Would the House have as positive a view of these resolutions?

Does the House believe a religion needs a state to protect itself from oppression? If so, justice demands that the House also support a Sikh state, a Jain state, a Parsi state, an Ajivika state, a Macumba state, an Umbanda state, a Candomblé state, an Asatru state, and a Unitarian state. How can Congress ignore the needs of these religions?

Religious states are among the most dangerous entities in the world, because their survival depends on controlling the minds of their inhabitants, keeping out competing philosophies.

Turning to Palestinians, the House
"(2) reiterates that Hamas must . . . renounce violence . . . and verifiably dismantle its terrorist infrastructure;"

Renunciation of violence would be wonderful. Why doesn't the House urge Israel to do it? Did the House ever demand that Israel dismantle the "terrorist infrastructure" of Irgun?

If Hamas dismantles "its terrorist infrastructure", can it keep the superstructure?

Going worldwide, the House
(5) calls on all nations--
"(B) to lay blame both for the breaking of the `calm' and for subsequent civilian casualties in Gaza precisely where blame belongs, that is, on Hamas;"

Thus, the House not only exonerates Israel of blame for the people already dead, but licenses Israel to Likudate any number of additional civilians. The blood of every innocent Palestinian Israel kills after 9 January 2009 will be on the hands of the 390 irresponsible puppets who passed this resolution.

Wading into politics, the House
"(6) supports and encourages efforts to diminish the appeal and influence of extremists in the Palestinian territories, . . ."

This is an attack on pacifist extremists, including Quakers, Mennonites, and Brethren. A Palestinian Gandhi would upset the world order. The military-industrial complex can't take the risk.

Moving to an adjacent continent, the House
"(7) calls on Egypt to intensify its efforts to halt smuggling between Gaza and Egypt and affirms the willingness of the United States to continue to assist Egypt in these efforts;"

Egypt has been reasonably effective in keeping food and medical supplies out of Gaza, increasing the number of casualties that the House will attribute to Hamas. Apparently, not even birth control supplies are allowed in, to insure an endless supply of Palestinians for Israeli target practice. Gaza has about the greatest rate of population increase in the world, because Israel crowds so many people into tight quarters that they must sleep together.

Taking a parental stance, the House
"(9) reiterates its strong support for a just and sustainable resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict achieved through negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority in order to ensure the welfare, security, and survival of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state with secure borders, and a viable, independent, and democratic Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with the State of Israel."

The "viable, independent, and democratic Palestinian state" is a product of the imagination. It cannot live "side by side in peace and security with the State of Israel" if it straddles Israel, as the unstable state of Pakistan straddled Bharat (India) until it failed in 1971. It can have no security, as shown by the current conflict.

There is already a Palestinian majority in the nearby Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Yet there can be no Palestinian head of state there. Jordan is ruled by a Hashemite (Bedouin) dynasty exiled from Hejaz by the Saud dynasty and compensated with other territory by the manipulative British Empire. (In the 20th century, the Brits set up a number of states from Egypt to Burma, intending that they would distrust and fight each other, keeping them dependent on the British Commonwealth. They would also keep Russia away from the Indian Ocean, lest it set up seismic monitoring stations.)

Kudos to the five who voted against the resolution: Reps. Ron Paul, Gwen Moore of WI, Nick Rahall of WV, Maxine Waters of CA, and Dennis Kucinich of Cleveland. We wish the 16 who abstained more fortitude in the future.

Even the five dissenting votes were such an embarrassment to Zionists that they pretend the vote was unanimous.


Correspondence to U.S. Senate regarding the confirmation of a Secretary of State

15-16 January 2009

Dear Senator:

In 2002, carpetbagging Senator Hillary Rodham voted to authorize the invasion of Iraq. She swallowed Scooter Libby's lies that Iraq posed a terrorist threat, allowing George W.M.D. Bush to settle a family grudge over hundreds of thousands of corpses, igniting sectarian conflict, allowing terrorist organizations to enter Iraq, and driving a million Christians into exile. It was Senator Rodham's responsibility to verify allegations before acting on them. She failed to get the facts from independent foreign policy sources before making a decision.

Now, this dupe has expressed the intention to "restore America's leadership in the world". She exemplifies the type of American who has become incompetent at exercising leadership. Does she intend the other 95% of the world to do what Americans say? That is a bigoted view that, to their credit, billions of people have no intention of fulfilling. I want no part of it. If my refusal to treat Americans as a superior race makes me a traitor, then organize my firing squad. I don't want to live in a world mismanaged by ugly Americans (bleach blonde or not).

Get Senator Rodham out of government. She can go back to helping Wal-Mart bust unions, run child labor sweatshops in Honduras, and smuggle lead toys out of China.

Peace,


An open letter to Rep. Nancy Pelosi

who represents most of San Francisco, Shasta bioregion

December 24, 2006

Representative Nancy Pelosi
235 Cannon House Office Building
Capitol Hill
Washington, District of Columbia 20515

Dear Congresswoman Pelosi:

You are quoted as saying, "Impeachment is off the table." Under Robert's Rules of Order, a motion taken off the table is placed on the floor, where it may be debated and approved.

To keep your word, you must follow through with impeachment procedures.

President John Forbes Kerry has abrogated his responsibility to execute the law. He has conceded an election that he won and allowed usurpers to take over the White House. He has failed to set up a government in exile. Kerry's failure to act has made him an accessory to election fraud and criminal violations of the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War.

It would be intolerable for a legislative leader to protect executives from prosecution for war crimes. (It was Foley on the part of Dennis Hastert to DeLay investigation.)

Should you change your mind and decide to lay impeachment back on the table as a delaying tactic, someone else can be found to be Speaker. Within the House, I would prefer someone like John Conyers, Dennis Kucinich, Maxine Waters, Maurice Hinchey, George Miller, or Ron Paul. Of course, as we are told by the Clerk of the House at <http://clerk.house.gov/members/memFAQ.html#elect>, the Speaker need not be a member of Congress. Lani Guinier, Jim Hightower, Barry Commoner, Dolores Huerta, Jeremy Rifkin, Studs Terkel, Ralph Nader, Wilma Mankiller, Amory Lovins, Cynthia McKinney, David Cobb, and Harry Belafonte are also eligible. There are plenty of alternatives available.

Peace,

The Green Troll


Letters from and about Rep. Nita Lowey

who represents Hudson Valley, New Yorkshire

from Rep. Nita Lowey to an Ossining resident

April 27, 2006

Dear ____:

Thank you for contacting me to express your views about U.S. policy toward Iran. I appreciate the benefit of your view on this issue of importance to our country, and welcome the opportunity to respond.

I believe the U.S. must continue to pursue all possible diplomatic avenues to pressure Iran to cease its nuclear program. Under its current leadership, Iran is a threat - to the U.S., to the Middle East region, and to global stability. Working with the community of nations, the U.S. must ensure that the current negotiations do not leave the door open for Iran to acquire nuclear capability. One negotiator described the effort to delineate between nuclear energy and weapons capability as "drawing a line in water."

The U.N. Security Council has referred the issue of Iran's nuclear program to the International Atomic Energy Association, or the IAEA. The IAEA is expected to report later this month on whether Iran is complying with UN demands that it halt uranium enrichment. I think it is clear that this report will confirm what we already strongly suspect.

In the wake of this expected report, the U.S. must lead the charge in the Security Council to ensure Iran does not achieve the nuclear capability it seeks. As we saw at the recent Security Council deputy foreign ministers meeting in Moscow, as well as during the President's meetings with Chinese President Hu Jintao, it will not be easy to marshal the support of the Security Council behind meaningful diplomatic action against Iran. Russia and China may enjoy a robust trade with Iran, but they must understand that their security will be directly threatened if Iran gains membership in the club of nuclear powers.

Pursuing a military option against Iran would not be prudent. President Bush's refusal to specifically rule out the use of nuclear weapons undermines global nonproliferation efforts and runs counter to the leadership position the U.S. should take in these efforts.

The U.S. should pursue sustained, multilateral diplomatic pressure under the auspices of the U.N. in order to persuade Iran to disband its nuclear program. We should also engage moderate elements among the Iranian people, three-quarters of whom are under the age of 30. We have a unique opportunity to combat extremist Iranian propaganda, especially among this youthful population, many of whom have been pro-American. I am pleased that the emergency spending bill currently under consideration in Congress includes funds to increase U.S. public diplomacy in Iran, facilitate student exchanges between Iranians and Americans, enhance independent radio broadcasts to Iran, and support pro-democracy elements within that country.

I will continue to work to encourage a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear crisis as well as more robust non-proliferation efforts around the world - key elements of U.S. national security and global stability. Thank you again for sharing your views with me. If you would like to receive my regular e-newsletter, please call my office or go to www.house.gov./lowey, and please feel free to contact me again if I can be of any assistance in the future.

Sincerely,

Nita M. Lowey
Member of Congress

from a reader to the Ossining resident

April 29, 2006

Dear ____:

Thank you for contacting us to relay Rep. Nita Lowey's views about Iranian policy toward the U.S. I appreciate the benefit of her view on this issue of importance to other countries, and welcome the opportunity to respond.

I believe Iran must pursue all possible diplomatic avenues to pressure the U.S. to cease its nuclear program. Under its current dearth of leadership, the U.S. is a threat - to Iran, to the Middle East region, and to global stability. Working with the community of nations, Iran must ensure that negotiations do not leave the door open for the U.S. to maintain nuclear capability.

The U.N. Security Council has yet to refer the issue of the U.S.'s nuclear program to the International Atomic Energy Association, or the IAEA. The IAEA is never expected to report on whether the U.S. is complying with demands that it halt nuclear development. If it ever saw the light of day, I think it is clear that a report would confirm, if not exceed, our worst fears.

In the absence of such a report, Iran must lead the charge in the Islamic realm to ensure the U.S. does not achieve the nuclear monopoly it seeks. As we saw in the Gulf War, as well as during the Iranian President's meetings with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, it will not be easy to marshal the support of the Islamic realm behind behind meaningful diplomatic action against the U.S. Nor will it be easy to marshal the support of the Security Council behind meaningful diplomatic action against the U.S., one of only five members with veto power. Japan and Germany may enjoy a robust trade with the U.S., but they must understand by now that their security will be directly threatened if the U.S. flaunts its membership in the arrogant club of nuclear powers.

Pretender George WMD Bush's refusal to specifically rule out the use of nuclear weapons undermines global nonproliferation efforts and runs counter to the nurturing position the U.S. should take in these efforts.

Iran should pursue sustained, multilateral diplomatic pressure in order to persuade the U.S. to disband its nuclear program. Iranians should also engage moderate elements among the American people, three-quarters of whom are under the age of 50. We have a unique opportunity to combat extremist American propaganda, especially among this youthful population, many of whom have been unwilling to face death in a country they cannot locate on a map. I am dismayed that the emergency spending bill currently under consideration in Congress borrows more funds, increasing Chinese totalitarian influence in the U.S. Instead, let's facilitate student exchanges between Americans and Iranians (following the example set by flight schools), enhance independent radio broadcasts to and within the U.S., and support pro-democracy elements within this country (instead of the monarchist element that forced its views on Iran, precipitating the Islamic revolution).

I have nearly given up trying to find a solution to the American nuclear crisis - a key element of Iranian national security, global stability, and the continuance of life on earth. Thank you again for sharing Rep. Lowey's views with me. If you would like to peruse my website, please go to <http://www.rev.net/~aloe/peace>, and please feel free to contact me again if I can parody the hypocrisy that angers societies whose material and cultural progress has been tragically and repeatedly delayed by U.S. imperialism.

Peace,

Ward Cleaver
Member of Progress


Questions? Comments? Send mail to the ridewaver@gmail.com.

TOP / HOME PAGE / FRONT PAGE
ELECTION INFORMATION
POLITICS PAGE

POLITICAL WINGS: COMPARING LEFT AND RIGHT
DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE
CONSTITUTION
WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENCE
RAILROAD PAGE
GEOGRAPHY PAGE
ADMINISTRATIVE BOUNDARIES FOR NORTH AMERICA
LIFEBOAT ETHICS
SEARCH

Last revised: 9 October 2016
visitors since 8 May 2006