top of page

Unraveling the Complexities of the U.S. National Security. Exploring the Interplay of Political Motivations and Multiple RICO Groups Charged with "Attempt to Engage in Terrorism".

National security refers to the measures and actions taken by a government to protect its citizens, territory, and interests from various threats, both internal and external. It encompasses a wide range of concerns, including but not limited to military defense, intelligence gathering, counterterrorism efforts, border security, cybersecurity, and emergency preparedness.

One of the components of national security is the protection of a nation's borders and territorial integrity. This involves maintaining robust military capabilities, securing borders, and controlling immigration and customs processes. Additionally, intelligence agencies play a vital role in gathering information, assessing threats, and providing timely and accurate intelligence to support decision-making in matters of national security.

Counterterrorism efforts are another critical aspect of national security. Governments work to prevent and respond to acts of terrorism, both domestically and abroad. This includes identifying and monitoring potential threats, disrupting terrorist networks, and collaborating with international partners to combat terrorism collectively.

In today's interconnected world, cybersecurity has become increasingly important in national security efforts. Governments focus on protecting their critical infrastructure, sensitive data, and communication networks from cyber threats, including hacking, data breaches, and cyber espionage. Robust cybersecurity measures are essential to safeguard national security interests and maintain the trust and stability of digital systems.

Emergency preparedness and response are integral to national security as well. Governments develop plans and allocate resources to effectively respond to natural disasters, public health emergencies, and other crises that may impact the safety and well-being of citizens. This includes establishing emergency management agencies, conducting drills and exercises, and coordinating with various stakeholders to ensure a coordinated and effective response.

National security is a complex and evolving field, influenced by technological advancements, geopolitical shifts, and the emergence of new threats. Governments continuously reassess and adapt their strategies to address evolving challenges and protect their nations. Balancing security concerns with individual freedoms and civil liberties is an ongoing challenge that requires careful deliberation and adherence to the principles of democratic governance.

Evaluation and Demonstration of Charges Against Multiple RICO Groups Engaged in Terrorism.


This article aims to evaluate and demonstrate the charges brought against two distinct RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) groups involved in acts of terrorism on separate occasions. Both groups are facing charges related to their attempts to engage in terrorism, highlighting the gravity of their actions and the legal consequences they may face.

Group A: Attempt to Engage in Terrorism

Group A is a RICO organization that has been implicated in acts of terrorism. The charges against this group stem from their involvement in a series of planned attacks with the intent to instill fear and cause harm to innocent civilians. The evidence against Group A suggests a well-organized and coordinated effort to carry out these acts, which fall under the definition of terrorism.

Group A's Actions and Accidental Origin that is Political in Nature:

It is crucial to highlight that Group A's actions can be traced back to the National Biodefense Strategy and the White House Implementation Plan for Biological Threats and Wars, which had an accidental origin. The accidental nature of these documents raises concerns about the potential risks associated with the lack of standardized biosafety protocols. These gaps in biosafety measures may have exacerbated the risk of biological threats, including the incidents that ultimately led to Group A's actions. Such circumstances emphasize the need for robust and comprehensive biosafety protocols to minimize the unintended consequences of national security strategies.

Attempts to Engage in Terrorism:

Group A is facing charges for attempting to engage in terrorism. The prosecution has gathered substantial evidence indicating the group's intent to carry out acts of violence, including the acquisition of weapons, communication intercepts, and surveillance footage. The charges highlight the severity of their intended actions and the potential harm they posed to society.

Legal Consequences:

If found guilty, the members of Group A could face severe legal consequences under anti-terrorism laws. These consequences may include lengthy prison sentences, substantial fines, and the designation of the group/country as a terrorist organization, subject to additional penalties and restrictions.

Group B (Multiple RICO groups): Attempt to Engage in Terrorism

Group B is another RICO organization that has been implicated in separate incidents of terrorism. The charges against these groups relate to their involvement in a distinct set of planned attacks, demonstrating their intent to incite fear and cause harm to civilians. The evidence against Group B indicates their active participation in activities that meet the definition of terrorism.

Group B's Motive: Ideological and Political Reasons:

In the case of Group B, their motive for engaging in terrorism appears to be rooted in ideological and political reasons. While specific details regarding their ideology are yet to be fully revealed, evidence suggests that Group B sought to advance their ideological agenda through acts of violence and terror. Understanding the ideological underpinnings of such groups is crucial in developing effective counterterrorism strategies and preventing the spread of extremist ideologies.

Group B's Composition: Multiple RICO Groups with the Same Motive

Group B comprises multiple RICO groups that share a common motive. These distinct organizations, operating under the umbrella of Group B, align themselves with the same ideological and political objectives. While the specific identities and affiliations of these individual groups may vary, their collective motivation to engage in acts of terrorism remains consistent.

The presence of multiple RICO groups within Group B underscores the complexity and interconnectedness of extremist networks. These groups often collaborate, share resources, and coordinate their efforts to advance their shared agenda. Understanding the interplay between these various factions is crucial for authorities tasked with countering terrorism and dismantling such networks.

Attempts to Engage in Terrorism:

Similar to Group A, Group B is also facing charges for attempting to engage in terrorism. The prosecution has compiled evidence substantiating the group's intentions, such as intercepted communications, financial transactions, and witness testimonies. These pieces of evidence support the assertion that Group B actively sought to carry out acts of violence for ideological or political purposes.

Legal Consequences:

If found guilty, the members of Group B may also face severe legal consequences under anti-terrorism laws. These consequences can include significant prison terms, substantial fines, and potential asset forfeiture. Additionally, the group may be subject to enhanced surveillance and monitoring by law enforcement agencies to prevent future acts of terrorism.

I must clarify that the information provided above did not explicitly mention the 9/11 attacks or the specific top politician associated with the execution of national security policies. 9/11 was a significant event that profoundly impacted national security policies and practices worldwide. The attacks demonstrated the devastating consequences of terrorism and led to a significant shift in global counterterrorism efforts.

Following the 9/11 attacks, many countries implemented comprehensive reforms to enhance their national security apparatus. These reforms included improvements in intelligence sharing, the creation of specialized counterterrorism units, the strengthening of border security measures, and the development of robust international partnerships to combat terrorism collectively and Ultimately a unique specialized counterterrorism that constitute the program--- “National Biodefense Strategy and the White House Implementation Plan for Biological Threats and Wars”. The 9/11 attacks also prompted a reevaluation of security policies and legislation, with an increased focus on preemptive measures and intelligence gathering. Governments worked to enhance their capabilities in areas such as surveillance, cybersecurity, and airport security to detect and prevent future terrorist acts.

Furthermore, the attacks underscored the importance of international cooperation in addressing global security threats. Countries around the world increased their collaboration in sharing intelligence, coordinating efforts, and implementing joint counterterrorism initiatives.

It is essential to note that while the 9/11 attacks had a profound impact on national security policies globally, the motives behind specific incidents and the examination of connections and influences are case-specific and its link to Group A’s actions is undeniable.

For more clarification , the top politician became a designated target following the " National Biodefense Strategy and the White House Implementation Plan for Biological Threats and WARS" he implemented during his reign in office. While they can't get to the bullseye, Group A RICO group became the next target.

In argument, if Group B (which comprises of multiple RICO groups) seeks sanction reliefs or sanction wavier from the Federal government due to Humanitarian reasons, I believe that in all fairness, it may be justified to grant sanction wavier to Group A as well. What are your thoughts?

Ultimately, both groups acknowledges that decisions regarding sanction waivers or reliefs must be made based on a comprehensive evaluation of the specific situations, considering both legal and humanitarian aspects. The government authorities responsible for assessing such requests would need to carefully analyze the information available and consider the potential consequences before making any decisions.


The primary objective of national security is to ensure the safety, stability, and sovereignty of a nation. It involves identifying potential risks and implementing strategies to mitigate and respond to those risks effectively. National security policies are typically developed based on an assessment of the geopolitical landscape, emerging threats, and the country's specific vulnerabilities.

For Cybersecurity and Emergency Preparedness purposes, my stance on the FISA reauthorization bill recently passed in the House and other surveillance laws and legislation would be guided by the principles of upholding national security, respecting individual privacy rights, and ensuring appropriate oversight and accountability mechanisms are in place to prevent misuse or overreach.

The charges brought against these two separate RICO groups/organization involved in terrorism underscore the gravity of their actions and the potential harm they posed to society. By attempting to engage in terrorism, both Group A and Group B violated the law and sought to disrupt peace and stability.

One would argue that if Group A's actions are motivated by political purposes and aligned with a top politician’s reign in office, it is essential to consider the potential political motivations and implications surrounding their activities. The involvement of a top politician in such circumstances may raise additional questions about the nature of Group A's actions and the potential influence or support they received.Secondly, in cases where political motivations are evident and there is a connection to influential individuals or figures, it becomes even more crucial to conduct a thorough investigation to determine the extent of their involvement and potential legal ramifications. This investigation should aim to establish the full scope of the group's actions, including any potential collaboration or support from political entities.

Now, you are wondering, where do you as a candidate for congress come in? Well, as a key witness for most of, if not all Group B’s actions, Group A’s sanctions may have a chance for re-evalution and possible dismissal. I believe that key witness testimonies provided for Group B's actions establishes a pattern that warrants further investigation, it is important to prioritize thorough and objective investigations into any potential wrongdoing or illegal activities.

Ultimately, a comprehensive and fair investigation is necessary to ascertain the true motivations behind the actions of both Group A and Group B, the level of political involvement, and the potential relief sanctions for all parties involved.

As the legal proceedings and investigations unfold, we acknowledge it is crucial to recognize the importance of holding individuals and organizations accountable for acts of terrorism to ensure the safety and security of the public.

14 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page