Join Watchdogwire.com/Pennsylvania to report on what’s happening in your community. The more eyes, ears and writers the better. We can hold our elected representatives and appointed officials accountable.

Regardless of which news outlet you choose to watch, or not watch, the overreach of government seizing personal emails of a news journalist, who went unrepresented, is a reason to question the actions of your government, and exercise your First Amendment Right.

THE FACES OF SCANDAL: When Jennifer Stefano of suburban Philadelphia tried to start a tea party group, the IRS sent her so many questions that she figured it was easier to quit, ABC’s CHRIS GOOD and SHUSHANNAH WALSHE report. “In the documents that were sent to me, if you did not tell the whole truth by not putting all your personal information out there by Facebook, by Twitter, of your personal relationship with candidates and parties … it could be considered perjury and perjury carried jail time,” Stefano, 39, told ABC News. “That was frightening and that’s why I shut it down. I shut my group down.” Stefano is among dozens of tea party organizers who received extra scrutiny from the Internal Revenue Service — 75 in 2012, by the agency’s own admission — as officials sought to investigate the tax-exempt applications of conservative groups.

The next step, a lawsuit.

ABC reports:

“What is the next step for the tea party groups who feel they were unfairly scrutinized by the Internal Revenue Service? For many of them, it may be lawsuits, against the IRS.

Jay Sekulow, the chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, said the group will be bringing a lawsuit on behalf of many of those groups next week.

“It’s the logical next step,” he said.”

That unanswered question seems to be the one failing students, and taxpayers, the most.

As a result of that decision, state revenue has increased. According to the Commonwealth Foundation, a Harrisburg-based free-market think tank, and their published fact-check blog:

“(Washington State) collected more than $185 million in spirit taxes so far this fiscal year (through March 10), an increase of 12 percent over the prior year total when the state government still controlled liquor stores. For the year to date, revenue totals exceeded expectations by nearly 5 percent.”

Similar support for legislative change here - House Bill 790 – was advanced in March. State House representatives voted 201-90, the first time a liquor measure like this passed a full House vote hurdle.

Now in the hands of the Law and Justice Committee, Rep. Chuck McIlhinney (R-Bucks) sits at the helm and has influence over the bill’s lucrative endeavors. With two out of the three hearings completed – one more hearing is set for June – it appears that Pennsylvanians could be stuck in a vortex of political illusions.

McIlhinney has apparent ties to unions, and his choice language is evident that he does not promote the option of selling alcohol in retail settings. His rebuke could be heard loudly at the May hearing.

Remarkably, though, there are 48 other states that allow private enterprises to some extent sell beer and wine either in grocery stores, gas stations, or private stores.

What makes Pennsylvania any different? Nanny state comments that are not supported by fact only continues an abuse of power that delineates from the role of an elected official, whose job is to facilitate business, not to scold them out of the state, taking Commonwealth tax dollars along with them.

Retired from the Postal Service, I have some ideas on what needs to be done to save this Constitutionally provided institution, and a new line of clothing, mentioned several months ago, does not even make my list, nor do I think elimination of Saturday delivery alone would be sufficient.   During my career, I carried mail, worked inside a large postal plant, and collected data for a year.

It was that year of collecting data that foretold today’s inevitable crisis.  The year was 2000, and at that time as I remember, first-class mail was less than half the letter mail volume but more than half total postal revenue.  The problem was that, of that first-class mail, somewhere around 70 percent consisted of bill presentment and payment.  The writing was on the wall.  Much less bill presentment, bill payment volume has evaporated to the internet, and will continue even more.  This was one major straw that broke the back of a camel already straining under what the postal service failed to recognize early on– that the business was becoming about the delivery of things rather than information.  Other substantial problems contributed to the current situation, but the loss of quality volume sufficient to sustain delivery to every delivery point six days a week was an inevitable result of new information technology and beyond the post office’s control.  Simply cutting the workforce and utilizing a heavy application of sorting automation, in many ways commendable, could not keep up with the deteriorating situation.

Political considerations put cutting several known sources of waste beyond reach that could have delayed (but only delayed) the current crisis.  One example, but certainly not isolated, happened near where I live.  Two small towns that appear as one are separated only by a railroad track.  Each had its own post office with its own postmaster and staff, and unfortunately still does.  One town outgrew its office.  Since the two towns together are smaller than many single towns, the opportunity was perfect to build one new office large enough to accommodate both.  I’m not sure if this was even suggested, but am confident, if tried, the local congressman would have been besieged with calls from one of these adjacent towns about losing its identity or the hardship of having to travel perhaps a half mile further to reach the new combined office.

Another commonly well-known waste that politics preserves occurs in suburban neighborhoods that originally had mail delivered to a box attached to the house or through a slot in the front door, rather than a box at the curb.  In such situations the carrier drives to the area, parks and walks to each house, then moves the vehicle to the next area, over and over again.  Yet by all appearance such neighborhoods are identical to others where curbside boxes were required from the start, and delivery from the vehicle is several times more efficient.  Private businesses looking at the current postal challenges would quickly change this, but under the political connection no one dares to even try.

Unions are another obstacle to efficient operation in ways other than wages that exceed the skill level.  Removal for poor performance or abuse of leave is extremely  difficult.  The workplace is fractured into crafts, each represented by its own union, so employees of one craft may not touch the equally low skilled work of another.  At one time, this could work; it simply cannot today.  One would think when workers at some plants, willing to work many hours of available overtime, can earn in excess of six figures, there would be concessions to overall efficiency and responsibility to secure the remaining jobs of all.

That brings us to today with the postal service looking to cut Saturday delivery to keep itself afloat.  This is attempting to put a band-aid on a gaping wound, and will be difficult to manage as well, as every Monday will follow two non-delivery days and will be like the current volume anomaly of Tuesdays after Monday holidays.  Of course there will still be Monday holidays and those Tuesdays will now be after three consecutive non-delivery days– what I can only imagine as a volume-overload management nightmare.

Now we get to the only possible solution I can conceive: the immediate move to three-day Monday-Wednesday-Friday delivery.  While each delivery day volume would increase, it would be more manageable by being more consistent day-to-day.  Such a move would mean adding carriers as some routes would have to be cut slightly (but not nearly by half) to get the job done.  Savings would be attained by cutting the use of delivery vehicles substantially.  The other significant savings would require a major change of workplace rules where carriers not delivering express mail and priority parcels on Tuesday-Thursday-Saturday would be working in a plant preparing mail for delivery, replacing work being done by clerks and mail handlers now, eliminating many of those positions.  Consideration would have to be made to occasionally deliver on Tuesday-Thursday-Saturday in working around holidays.

Proposed plans are to continue delivering parcels six days a week and I would assume express mail also.  Most offices could do this job with one of every three or four current carriers, leaving the others to work in plant.  Limiting six-day parcel delivery to priority rate parcels would encourage greater use of the higher priority rate.  For letters considered urgent there already is a flat rate express letter option that does not require a time-consuming signature.  Out of the box thinking and a willingness to be flexible with current workplace rules and a decidedly more radical approach is necessary to potentially continue the US Postal Service as a self-sustaining entity in the 21st century.

Todd Keefer is the author and creator of FreeMktMonkey, www.FreeMktMonkey.com.

Metcalfe’s legislation would prevent mandatory compulsory dues for non-union members, and would apply to both public and private sector employees. He said he is working on adding co-sponsors to this bill, which is part of a six-bill package.

The other bills are:

- HB 51, prohibits labor organizations from collecting compulsory union dues from non-union public school employees

- HB 52, prohibits labor organizations from collecting compulsory union dues from non-union state employees

- HB 53, prohibits labor organizations from compulsory union dues from non-union local government employees

- HB 54, prohibits employment from being conditional upon membership or non-membership in a labor organization – compulsory dues would be prohibited for non-union members and would apply to only private sector employees

- HB 250, permits public employees to opt out of their union membership at any time during their contract.

Currently, under the Public Employee Relations Act, employees can only opt out of their union membership 15 days prior to the expiration of their contract. This legislation, House Bill 250,  would provide public employees the freedom to terminate their union membership at any time.

“Becoming a Right-to-Work state is a basic freedom every Pennsylvanian should enjoy,” Metcalfe said. “Pennsylvanians should be able to have a job without being forced to pay dues.”

Metcalfe said there is an increase at the prime sponsorship level to support passing Right-to-Work legislation. His bill is currently sitting in Labor Committee.

“Indicators show the economy is helped by Right-to-Work policies,” Metcalfe said. “At no cost to the taxpayers, this legislation would reap great benefits. Especially now, with so many people out of work.”

Metcalfe said he’s heard from individuals who are forced to be part of a union, but they want to opt out.

While Metcalfe is pushing Right-to-Work legislation on the state level, along with his co-sponsors, at the national level, The National Labor Relations Board lost a battle to advertise its message in the workplace.

According to the Wall Street Journal, President Obama’s National Labor Relations Board is undergoing tough scrutiny.

“Three judges on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, ruling in National Assocation of Manufacturers v. National Labor Relations Board, struck down the NLRB’s diktat that businesses put up pro-union posters in the workplace. That, the court said, violated employer free speech rights in place since Congress’s 1947 Taft-Hartley Act,” the online news source reported.

“Before even getting to the heart of his opinion, Judge A. Raymond Randolph wrote, “Although the parties have not raised it, one issue needs to be resolved before we turn to the merits of the case.” That “one issue” is of course the now-famous Noel Canning case, the D.C. Circuit’s January opinion which held that President Obama’s non-recess recess appointments to the NLRB were illegal, and thus hundreds of past and current NLRB rulings are illegitimate.”

In our “Progressive” household, we watched the assassinations of John Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr. and Bobby Kennedy on television; Vietnam unfold at the dinner table and Watergate spin out of control; and the military-industrial complex and intelligence community grow. We thought then that the danger was tyranny from the “Right.” And, at that time in America, it seemed we were correct. But, today it is the “Left” who threatens liberty.

My grandmother emigrated from Poland, before the Nazi and Soviet atrocities. She became American, through and through. She was dedicated to freedom so much so that after World War II broke out in ’39, she tried to enlist. The recruiters laughed at this tiny, almost middle-aged woman with a heavy accent. But, as the reality of Europe became more clear, they laughed less, and respectfully called her “little Mother.”

After Pearl Harbor– the Pacific seeming poised to fall, and Hitler declared war on America– they came to visit her in a government sedan. They asked her if she still wanted to fight, and offered her a job. She became a welder in Kaiser’s Sun Shipyards in Marcus Hook, near her Wilmington, Delaware home. She built cargo ships that were called “Liberty ships.” She soon took to bossing big men too old or unfit for active duty.

And though America won, she lost almost all her family who stayed behind – only two survived. One a little strawberry blonde, blue-eyed, five year-old Jewish girl in a death camp, who the Nazis just didn’t have time to exterminate before the Russian onslaught from when the East swept over them. After surviving in the displaced persons camps, she finally found herself in Israel. She made a new home and family.

Cousin Genia came from Israel after the Six-Day War, to visit my Grandma Mincha. I was sitting with her in Grandma’s house in Wilmington, on horrible thick clear plastic sofa pillow covers that protected hard-earned furniture, when I saw the numbers on her arm. The precocious and sensitive boy that I was, I reached out and gently touched the tattoo. I said, “I know what those are. Don’t worry. You’re in America now. You’re safe. It can never happen here.”

I will never forget it– as if I could ever forget anything– the look on her face. She went ashen and blank, and seemed to just, well, disappear. She sat there, but it was as if there was no one left. I felt strangely alone. After a moment, she ran from the room, leaving me to wonder what was wrong with her. I didn’t realize that it was me that was wrong. I did not understand the trauma, her loss.

Grandma came in alone, about 15 minutes later. I had always been the apple of her eye– “so smart, so handsome, so wonderful!” I was unprepared when she raised her hand high, swung it down and struck me in my face. It was so hard that it knocked me to the floor. The anger and sorrow and guilt made her, a small woman, seem like a giant.

She roughly grabbed my shoulders and pulled me up, shaking me. Eyes inches from mine, she spat out, “Do you think we were uncultured? Uncivilized? Animals? Do you think we knew what would happen? That butchers would kill us all?”

We were both weeping. She made me promise to never to let it happen in America.

But it did happen, many times, many places since, the same way it’s beginning to happen here.

The continuum from Left to Right is not a line, it is a circle. On one side, there are moderates, what I consider the reasonable. There are Liberals who want individual Liberty; Conservatives who want to preserve the best of heritage. Mostly honest– we can work together to solve problems.

Our founders were explicit in executing our Constitution. They clearly spelled out exactly what powers were allowed to the federal government, and those reserved to the states and the people. They wrote volume upon volume of published prose and private letters, detailing why they made it so. They understood the best and worst of human nature. And they warned us of the dangers.

There are many reasonable folks who have become inured to gradual corruption of government and lessened liberty, who see no troops in the streets, no mass arrests, confiscations or FEMA concentration camps, who ask why we should worry. They should consider consequences, intended or not. Shall we continue to follow “Progressive” plans toward “group identity,” mutable rights, civilian disarmament,  educational indoctrination, undefended borders, incomprehensible regulation with criminal consequence, unaccountable control by alleged experts, usurious taxation, corrupt corporate crony capitalism, a politically correct press that publishes naught but propaganda? Even the most cynical and sanguine must admit the possibility that we tread the same path to perdition as other countries that became tyrannies. The lessons of history cannot be ignored. And what downside could there be to restoration of limited, constitutional government– of state and individual rights?

We have but a brief moment to forestall the well-laid plan of “progress,” to hold the line and then take the fight to the enemies of freedom. Corrupt-ocrat crypto-fascists will be our undoing, if we let them. Today, using discredited but time-honored tactics of the big lie, divide and conquer, and created crisis, we are pushed forward to a dystopia of almost unimaginable proportion. Today they make totalitarianism legal. Today the forces of darkness have at their disposal technology so efficient, so pervasive and invasive, that once lost, liberty may never be regained.

Who would they come for first? Christians, Muslims, Jews, blacks, whites, gun owners, Tea Partiers? Will we be as Rev. Niemöller, or will we fight for those targeted for oppression, knowing we are next? We must restore liberty and become that “shining city on a hill!”

This is what we stand to lose or gain, why we must wake up and stand up. That is why I am giving up my beloved anonymity, my peaceful life of quiet contemplation. I fight because of our our God-given rights, our Constitution, and a promise once given.

Since the drilling boom began in 2008, there has been an increase in job growth and an expansion in natural gas drilling. As all interested parties try to find an effective way to manage the natural resource, concern of small town growth happening too fast, and not having enough local services to manage burgeoning communities, has been conveyed.

The state has until July 1 to allocate funds to local communities. Even abutting communities that are not home to well drillers, will benefit from the perks of natural gas drilling. Some are expected to receive additional funding for their local budgets.

Natural gas companies are in the same boat as state officials, in terms of understanding the direction of paying the structured fees under Act 13, which was implemented in 2012. In spite of any fee confusion – delayed payments - the results of the state’s recent modest growth in natural gas hasn’t stopped the industry from bringing profits along with it.

According to TribLive.com:

“Gas companies drilled 1,357 new deep-shale wells in Pennsylvania last year. Nearly all of those were horizontal and got charged a full fee of $45,000 each. There were 4,920 deep-shale wells drilled before 2012, which had to pay a lesser fee. There were 288 vertical deep-shale wells, whose owners have to pay only a fifth of what horizontal drillers paid, under the law.”

Implementing a new severance tax in 2015 or 2016 could derail what is slowly and reliably becoming a valuable way to create jobs, provide philanthropy to communities, and make Pennsylvania viable in the energy market.

The costs associted with drilling are far from inexpensive. The addition of further regulation, and taxes, on a promising industry doesn’t guarantee that the money collected will be put to good use, but it will kill jobs and it will slow revenue growth.

According to Pennsylvania Fracking, a site that advocated against a severance tax in previous gubernatorial administrations, “taxes collected on natural gas will not be directed toward environmental causes. Rather, these funds will be used to fill a gap in the state budget caused by overspending.”

The site reports, “in 2009, the DEP raised drilling permit fees from $100 to as high as $5,000 – generating $12 million in 2010, a 1,600% increase over the previous year. Further, Marcellus drillers have already contributed over $400 mllion through other taxes.” John Hanger, the Democrat candidate for governor, spearheaded the cost increase of drilling permit fees.

Comparing Pennsylvania to states that drill nationwide, state taxes should be considered. Natural gas tax models in states like Texas and Wyoming are unlike Pennsylvania in that neither has income nor corporate taxes.

Pennsylvania, though, has one of the highest tax burdens in the nation.

I grew more progressively peeved with “progressive” policies promoted by SEIU without worker permission, on our dime. As an Unemployment Claims Examiner for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, I have no option to refuse SEIU’s representation. It is a mandatory condition of employment. This corruption is compounded by cavalier, near complete lack of concern for individual workers’ welfare. The union will not fight for us.

Few, if any, current employees were working for the state all those decades ago when the first contract was signed, thus we never had the option to decide whether we actually want this union. Dues and fees taken as a requirement of employment were, and still are, funnelled to SEIU International, an avowedly Communistic organization, and lavished locally on lawmakers.

As quid pro quo, successive administrations and Legislatures, local and national, catered and caved in to demands for excessive and unsustainable benefits and pensions and turned a blind eye to union violence. They got not only union support for re-elections, but also a hands-off approach from the union regarding contract violations. And, as with Legislators, a worker’s merit is misdefined as time served. Quality and quantity of our work mean nothing.

(Incidentally, Andy Stern, former President of SEIU International and good friend of President Obama, got his start in my Local. He was the one who took PSSU, the Pennsylvania Social Services Union, and affiliated with SEIU, the Service Employees International Union).

I ran for President of our Local in 2008. Pledged to restrict expenditure of union monies to strictly union matters; to institute independent audit; to poll the membership and adhere to their views. Turnout was slight. I lost the election.

By April 2012, I was beyond exasperation. Despite a contract clause that only permitted resignation from membership within a very narrow window, every three years when the contract was up for renewal, (the next being July 2014), I wrote Kathy Jellison, current President of SEIU 668, advising that I wanted out!

The information was found easily on the Internet, which indicated that under the US Supreme Court “Beck” precedent, I could not be forced to remain a member or be forced to pay for unauthorized political speech. They stole my natural, self-evident, Constitutional Right to Free Speech by forcing me to subsidize their own views.

The union ignored me. So I asked for help from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, and they agreed. Jim Young, an attorney who had already beaten SEIU before the bench at SCOTUS, took my case. We sued SEIU Local 668 and Governor Corbett in United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, on First and Fourteenth Amendment grounds. (Case 5:12-cv-05202-JS GRAY v. CORBETT et al). We argued that my constitutional right to free speech was being abridged.

At first they denied me. Then they cajoled, caviled, compromised, and finally caved. They settled, and we won.

Not only did they let me out, but they paid me back all dues since I sent my letter, a provision we never even asked for. They made no stipulation of non-disclosure (probably because they already knew I am a loudmouth who would never agree).

I was now a fee payer, but unsatisfied. I insisted they comply with the SCOTUS “Hudson” precedent, and provide all fee payers with an independent audit of union expenditures, outlining what was political, and thus exempt from fees. They complied, producing the first audit any of us had ever seen. Mandatory fee deductions were significantly reduced, costing the SEIU big money.

Though I felt the audit was not truly “independent” and somewhat less than accurate, it was not worth further challenge without a great deal more verifiable research to prove its’ lack of veracity, and a Class action suit.

But that was still not enough, and I did not let up. My fees are now escrowed, and quarterly payments made to the charity of my choice (The Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation Education Fund. Bet it gives SEIU fits when they write the check!)

The union still must represent me in contract matters, however unenthusiastically. Little matter, as unpaid shop stewards do the yeoman’s work in grievances; it is extremely rare that any rising above first level are ever satisfied. And neither members nor fee payers have any real voice in contract negotiations.

No thugs ever accosted me. Bullies rarely attack those who can defend themselves; they prey on the weak. And whatever victory I achieved is slight, for the tens of thousands of other union workers forced to subsidize Progressive politics and corruption against their will have not yet followed.

Like most folks, union workers are prey to the demons of apathy and fear, frightened to take a stand lest they lose what little they’ve got. Which is exactly what those who would rule us count on. We are subjects of soft tyranny, ripe for the real thing if we don’t stop it soon.

I still support the idea of union; the ideals of Main Street, Wall Street, the Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches of Government, our Religious, Civil and Fraternal Organizations. But, like my union, most have been, over the past century, infiltrated and taken over by those who claim to believe in “Progress”. Looking at America today, we see what the March FORWARD really means.

Despite the brave, new rhetoric, it is the same sorry story of self-dealing; a dimunition of the people. There are no unintended consequences. The best way to ensure union justice and effectiveness for the worker is to remove those who have become too comfortable with power.

Though I beat them and regained my voice, I will continue to make my case for freedom. No matter the cost, for the price of silence in the face of sin is too high.

That said, can the trigger of future destructive events be intelligently harnessed by our very large, and ever-expanding government? Ascertained information collected on possible dangerous individuals doesn’t seem to light a much needed fire under those who oversee national safety standards.

That is not to say that the Federal Bureau of Investigation is not doing its job, or the Department of Homeland Security, or any other bureaucracy. Individuals who assume responsibility to prevent such destruction must be held accountable, including Attorney General Eric Holder who is telling the public to avoid acting negatively toward Muslims.

Reasoning behind Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev choosing to detonate the bombs is unknown. The victims’ family members will have to spend time questioning life in general, and life as they knew it. While blood shed of this magnitude has not occurred on American soil since the devastating Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, and numerous attacks have been reported as being thwarted, it is still very unsettling to learn that government officials knew of Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev before the Boston bombings.

As the story has unfolded, a nation has come to learn that the FBI was aware of these dangerous suspects, and cleared them. Background on the young terror seeking brothers doesn’t lessen the blow that the men have alleged jihad ties to their native Chechnya. Rumors, reports and shared information have surfaced to support such claims.

Most recently, U.S. Rep. Peter King (R-NY), clamored on Sunday talk shows about the need for transparency. He said there is a threat coming from the Muslim community, “and in previous times when certain elements in the community are the ones responsible for crime, the police focused on it.

For instance in Boston, the FBI never spoke to the Boston police about the older brother. And afterwards there was no intelligence files in Boston on these types of people, these people inclined to terrorism. The FBI never even got to examining him.”

Why?

The debate on this current event has, at times, turned to defining terrorism. According to an FBI report, “there is no single, universally accepted, definition of terrorism.” It continues, the definition of terrorism begins with “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”

More and more pundits, reporters and politicians are weighing in on the conversation surrounding this horrific event, some not without deflecting the reality that more than enough people witnessed terrorism with their own eyes. Two suspects, who caused damage, were caught by the help of citizens actively forced into the manhunt. And, allegedly, there could be more dangerous suspects involved walking freely throughout America without question.

Had Americans been made aware of these suspicious young adults prior to the events on April 15, would the results have been different? We no longer engage in the Homeland Security color-coded system that alarmed people of potential danger, and provided vague terror warnings. The colors were red for a possible severe attack; orange for high risk; yellow for elevated; blue for guarded; and green for low. The system was phased out April 2011. The system now, under Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano is simply stated, “When a threat develops that could impact you – the public – we will tell you.”

There were bomb-sniffing dogs located at the exact locations of where the bombs were detonated. Had people been on alert, could they have potentially helped to thwart the bombings before, or had the choice to not attend the Boston Marathon, if they had so desired? No one was warned or told anything under the new system. There are currently “no alerts.”

True to the nature of politics, questions remain to be answered on the protocol of how we handle suspected terrorists, terror visas, and who we allow into this country. The more antecdotal and factual information collected repeatedly shared in media, leads one to believe, not all resources are being used to stop terrorists before they act.

Major Nidal Malik Hasan, who was charged in a mass shooting with 13 counts of premediated murder and 32 counts of attempted murder, is another example. The 39-year old revealed unsettling mental characteristics reported by coworkers, before the mass shooting took place at Fort Hood, Texas.

An FBI investigation concluded that his emails with the late Anwar al-Awalki – a senior talent recruiter and motivator involved in planning terrorist operations for Islamist militant group al-Qaeda – were innocuous. After the shootings, the FBI and Department of Defense and U.S. Senate conducted investigations that classified the event as “workplace violence.” The U.S. Senate released a report describing the mass shootings as “the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil since Sept. 11, 2001.”

As more and more Americans wake up to the idea that our nation is targeted by extremists, and information has been revealed that government officials knew of, or know of, terroristic suspects, who could cause massive destruction, why let them go or shuffle them around the country? The hiding of suspected perpertrators, associated with a religion, is not a new story specifically in Boston.

Is the hiding of terroristic suspects the next Catholic Church sex abuse scandal? As the scandal was uncovered in Boston, the number of cases reported spread nationwide.

The Catholic sex abuse cases labored for decades, while priests were quietly moved from church to church, covering up the truth of child molestation. Some in the know in the Catholic hierarchy did not report sex abuse allegations to legal authorities.

The pain of the Catholic Church Crisis equally dampened the strong, Boston City where a spirit of freedom is saturated by a vibrant cultural environment. The priests’ stories that cyclically riddled headlines for years broke the hearts of faithful Catholic followers, and many had to reconcile with themselves what they believed. Confusion that leaders of a deeply rich faith hid a sin as enormous as pedophilia was commonly referred to as betrayal in a city that often repeats the mantra, “denial is not a river that runs through Boston.”

To sweep under the rug the severity of a jihadist attack and the impact it can have on this country, when we are still in a very vulnerable economic position, and when politics are viciously separating both sides of the aisle more and more, undeniably means justice in this matter needs to be served. The witnesses are many.

The Catholic sex abuse cases were exposed widely, and uncomfortably. Catholics mourned the pain of those who suffered from the wrongdoings. To turn a blind eye to a jihad attack against Americans on a day that is meant to exemplify freedom is unAmerican.

The next steps forward need to implore transparency on levels never seen before of government officials, politicians and citizens.

The heartbeat of America is freedom. The sins of an organized, radicalized religion that molest our God-given rights neither should be hidden, nor the failure of our government to execute safety procedures properly, based on accurate information, be suddenly forgotten.