By Chandrashekar (Chandra) Tamirisa, (On Twitter) @c_tamirisa

Barack Obama has declared another major victory against Al Qaeda, the non-state global terrorist group that was responsible for the September 11, 2001 attacks on the two tallest towers of the World Trade Center complex in Lower Manhattan, New York.

The Washington Post reports that Anwar al-Aulaqi, the leader of the external operations of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and Samir Khan, the co-editor of an al-Qaeda magazine, both U.S citizens, were killed in drone attacks on Friday, September 30, 2011, the last day of Fiscal Year 2011 whose budget was never passed. The Federalist Society has released an important question for debate on Facebook about the legalities of killing US citizens in counterterrorism operations. The Society, of which I am a member, also has a podcast of the discussion on their website.

Anwar al-Aulaqi and Samir Khan were clearly engaged in treasonous activities, Christian or Muslim, white or brown, and could have been captured and/or killed legitimately under the due process clause of the United States Constitution, either abroad or inside US borders. They were killed before they could be captured. Timothy McVeigh met with his death by death penalty for bombing a federal building in Oklahoma City. President Obama will not be at fault provided there was no option besides using drones to dismember their bodies into pieces.

The tendency of a state, however, to kill its own citizens (including the use of the death penalty), whatever the domestic or foreign legalities or the geopolitical contexts of its justification, with or without due process, must be disconcerting especially for the United States of America and moreover, to a president who has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 and who is working to cite Moammar Gadaffi and his son Saif al-Islam of Libya on human rights violations in The Hague.

To provide anecdotal evidence, in 2009 I had written to the top law firms in Washington, D.C while at the Federal Reserve seeking representation in a personal injury claim against the Fed because of my complaints about government wrongdoing involving evidence of brazen interference in my life as a private citizen motivated by political retaliation because of policy differences and widespread government abuse of my intellectual property. I had complained within the Fed and to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI); to the ombudsperson at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT); reported the matter to my state’s senator in the United States Senate and to the Obama White House seeking relief from a federal agency and notified the press.

As I have been documenting to the Nobel Committee since 2010, for complaining I was forced out of my government employment and thrown out of my house on court order per force, and in spite of being a healthy man sent to a mental health institution for seeking divorce on grounds of domestic violence brought about by bureaucratic pressure through my spouse, an economist at the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

The mindset in Washington is so plagued by xenophobia that security guards are determining on an ad hoc basis who an American is based on the looks of the person. Security departments in government agencies are likewise using information about the personal lives of citizens to determine social mobility in internecine bureaucratic warfare predicated on the population sizes of the various racial and ethnic groups in the society without respect for the legal standing of citizens and the Constitution.

As accomplished as I may be, earlier this year a Mr. Pistol raised a sub-machine gun at me, threatening federal trespass with the intent of shooting my car as I was leaving the federal property turning around from the guard’s gate after being denied visitor entry when I went to Langley to drop of a business card to introduce myself to Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) procurement office as a registered government contractor. Mr. Pistol is black and white, akin to the president. I am South Asian.

I am not an enemy combatant in Al Qaeda’s war against the United States. I am an owner of legitimate corporations incorporated in the District of Columbia, a lobbyist and a consultant and an upstanding US citizen. I was a career government civil servant for more than a decade at the Federal Reserve with a high security clearance for sensitive data access and no holds on employment or access to any agency of the United States government, including my former employer Federal Reserve, CIA and the Pentagon which require the most stringent clearances.

Eventually, unable to obtain legal representation despite the United States Senate asking me to seek pro bono help because of my financial constraints, I filed personal injury papers myself under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) against the White House, the Federal Reserve, and the CIA’s Inspector General. The case is under investigation and I am going about my normal life.

Behaving as such, and not taking matters into one’s own hands as Kaczynski, McVeigh, Aulaqui and Khan did, is professionalism and due process, notwithstanding the fact that the government is prone to bringing fake terrorism charges as it did against a few African-Americans in Florida several years ago.

These days, bedeviled by amnesia and irresponsibility, seasoned politicians are hurling accusations of terrorism against independent political movements such as the Tea Party, otherwise representative demographically of mainstream America.

The word “American” which originally meant the English immigrants to the American colonies of the United Kingdom after the founding of Jamestown in 1607, today means an immigrant born on any continent or of immigrant heritage born on any continent or born on the American continents. More commonly, as understood around the world and in self-reference, an American is a citizen of the United States of America, proficient in the English language (read, write and speak) to be able to fully participate in American democracy.

Anwar al-Aulaqi’s is, therefore, a tragic story of deliberate estrangement in American society, this fuel being fed by nonsensical political rhetoric aimed at purging its own citizens from the country since 9/11. The country is experiencing an identity crisis and is increasingly becoming intolerant. Social discontent, on the one hand of serious violations of constitutional rights as alleged by the majority white Tea Party and on the other of scapegoating minorities (al-Aulaqi, reports The Washington Post, has been implicated, a careful use of words from the editorial room of a major newspaper) is becoming the norm, not the exception.

Our elected representatives are rising to elective office in their political careers and staying there with all the trappings of the Constitutionally vested authority delegated to them by the American people, in a reflection of the social (in)tolerance they are being elected to represent, because of their biases and prejudices not in spite of them.

Barack Hussein Obama, a Unitarian Christian with a Muslim middle name has become a fig leaf for inclusion as a post-Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, Jr., role model against minority discontent after 9/11. The subtext of his Nobel Peace Prize is for “reaching out” to Muslims and for keeping the Chinese at an arm’s length from the United States and Europe.

The inability of this president and his men to address the root causes of social frailty fails my imagination. Why the Federal Reserve cannot make industrial policy and finance the government deficit directly instead of continuing to borrow from China and the Middle East, the source of Tea Party discontent, and why Obama is vetoing Palestine, the root cause of the Aulaquis of the world, while sending drones to target individuals are either mysterious for sensible individuals such as myself or can only be explained as political corruption. The best and brightest cannot be so utterly incompetent, unless in acts such as his veto of Palestine Obama is revealing his worldview that victims must be pressured to be “compliant” with victimizer power rather than resist to be free.

Ayman Al Zawahiri, the Al Qaeda leader and mastermind could be back in his homeland Egypt plotting the unraveling of the Arab Spring and, as a consequence, of America, in the shadows of the Muslim Brotherhood, before the Congress and the White House can decide on how much more to borrow to keep the government running to kill the symptoms only to feed the problem.

President Obama must be impeached for the killings of US citizens Anwar al-Aulaqi and Samir Khan using targeted drone attacks after possibly implicating the two persons in terrorist plots to estrange them from the United States using intelligence approaches such as isolation from kith and kin or Phase 1 of National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance, exclusion from society or Phase 2 and physical elimination or Phase 3 similar to Nazi tactics in World War II by Adolf Hitler’s SS of isolating, concentrating and exterminating the European Jewry.

If we are losing information warfare domestically to our own citizens such as John Phillip Walker Lindh, Jose Padilla, Yaser Esam Hamdi, Anwar Al Aulaqi and Samir Khan, can we win abroad?

How can a president who cannot rally his country together despite his soaring rhetoric since 2004, bring the world together?

The country is losing sight of what is important, in the political tug-of-war since 9/11 between those on the right of the political spectrum and on the left, because of the weakening of checks and balances in a system of government architected by design not be trusted. Trust, a social intangible, becomes tangible in the dollar guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the United States.

Loss of trust in the credit and currency is, therefore, loss of trust in the United States.

United States of America cannot be the metaphor for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness unless it walks its talk.