Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - netfreak

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 20
Conspiracy / Maj. Gen. Edwin A. Walker
« on: February 16, 2017, 08:59:26 pm »

           The Strange Case of Maj. Gen. Edwin A. Walker

General Edwin A. Walker is known to most JFK assassination buffs as
the man whom Oswald allegedly shot at in April 1963. The general's
right-wing connections are often noted, as is the fact that he was
forced out of his command by the Kennedy administration for his
political indoctrination of his troops. His activities during the
race riots in Oxford, Mississippi in 1962 are also often mentioned,
when he was arrested on four federal charges including insurrection.

His public statement at Oxford was as follows:

      This is Edwin A. Walker. I am in Mississippi beside Gov. Ross
      Barnett. I call for a national protest against the conspiracy
      from within.

      Rally to the cause of freedom in righteous indignation, violent
      vocal protest and bitter silence under the flag of Mississippi
      at the use of Federal troops.

      This today is a disgrace to the nation in 'dire peril,' a
      disgrace beyond the capacity of anyone except its enemies.
      This is the conspiracy of the crucifixion by anti-Christ
      conspirators of the Supreme Court in their denial of prayer
      and their betrayal of a nation.

      [source NYT, 9/30/62]

The Army ordered General Walker to undergo psychiatric testing.

The general's case is strange indeed. But another fact, not often mentioned,
makes his activities in 1961-3 even stranger. Going back to 1957, we find
him in charge of *enforcing* the desegregation order in Little Rock,
Arkansas. His public statements on the matter were limited to exhorting
the public to uphold the will of the courts and desegregate peacefully.
The following article details his biography up to that time.

New York Times, September 25, 1957, page 18

                        HE GUARDS THE PEACE
                       Edwin Anderson Walker

LITTLE ROCK, Sept. 24 -- Maj. Gen. Edwin Anderson Walker, who will be
responsible for maintaining peace in Little Rock, was described by staff
officers today as "tough, but fair." A tall, lean-visaged Texan,
General Walker came to Little Rock only seven weeks ago as commander of
the Arkansas Military District. He is still a stranger to the city.
Today, General Walker was at his desk in a downtown office building at
7 A.M. He had not yet received formal orders to take over the Arkansas
National Guard, but he knew what was coming. Already orders carrying
his signature were being processed for the deployment of National Guard
units. He will command a combined force of regulars and Federalized

He stands 6 feet 3 inches in height. He is a bachelor and has been
considered a prize for hostesses wherever he has been stationed.
He was born in Center Point, Texas, on Nov. 10, 1909.

General Walker's favorite expression is "check," a word he snaps to
indicate a mission has been accomplished or that he understands his

As a member of the Special Services group, he was required to be a
paratrooper. At his test, he approached a subordinate and asked:

"How do you put this thing on?"

He received a fast five-minute briefing and climbed into an airplane.
He jumped, landed safe and snapped to the test officer: "Check."

General Walker is a combat officer. He has seen action in World War II
and in Korea. He has carried out a number of unusual and hazardous
assignments, particularly during World War II.

He started his military career as an artillery officer after he
graduated from West Point in 1931. But he switched to commando
operations during the war and led a special force of Canadians and
Americans, in Italy and in France.

This outfit, trained for airborne, amphibious, mountain and ski
operations, was called the Special Services Force.

General Walker led the Third Regiment, First Special Service Force,
in its initial operation at Kiska during the Aleutians campaign. When
the commandos were transferred to the Italian campaign, General Walker
led the first Special Service Force in tough mountain fighting up the
Italian peninsula and at Anzio beachhead.

                         A Surprise Landing

In August, 1944, his men made a surprise landing on the Hyeres Islands
off the French Riviera and killed or captured a strong German garrison
that could have jeopardized the Seventh Army landings on the mainland
near by.

With the Hyeres occupied, his troops rejoined the main invasion force
and moved up the Rhone Valley. Toward the end of the war he was detached
from the commandos and placed in command of the 417 Infantry Regiment,
a separate force attached to the Third Army. At V-E Day he was commanding
a special task unit in Oslo.

Returning to the United States in January, 1946, General Walker served as
assistant director of the combined arms department, Field Artillery
School, Fort Sill, Okla. He was in charge of the Greek desk at the
Pentagon during the Greek civil war and made an official visit to Greece
and Turkey.

During the Korean War, General Walker commanded the Seventh Regiment
of the Third Infantry Division and later was senior adviser to
Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek. His last assignment before coming to
Little Rock was as commanding general at the Twenty-fifth Artillery
Division in Hawaii.

He holds the Silver Star and the Bronze Star with oak leaf cluster.

This is the man arrested on four federal charges in Mississippi in 1962?

Those charges were:

      Section 111-- For assault and resisting or other opposing Federal
      officers, including marshals, in the performance of their duty.

      Section 372-- For conspiracy to prevent a Federal officer from
      discharging his duties.

      Section 2383-- For inciting or engaging in an insurrection
      against the United States.

      Section 2384-- For conspiracy to overthrow or oppose by force
      the execution of the laws of the United States.

A conspiracy is defined legally as including two or more persons.

On October 7, 1962, Walker posted $50,000 bond and returned home to
Dallas amid 200 cheering supporters carrying signs like "Welcome
Home, General Walker," "Win With General Walker," and "President '64."

On January 21, 1963, a federal grand jury in Oxford, Mississippi adjourned
without indicting Walker on any of the four counts against him.

The Justice Department dismissed the charges "without prejudice" after
the grand jury failed to indict. The dismissal "without prejudice"
meant that the charges could be reinstated before the five year statute
of limitations expired.

Walker and his supporters then went on the offensive. On April 2, 1963,
a group called the Citizens Congressional Committee filed a petition
with the Senate Judiciary Committee requesting an investigation of the
treatment of "America's fearless patriot on the occasion of his
incarceration at the instigation of the Department of Justice."

Nine days later, on April 9, Walker was sitting at his desk at home when
the famous shooting incident occurred.

Meanwhile, the American Medical Association was receiving "a volume of
letters from individual physicians" charging Dr. Charles E. Smith, the
Army psychiatrist -- who commented on Walker's mental state at the time
of the Oxford violence -- with unethical conduct: that he made an improper
diagnosis without a personal examination. Dr. Smith was cleared by the
AMA on July 4, 1963. He said that news stories of Walker's "reported
behavior reflects sensitivity and essentially unpredictable and seemingly
bizarre outbursts of the type often observed in individuals suffering
with paranoid mental disorder." The society had received 2,500 letters
from physicians alleging unethical conduct by Dr. Smith. Nevertheless,
the board unanimously ruled in Smith's favor.

Walker then took his case to court, filing a total of $23 million dollars
in libel damages against numerous media outlets alleging that they had
made "false statements" and that their "suppression of truth was motivated
by malice and a desire to hurt and harm him in his good reputation and
blacken his good name." The statements in question were that he "led a
charge of students against Federal marshals on the Ole Miss campus"
and various other statements attributing to him a very active role in leading
the insurrection such as "Walker assumed command of the crowd." A jury
in Fort Worth awarded an $800,000 judgment against the Associated Press,
ruling that malice was intended.

The offensive was also being taken up by Republicans in Congress in an
alliance with Southern Democrats, who wanted to embarrass Attorney
General Robert Kennedy because of his civils rights activities. The House
Judiciary Committee voted on September 1, 1964 by a margin of 18 to 14 to
open an investigation of the Justice Department's handling of cases
including, but not limited to, those of Jimmy Hoffa, Roy M. Cohn, and
former Maj. Gen. Edwin A. Walker. The vote among Republican and Southern
Democratic committee members was 16-2; that of non-Southern Democrats
was 2-12.

Meanwhile, a Louisiana jury awarded Walker $3 million in damages in another
one of his libel suits.

His luck started to turn sour however, and finally on June 12, 1967, the
Supreme Court ruled 9-0 extending the constitutional protection of
freedom of the press to libelous falsehoods about private individuals
who willingly take part in public affairs. Such protections were already in
place concerning libel against political officials, but this was a landmark
case extending the applicability to private individuals who willingly
venture into the public arena. Walker's awards were overturned.

Chief Justice Warren explained, "Our citizenry has a legitimate and
substantial interest in the conduct of such persons... Freedom of the
press to engage in uninhibited debate about their involvement in public
issues should be subject to derogatory criticism, even when based on
false statements."

Walker's name occasionally surfaced in the press after this, usually
in connection with anti-UN activities or in connection with the
presidential campaign of George Wallace.



These articles concern the controversy about right-wing extremism in the
military in the early Sixties, specifically related to General Walker and
the Kennedy administration.

New York Times, June 18, 1961, page 1

                Right-Wing Officers Worrying Pentagon

                         by Cabell Philips

WASHINGTON, June 17 -- The Pentagon is having its troubles with
right-wingers in uniform.

A number of officers of high and middle rank are indoctrinating their
commands and the civilian population near their bases with political
theories resembling those of the John Birch Society. They are also
holding up to criticism and ridicule some official policies of the
United States Government.

The most conspicuous example of some of these officers was Maj. Gen.
Edwin A. Walker, who was officially "admonished" for his activities
by the Secretary of the Army earlier this week.

General Walker's offense was in saying that a number of prominent
Americans, as well as elements of the newspaper and television industries,
were tainted with Communist ideology.

He did this in the course of a continuing effort that the general said
was "designed to develop an understanding of the American military and
civil heritage, responsibility toward that heritage and the facts and
objectives of those enemies who would destroy it."

General Walker was the commander of the Twenty-Fourth Infantry Division
in Germany at the time...

The problem for the Pentagon arises out of the fact that a number of its
higher ranking officers have participated in or publically lent their
support to a variety of so-called forums, schools, and seminars,
ostensibly focused on the issues of national security. However, many of
those groups -- at least incidentally -- are preoccupied with radically
right-wing political philosophies.

                       Stress on Anti-Communism

The chief ingredient of these philosophies is often a militant
anti-communism. The argument is that Communist subversion today is rife
among the schools, the churches, labor unions, Government offices, and

In this argument, liberalism is equated with socialism and socialism with
communism. Thus it opposes most welfare legislation, many programs for
international cooperation such as foreign aid and disarmament

The genesis of this program goes back to the so-called "cold war policy"
evolved by the National Security Council in the summer of 1958...

                        Cold War Widened

President Eisenhower and his top policy leaders decreed that the "cold
war" could not be fought as a series of separate and often unrelated
actions, as with foreign aid and propaganda. Rather, it must be fought
with a concentration of all the resources of the Government and with
the full understanding and support of the civilian population. It was
decided, in particular, that the military should be used to reinforce
the "cold war" effort.

This was the substance of the still-classified "cold-war policy" paper
of the National Security Council...

Of the hundreds of military bases here and abroad, only a score have
become involved in these programs to the point that they have caused
alarm among the new civilian team in the Pentagon. Officials suspect,
however, that the trend is somewhat more widespread than their reports
currently indicate. They are quietly trying to find out how widespread
it is.

A typical example about which they do know is a seminar labeled Project

This was held at the Naval Air Station, Wold-Chamberlain Field,
Minneapolis, on April 28 and 29 of this year. Capt. Robert T. Kieling
is the commanding officer of the station. He was a co-sponsor of the
program in collaboration with a committee of the Minneapolis-St. Paul
Chamber of Commerce.

The official announcement described the program as follows:

"The purpose of Project Action is to inspire the citizens of this area
to take an active part in the war against the danger that threatens our
freedom and American way of life."

"The program of talks and presentations by nationally-known leaders for
the cause of democracy will bring to light facts and figures concerning
the rising crime rate, juvenile delinquency, drug addiction, the general
degradation of morals, the complacent attitude toward patriotism, and
the tremendous gains the Communist conspiracy is making in this

The United States Naval Air Station is making facilities available for
the seminar at the request of the Twin Cities Council for American

Among the scores of letters concerning Project Action that reached the
Pentagon in the following days was one from a newspaper editor. It said
in part:

"Perhaps someone can clear up for us our lack of understanding as to just
how co-sponsorship of such activities fits in with the Navy mission, or
the overall military mission, for that matter. It must be admitted that
the local Project Action is politically partisan in a very real sense,
although the partisanship is not that of the party label type." ...

Among numerous other incidents that have been brought to the attention
of the Defense Department is the "Fourth Dimensional Warfare Seminar"
held in Pittsburgh on April 15. Among those listed as giving "assistance
and support" to the program were Lieut. Gen. Ridgely Gaither, Commanding
General, Second Army, and Maj. Gen. Ralph C. Cooper, Commanding General
of the Twenty-First Army Corps, and their respective staffs...

"This sort of thing, if carried far enough among susceptible people,
can breed a wave of vigilantism and witch-hunting," one Pentagon official
said. "Even Mr. Hoover of the F.B.I., whom nobody would call 'soft on
communism,' deplores these self-appointed counter-spies." ...

Reinforcing his point, he took from his desk a memorandum from Secretary
of Defense Robert S. McNamara, which has been circulated as "guidance"
throughout the services. In part, it said:

"After the President has taken a position, has established a policy, or
after appropriate officials in the Defense Department have established a
policy, I expect that no member of the department, either civilian or
military, will discuss that policy other than in a way to support it
before the public." ...

New York Times, September 8, 1961

    McNamara Refuses to Identify Individual Censors in Pentagon

          But He Gives Senators a List of Security Staff --
      Thurmond Voices Criticism of Policy on Anti-Red Speeches

WASHINGTON, Sept. 7 -- Defense Secretary Robert S. McNamara refused today
to give the name of the person in the Pentagon immediately responsible
for deleting anti-Communist statements from speeches by an Army general.

He did provide a roster of the twelve-man security and review staff,
which clears speeches. But he declined to identify particular individuals
in the section who had made specific deletions.

The demand for this information was made by Senator Strom Thurmond,
Democrat of South Carolina, at the close of hearings before the Senate
Armed Services Committee on his resolution for a full investigation of
charges that military officers have been "muzzled." ...

It was also learned today that Gen. Edwin A. Walker, deposed last spring
from his command in Europe because of the nature of his troop
indoctrination program, had pleaded the military equivalent of the Fifth
Amendment's guarantee against self-incrimination during the investigation
of his case by the Army Inspector General...

The entire transcript of the proceedings involving General Walker, which
runs to more than 900 pages, is in the process of being declassified by
the Department of Defense...

Senator Thurmond's inquiry today related to a speech prepared for delivery
last March by Gen. Arthur G. Trudeau, Chief of Army Research. In
testimony today it was indicated that the excisions had the effect of
softening the general's blunt criticism of Soviet policies and tactics.

Mr. McNamara said that the justifications for the changes was that
negotiations were then going on with the Russians for release of the
downed RB-47. It was regarded as impolitic at the time, he explained,
to provoke the Russians unnecessarily...

New York Times, November 19, 1961, page 1


   Attacks Birch Society and 'Minutemen' at a Party Dinner in Los Angeles

                        Spread of Fear Scored

       President Says Real Threat Comes From Without, Not Within

by Tom Wicker

LOS ANGELES, Nov. 18-- President Kennedy spoke out tonight against the
right-wing John Birch Society and the so-called Minutemen in a speech
at a Democratic Party dinner here.

The President mentioned neither group by name but left no doubt whom he

  [In Atlanta, Senator Barry Goldwater, Arizona Republican, attacked
  the "radicals in the White House." At a news conference, he called
  President Kennedy the "wagon master" who is "riding on the left
  wheel all the time."]

The President, in his talk at the Hollywood Palladium, also made his
first public response to Edward M. Dealey, publisher of the Dallas
Morning News. Mr. Dealey attacked the President at a White House
luncheon for "riding Caroline's tricycle" instead of being "a man on

                  Some 'Escape Responsibility'

"There have always been those fringes of our society who have sought to
escape their own responsibility by finding a simple solution, an appealing
slogan or a convenient scapegoat," Mr. Kennedy said.

Now, he continued, "men who are unwilling to face up to the danger from
without are convinced that the real danger comes from within."

"They look suspiciously at their neighbors and their leaders," he declared.
"They call for a 'man on horseback' because they do not trust the people.
They find treason in our finest churches, in our highest court, and even
in the treatment of our water."

"They equate the Democratic Party with the welfare state, the welfare
state with socialism, and socialism with communism. They object quite
rightly to politics' intruding on the military -- but they are anxious
for the military to engage in politics." ...

Mr. Kennedy chose a region in which the John Birch Society has some of
its strongest support to make his third and sharpest attack on what he
called tonight "the discordant voices of extremism."

In the first two speeches, at Chapel Hill, N. C., and Seattle, he also
warned against left-wing and pacifist extremists. His remarks tonight
were directed to far-right groups and individuals.

The reference to "armed bands of civilian guerillas" appeared to be
directed at the Minutemen, individual groups of which are being
organized and armed in some parts of the country. The organization
is reputed to be particularly strong in California.

Los Angeles is regarded as almost the heartland of the Birch Society.
Two Republican Representatives from its urban districts, John H.
Rousselot and Edgar W. Hiestland, are avowed members. ...

New York Times, November 19, 1961, page 54


       3,000 Parade in Los Angeles in Orderly Demonstration

LOS ANGELES, Nov. 18-- Raucous picketing took place outside the Hollywood
Palladium where President Kennedy spoke.

For nearly an hour, 3,000 persons paraded, carrying signs and chanting
and singing their protests over a variety of issues.

The demonstration, which started rather mildly five hours before the
President spoke, was suddenly stepped up by an apparent influx of

Some of the signs carried by men and women wearing red, white, and blue
paper hats, read: "Unmuzzle the Military," "Clean Up the State
Department," "Veto Tito," "Disarmament is Suicide," and "CommUNism is
Our Enemy."

The marchers sporadically chanted "Test the Bomb," and, "No Aid to Tito."
They sang, among other things, "God Bless America" and "The Battle Hymn
of the Republic."

A much smaller contingent of pacifist marchers was elbowed out. Most of
these carried signs urging the end of all atomic testing...

New York Times, November 19, 1961, page 54

               Eisenhower Travels Aloft With Kennedy

SHERMAN, Tex. Nov. 18 (AP) -- President Kennedy and former President Dwight
D. Eisenhower rode together to Perrin Air Force Base near here by helicopter
today after attending the funeral of Sam Rayburn at near-by Bonham.

Senator Carl Hayden, Democrat of Arizona, was also on the helicopter.

Mr. Kennedy and General Eisenhower stood together talking by the side of
the aircraft for about two minutes. Mr. Kennedy gestured repeatedly with
his left hand and appearing to be explaining something to General
Eisenhower. General Eisenhower listened intently and shook his head
affirmatively several times.

They shook hands. Mr. Kennedy then walked briskly to his plane and General
Eisenhower got into an Air Force automobile.

New York Times, November 24, 1961, page 1

         Eisenhower Says Officers Should Stay Out of Politics

                 Assails Extremists In TV Interview

Former President Dwight D. Eisenhower last night urged officers of the
armed services to shun partisan politics.

Speaking as a General of the Army, he declared it was "bad practice --
very bad" for an officer, even when testifying under oath before a
committee of Congress, to express opinions "on political matters or
economic matters that are contrary to the President's." ...

The former President was blunt in discussing the recent "rise of
extremists" in the country.

"I don't think the United States needs super-patriots," he declared.
"We need patriotism, honestly practiced by all of us, and we don't
need these people that are more patriotic than you or anybody else."

His definition of extremists embraced those who would "go back to
eliminating the income tax from our laws and the rights of people to
unionize... [and those] advocating some form of dictatorship." It
also included those who "make radical statements [and] attack people
of good repute who are proved patriots."

At that point, Walter Cronkite of the C.B.S. news staff, who conducted
the interview, asked about the "military man's role in our modern
political life." He did not cite, but obviously referred to, the case
of Maj. Gen. Edwin A. Walker, who stirred up a controversy that led to
his "admonishment" for the political nature of the indoctrination of
his troops. General Walker lated resigned from the Army.

"I believe the Army officer, Navy officer, Air officer," General
Eisenhower said, "should not be talking about political matters,
particularly domestically, and never in the international field, unless
he is asked to do so because of some particular position he might
hold." ...

The general declared there was hope for disarmament and better
East-West relations. As the Russian standard of living improves, the
Russian people will begin to understand that there is another way of
life, he said...

Conspiracy / WACO history
« on: February 16, 2017, 08:57:40 pm »
From: cs101b49@dcl-nxt11 (cs101 student)
Subject: WACO history
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1993 19:18:24 GMT
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

=== Repost from Fidonet Civ_Lib ===

* Original: FROM: Linda Thompson
* Original: TO:   All
* Original: AREA: AEN NEWS

* Forwarded by Linda Thompson
* Forwarded Using QuickBBS 2.76 Ovr
* Forwarded at 02:46 on 21-Apr-93

     Words can't express the sickness, horror and outrage I
felt, watching an army tank bash holes in the walls of the
house at Mt. Carmel Monday, April 19, 1993 -- exactly 50
years after the Nazis burned the Warsaw ghetto.
And all the while, the FBI's personal buffoon, Ricks,
sanctimoniously made claims that this was done to "urge"
the people to come out, that the FBI was "concerned about
child abuse" because of the "conditions the children were
living in."

     What utter and total baldfaced lies.

     The holes were bashed in the sides of the building,
not to introduce CS gas, so much as to make sure the house
was well ventilated, so that the fire would spread rapidly.

    I have received reports from no less than 15 people
across the country who saw on the TV footage, two men in
black uniforms, wearing gas masks, set the fire.

    I personally saw an incendiary fly through into the second
story window.

    Three others reported seeing footage where the tank
drove over a gas tank, exploding it.

    I represent several family members and Branch
Davidians.  I have talked with several Branch Davidians.

    They are not glazed over moonie-type crazies.  They are
well educated, articulate, very nice people.  All of them
had normal jobs outside the Mt. Carmel Center.  None of
them believed they were under David Koresh's "control."
All of them said they were free to leave whenever they

   One of them said that there was no "suicide" -- that no
one from the Branch Davidians set the fire at all and
didn't know it was coming.

  And the real story follows.

* Original: FROM: Linda Thompson
* Original: TO:   All
* Original: AREA: AEN NEWS

* Forwarded by Linda Thompson
* Forwarded Using QuickBBS 2.76 Ovr
* Forwarded at 02:46 on 21-Apr-93

   Most of you have seen our earlier accounts of Waco while
the Branch Davidians were under seige and know from the TV
news what the conditions were there.

   The news media was kept 3 miles from the Mt. Carmel Center by
armed guards at all roads into the compound.  And the media
dutifully reguritated whatever tripe the FBI fed them each
day at 10:30, calling it "news" as they slandered the
Branch Davidians, spreading lies of "child molesting",
"planned mass suicide", and "religious whackos in Waco."

   No matter, sensationalism sells newspapers, doesn't it?  It
gets those network ratings up, too.  It wouldn't be a story if
they told the truth. The FCC might shut down a network or two
or yank a permit.  Better that 100 people should die in an
inferno than expose the depths of the depravity of the
leaders of this country.

   Well, the FBI lied and so have the major media
throughout this entire ordeal.  Here's the real story:

   In 1992, Sheri Jewel and her ex-husband were in a
custody battle over their daughter, Keri.  Sheri was a
Branch Davidian and she was killed in the fire Monday.

   Her ex-husband is a radio announcer.  His wife is a TV
personality.  They have money.

   A fellow named Mark Breault, who is reputed to have a felony
record, used to be a Branch Davidian. He proclaimed himself to be
a prophet.  After awhile, he tried to take over the Mt. Carmel
compound and was ousted by David Koresh. Breault, an Australian,
left, vowing revenge.  He often called the compound daily to
harrass the members.

   The Jewel's hired Mark Breault to testify in their
custody dispute.  In an affidavit, Breault made
allegations of child molestation and religious weirdness.
This was in Michigan in 1992.

  Senators were contacted to investigate these allegations, as
was the "Cult Awareness Network."  The Cult Awareness Network is
a group in Washington, D.C., headed by the wife of late Senator
Ryan who was killed at Jonestown. She has a personal
vendetta, too.  And she wields a lot of power in
Washington, apparently, because if someone ends up on her
cult hit list, they frequently end up dead.

  The allegations of child molestation were investigated in the
intervening two years, twice, by Texas welfare department
authorities and found to be baseless.  The Sheriff's department
investigated the allegations of illegal guns and these
claims were found to be baseless.  The investigations were
peaceful.  There were no problems.

  Mark Breault, however, continued to make his baseless and
slanderous allegations against the Branch Davidians.  The
Cult Awareness Network turned up the pressure.

  The newspapers called Breault a "private investigator who has
tracked the Davidians for two and a half years."  "Tracked"?
They had lived at the Mt. Carmel Center since 1935.  How much
"tracking" did it take?  "Investigator"? Ha.  He's a self-
proclaimed "prophet" with a vendetta against the Branch
Davidians.  And who paid him so handsomely that he could
afford to "track" them for 2-1/2 years, anyway?  Did the
media bother to check any of this out?  Never.

   You may remember that in the first few days the Branch
Davidians were under seige, they hung a sheet outside the
window that said, "Send in Don Stewart, CFA and Ron
Ingleman."  I now know all these people pretty well by

   Don Stewart says he is a former paid informant and hired
assasin for the BATF.  He named dates, times, and places, and
detailed a secret hit squad operated under the BATF by a man
code-named "Wolfgang" (whose name he identified to me).  He
claims this secret hit squad killed a fellow named Tomassi
in California, a religious leader called the Bogwan
Rashnesh Shari, and provided the weaponry to the woman
named Moore who tried to shoot President Ford, driving her
through guards to get her in place.  They took her
children to keep her quiet.  He also says that John Wayne
Hearns, the man who ran the ad in Soldier of Fortune magazine as
a hired hitman that got Soldier of Fortune sued when he actually
carried out a hired murder for someone, was a paid
operative.  Congressional records show that a man named
Dirk Stoffberg was another such operative, who was a hired
assassin of our government and also ran guns and cocaine
in and out of the country.  Don Stewart is now on the run
from the BATF, living in an RV with his family. If even a
10th of his information is true, it is a sorry, sorry tale
of the depravity existing at the highest levels of our

   CFA -- the Constitutional Foundational Association, was
started by Greg
Sali and Bill Griffith, to expose the true story in Waco.
They are also now working to establish common law courts
throughout the country to put corrupt judicial officials
and politicians behind bars, where they belong.  Together
with Ken Fawcett, they have collected over 300 hours worth
of videotapes of the initial onslaught.  People who have
studied these tapes in slow motion say that they show that
the BATF agents who were killed going in through the
second story window were killed by friendly fire and their
own frag grenade.
When they got inside the window, they were in a 10 x 10
room that had a locked steel door.  They couldn't get out.
 They were hit by friendly fire and trapped in the room
when the frag grenade went off.

  One Branch Davidian, Mike Schroeder, left the Mt. Carmel
compound that morning to go to work as usual. He passed by
agents who never stopped him. He didn't learn of the initial
seige until later that day.  When he tried to return home, he
was shot in the back as he climbed a fence.  His body was
left hanging on the fence for days, as his wife and child
could see him there, from inside the house.  The
government finally moved his body, using a grappling hook
from a helicopter, at night, to drop it into a nearby
field, where it was chewed by wild dogs and buzzards beyond
recognition as a human being.

   Another man was shot and his body was left up on the
water tower for days by the government and it, too, was
dropped to the ground at night by a helicopter, leaving
pieces to be scraped up from the ground.

   The two old ladies who came out of the compound with the
children said that all the children had been in an upstairs room
when they were suddenly fired upon by helicopters through the
roof the day of the seige.  They covered the children with
their own bodies to protect them.  These old ladies were
charged with murder and held in jail.  Eventually, they
were put under arrest as material witnesses and held in a
half-way house out of the city.

  While the FBI was claiming to be urging the Branch Davidians to
surrender, FBI spokesperson Ricks announced on Friday, April
17th, that anyone who came out would be considered a threat to
the BATF agents and would be shot. Shots and percussion
grenades were fired at a person who tried to leave through
a window that day and at Steve Schneider.  Ricks said that
Steve Schneider had "abused his privileges" and had to be
taught a lesson.

   For 51 days, the FBI tortured the people inside the Mt. Carmel
center.  All utilities, including sanitation, were cut off.
Loudspeakers were set up all around the house to blare
sounds 24-hours a day, including the sounds of rabbits
being slaughtered, the sound a phone makes when it is left
off the hook, Tibetan monk chants, jet airplanes, babies
crying, and songs such as "these boots are made for
walking" and Christmas carols.

  Stadium lights were set up to keep the place lit up 24 hours a
day.  Military tanks, including M1 Abrams and Bradley's, were
brought in and rapidly circled the house, firing
percussion grenades, continuously.  The tanks would charge
up to the house and then stop within feet of the house

   Black helicopters flew overhead.  Two huey gunships also
flew over frequently, guns mounted in front.

   Around the 40th day of the seige, David Koresh announced that
the children and babies were out of milk.  Two relief efforts
to bring baby food to the Mt. Carmel compound were turned
back.  Two people, one of them Gary Spaulding from South
Bend, Indiana, were arrested for trying to take the food
past a roadblock. When I posed the direct question to the
FBI headquarters, "Has it come to this? Does the United
States government want babies to starve to death?" The
answer was, verbatim, "Yes."  An ATF agent, in a pickup
truck that said "Wild Bill" on the side, stole the food,
too. And to that agent, and every state trooper, every BATF
agent, and every FBI agent who prevented those children
from receiving food, you are murderers.

   And how did the BATF account for what it did when it
assaulted the Branch Davidians?  Did it offer to show the
American public the search warrant they claimed to have?
No. In fact, the search warrant and probable cause
affidavit, if they existed at all, were "sealed" by court
order.  A court order from the same judge who apparently
signed it in the first place.

   The same judge, Walter Smith, Jr., of the Waco Division,
Western U.S. District Court in Waco, denied eight petitions for
relief filed by various lawyers seeking to order the FBI and BATF
to be made to follow the law and the United States
Constitution.  The government never once filed a single
paper in opposition to any of these motions.  There was
clear, controlling Supreme Court law that required that
these petitions be granted. The judge had no legal reason
to deny them, yet he did.  And he used the same order,
nearly a xerox, to deny all of them.  Walter Smith, Jr.,
you are a murderer.

   Walter Smith is the same judge who allowed arraignments of
people who left the compound to be held in secret.  When there
was not sufficient probable cause to hold them under arrest, he
allowed them to be detained in jails as "material

   And this same judge is the only judge in that division,
where all the remaining Branch Davidians, now facing
"murder" charges, will be put on trial.

   After the BATF and FBI learned that the American Justice
Federation had released a press release stating that the use of
military troops against United States citizens violated federal
law, specifically, the Posse Comitatus act at  the BATF
released a cover story, claiming that the tanks were
"really" not Army, they were national guard, and had been
brought in under the "Drug interdiction act" because they
had heard there was a "methamphetamine lab" -- three weeks
after the FBI had already publicly announced there was
never any question whatsoever of drug involvement.

   Governor Ann Richards of Texas, who authorized the use
of the tanks, claimed she had been tricked.  But she still
did not order the tanks to be withdrawn.  Ann Richards,
you are a murderer.

   Each day, secret horrors were perpetuated upon the Branch
Davidians, out of sight of the American public, as the press
cowered like sheep, out on the fringes.  Each day, the FBI gave
us "The Truth", as told by the FBI, and the news media dutifully
lapped it up and spread it throughout the country,
poisoning the minds of people across the country, just as
the FBI intended.  FBI Agents Jeff Jamar and Ricks, you are

    Did any of the news media ever challenge how the BATF
might have any jurisdiction at all over "child molesting"
allegations?  Or their authority to bring in two cattle
trailers full of armed men, who threw grendades at the
front door and went in shooting at women and children on a
Sunday morning?  Each of you in the media, who didn't
question, who didn't challenge, who didn't know enough
about the Constitution of this country to even ask an
intelligent question, each of you are murderers.

    One or two persons asked decent questions at the press
conference. Lewis Beam, a former KKK grand dragon and
political activist, and a reporter from Soldier of Fortune
Magazine, were kicked out of the press conference for
doing so.  Lewis Beam was arrested.  His crime?  Asking "Is
this the beginning of gestapo tactics and martial law in
this country?" at the press conference.

   Two other known "trouble makers" (this author included), were
prevented from entering the press conference, despite valid press
credentials.  In fact, later that day, I was detained, as a
BATF agent at a road block pointed a machine gun at me and
my partner, John Baird, and our credentials were stolen.
My crime?  I had filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Branch
Davidians, asking that they be allowed to have legal

  And, for all the unasked questions:  No, it is not illegal to
own a machine gun in this country.  Even if the Branch Davidians
had a machine gun, which it now appears they did not, if
it was "illegal" it merely meant that a $200 tax had not
been paid on it.  All it takes to legally own a machine
gun in this country is to pay a $200 tax and fill out a
form 4.  The BATF is supposed to check that those taxes
have been paid.

   Neighbors we have spoken with who have known the Branch
Davidians for 15 years described them as "good samaritan"
types who helped their neighbors and were kind and
friendly.  Normal people, good neighbors.  The kind of
folks you'd probably rather have living around you than the
thugs who commit the drive-by shootings, rapes, and
robberies, for instance.

   Calling a religion a "cult" and putting out false information
across the media about "child molesting" and "weapons caches" is
exactly the same technique that was used by the Nazis to portray
the Jews as filthy, disgusing people, so they could be killed.
It is the same technique used by every tyrannical government, to
kill an unpopular and potentially vocal adversarial group.  But
in this country, we are supposed to have freedom of religion.  It
would seem that is a pipe dream.

   We have three confirmed reported citings of trainloads of U.N.
tanks going into Portland, Oregon, over the past few weeks, and
troop movements of unmarked military vehicles across the
nation. Perhaps you might want to ponder the significance
of these events.  And tonight, Peter Jennings, in yet
another "made for propaganda" ABC News TV special, gave a
full and impartial (not) accounting of events by having
those bastions of integrity, Kisser, of the Cult Awareness
Network, and a former Branch Davidian, give us "insight"
into how Branch Davidians and "all cults" think.  As if
they know.  Peter Jennings twice said tonight, that "there are
more than 100 cults across the country and this is a warning of
things to come."

   Paul Fatta, a Branch Davidian, held a Class III dealer's
license.  That meant that he could legally own, sell, and
buy, any type of gun.  It is thus highly unlikely that
there were any "illegal" guns in the center at all.
And who is responsible for issuing these permits?  The
BATF.  They knew Paul Fatta had a license.

   Paul Fatta was not at the Mt. Carmel Center the day the BATF
assaulted the Branch Davidians.  Nonetheless, he is now listed on
the FBI's "10 Most Wanted" list as "armed and dangerous."
This gives the government the ability to shoot him on sight and
then claim he was a "fleeing felon."  It is, in otherwords, a
license for the government to kill, again. To bury the best
evidence against them, again.

   David Koresh had a message for the world.  He wasn't holding
out to commit suicide.  He didn't hold anyone hostage.  He wanted
to give what he believed was a gift to the world.  He believed he
held the secret to the seven seals, spoken of in Revelations.  He
wanted to offer what he knew for anyone who could hear it,
believing he had a duty to offer it to help save the souls of
those who did not know.  He wanted the time to write it down,
which he had to do in candlelight, using a manual typewriter, on
scraps of paper.

  He sent a message to the FBI telling them this.  He also
sent messages, Bible scriptures, that said that God would
send his holy armies to smite his enemies.

  That much may be true.  The Waco massacre has awakened
Americans all across the nation to what is horribly wrong
in this country.  A voice of unity is being heard, growing
louder each day.  Interstingly, the day the Branch
Davidians were murdered is also the anniversary of the ride
of Paul Revere.

  We have seen our leaders on the television, lying to us with
straight faces, offering justifications for this carnage, as if
there could ever be any possible moral explanation or excuse that
could be enough.  That the people offering these excuses are
morally bankrupt and corrupt, should be obvious. A simple, "We're
sorry" would at least show a glimmer of common decency and
humanity, but those words have never crossed any of their lips.
And each of them, Bill Clinton, Janet Reno, William Sessions, and
Lloyd Bentsen, are murderers.

  So, America, we have cold-blooded killers running our
country.  Isn't it about time you put down your beer, get
up off the sofa, and do something about it?

Linda Thompson
American Justice Federation

« on: February 16, 2017, 08:55:56 pm »

                           A LIE THAT IS KILLING US

            Animal experimentation, also known as vlvisectlon, is directly
responsible for the ram- pant growth of cancer, heart dissase, diabetes,
birth defeds, arthrrtis, muscular dystrophy, leukemia, all kinds of mental
diseases, and an sndless list of many otherold afflictions as well as
scores of new ones, such as Alzheimer's disease and AIDS. These diseases
are causing the most massive, systematic, and widespread destruction of
human health ever known. The reason is fundamental: Today's research Is
based almost entirely on animal experimen- tation, whlch Is a medical and
scientific fraud. It is impossible to re-create a naturally occurrlng
dlssase In a healthy animal simply because once rt is "re- created," it is
no longer theoriginal,naturaldisease.The
predictableresultoflookingatartlficlallydiseasedanimals is that the data
obtained is not applfcable to man and thus is tragically misleading. This
is the reason why no diseass has been cured in the 20th century except for
the control of infectious diseases, which was accomplished thanks to
nutrrtion, hygiene, and public sanitation. Consequently, all the old
diseases along wrth the new ones are killing and dam- aging more and more
people every day, including you and your family and friends.

                      A LIE THAT IS COSTING US TRILLIONS
                        OF DOLILARS (YES, TRILLIONS!)

            There is no money to be madefrom healthy people. This is why
the medical and rssearch establishments are not in the least interested in
preventlon (practically all diseases are pre- ventable). The criminal
refusal to remove ths known causesof so many human allments guarsntses a
sltuation where practlcally everyone is sick or will eventually gat sick
(the flat refusal to educate people about the vital need to adopt a
vegetarian diet is a prime ex- ample). Once millions upon millions of
people are sick and dying and pronounced "in need" of drugs, tests,
radiation, surgeries, transplants, and all kinds of medical attention and
intervention, the expenditures connected with "heahh care" skyrocket
accordingly. In 1991 alone, the United States spent 750 billion dollars on
what should more appropriately be called "sickness care." It is
conservatively estimated that by the year 2000, annual "health care" costs
in the Unrted States will have increased to at least 1.5 trllllon dollars
($1 ,500,000,000,000) (1) Needless to say, sueh astronomicai expendrtures
(which have made countless doctors, surgeons, pharmaceutical companies,
and all kinds of instrtutions rich) have alrsady broken the financial back
of the country. It is clear that prevention, and not "health care reform,"
is the real cure.


       It is estimated that, just in the United States, 100 million
animals of all kinds are tortured to death every year by vivisectionist
mills, which operate hidden from public view in colleges and universities,
hospitals, chemical and pharmaceutical companies, cosmetic and tobacco
companies, countless other corporations such as Gsneral Motors (in
carcrash experiments), and by NASA and the milrtary. The numberof animals
used by the milrtary is unknown and thus is not included in the 100
million figure. In addition, millions of animals are consumed by the
vivisectionist machinery in other countries all over the world (countries
that follow the "scientific standard" set by the United States). The 1991
budget of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Washington,D.C., the
largest source of funding for vivisectors, was8.6billlon tax dollars
($8,600,000,000).(2) Because of AIDS (the new gold mins for the biomedical
establishment), we are now pouring more billions into the pockets of the
very "researchsrs" and "scientists" who never cured cancer, heart disease,
diabetes, or anything else desprte having consumed hundreds of billions of
our tax dollars and billions of animals just in the last few decades.


        Not only are our health and economy being systematically destroyed
by the vivisectionist mind-set, but so is our environment. The massive
production and widespread use of pesticides and countless other chemicals
found "safe" based on anlmal tests are responsible for the relentless and
massive pollution of our land, rivers, and oceans, the consequent
poisoning of ourfood and water supplies, the dsstruction ofthe earth's
protective ozonelayer,and many other threats that are jeopardizing the
very survival of life on the pianet.

                     A LIE THAT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE

    Horrifying chemical, biobgical, and nuclear weapons, possessed by an
ever-increasing number of countries, were developed by vivisectors and
"tested" on animals the same way a drug, detergsnt, or toothpaste is
"tested" on animals. Conventional wsapons of all sorts were also created
in vivisectionist laboratories, where animals are routinely used as
surrogates for man in warlike situations.

                       ADDICTION AND MENTAL DISEASE

       There is plenty of tax money to fund endless numbers of grotesque
and useless "experiments"where perfectly healthy animals areturned
intodrug addicts and alcoholics. No money is available, however, to help
the millions of human beings who are being destroyed not only by the drugs
and aleohol they are addicted to, but also by the utter hopelessness they
feel when life-saving treatment is denied them becauss of this criminal
waste of precious resources. The same applies to the increasing numbers of
mentally ill people who are often totally ignored, while incredibly huge
amounts of money are poured by the National Instrtutes of Mental Health
and other sources into psychological and other "experiments" whereanimals
are driven insane. It is important to remember that the overwhelming
majority of homeless people are drug addicts, alcoholics, and/or mentally
ill idividuals.

                        MEDICAL AND SCIENTIFIC FRAUD

   The medicai and scientific fraud of vivisection is based on the following
lies that the
biomedical empire relentlessly spoonfeeds the public in countries all over the
world with the
hslp of the beholden media:

    LIE #1 : It is possible to re-create a naturally oa:urring human
disease in a healthy animal (what researchers call "an animal model of a
human disease"). SCIENTlFICFACT#1: h is by definrtion impossible. Trying
to re-create spontaneous human diseases (naturally occurring diseases that
arise from wrthin) in a healthy being constrtutes "experimental ra-
search." It is impossible to re-create a naturally occurring human disease
in a heaithy animal (or in a healthy human being for that matter) simply
because once it Is "recreated,"It is artificial and is no longer the
original, natural diseass.Clearly,"re-creation" and "spontaneous" are
contradlctory terms. It then follows that experimental research cannot
find cures for any diseases no maner how many millions of animal or human
experiments are performed (human experiments are also common place). It is
sometimes possible to re-create some of the symptoms of a disease but
never the disease itseff. The exception to this fact is the case of
infectious diseases. However, animals do not get human infectious diseases
and we do not get theirs. Thls Is why vlvisectors cannot infect a single
animal with human AIDS desprte massive efforts aimed at creating "an
animal model of human AIDS." (Besides, a nonhuman animal cannot have a
human disease because each species of animal is a drfferent biomechanical

   Obviously, prevention is the ideal situation. Once disease has
occurred, however, the only hope for a successful treatment and possible
cure is clinical research, ortheobservation of human beings who have
naturally occurrlng diseases. Clinical research is the only way to get
valid answers. Tragically, we keep financing experlmental research to the
almost total exclusion of prevention and clinlcal research.

      LIE #2: It is possibie to learn human anatomy and physiology by
studying four legged animals (quadrupeds), fish, and/or birds.
5ClENTIFICFACT#2: Animals are totaily different from man and from each
other genetically, histologically, anatomically, physiologically,
immunologically, emotionally, psychologically, sexually, and socially. It
Is clear that human medical cannot be based on veterinary medicine.

      LIE #3: It is possibie to predict human readions to drugs, vaccines,
and other chemicals by testing them in animals. SCIENTIFIC FACT#3: Animals
react drffersntly to drugs, vaccines, and other chemicals not only from
man but also from each other. Hence the incalculabls damage to human
health caused by pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines.

      LIE #4: Animal experimentation is useful in order to learn about
animal diseases in veterinary schoofs. SCIENTIFIC FACT #4: No knowledge
about animal diseases can be obtained by looking at artificially diseased
anlmals (experimental research). Same reasons as in Scientrfic Fact #1 .


   The new antivivisectionist movement represented by SUPRESS is seeking
the total abolition of animal experimentation and testing on medical and
scientiflc ground:. For the first time ever, the public is being informed
about one of the most supprsssed issues of the last 100 years: the
connection between animal experimentation and the systematic devastation
to our health, environment, and economy.

                     BEWARE OF IHE "ANlMAL RIGHTS" TRAP

    The biomedical empire has a vested interest in promoting the sbgan
"animai rights" because making vivisection a moral, ethical,
philosophical, and/or religious issue Is the most effectlve way to shift
the public's attentlon away from tts medical and scienttflc fraudulence.
For decades the vivisectors have been able to disarm ths opposition by
using the tired line: What will it be, your dog or your baby? (which
implies that anyone opposed to animal experimentation is antihuman). We
are now painfully aware of the fact that this emotional question tries to
hide an indisputabls fact: Vivisectors routinely take the Iives of both
the dog and the baby. Vivisection as it is presented to the public is not
a moral issue. It is a msdical and scientific fssue, a human health issue.


 Please do not remove this advertisment!

   Call The Cell - Would like more information on animal rights?
   (817) 589-0283
   Directly working from IDA, SURPESS, PETA Literature

   Article above from Surpress - Call 1-800-KILL-VIV

 Another file downloaded from:                     The NIRVANAnet(tm) Seven

 & the Temple of the Screaming Electron   Taipan Enigma        510/935-5845
 Burn This Flag                           Zardoz               408/363-9766
 realitycheck                             Poindexter Fortran   510/527-1662
 Lies Unlimited                           Mick Freen           801/278-2699
 The New Dork Sublime                     Biffnix              415/864-DORK
 The Shrine                               Rif Raf              206/794-6674
 Planet Mirth                             Simon Jester         510/786-6560

                          "Raw Data for Raw Nerves"

« on: February 16, 2017, 08:48:10 pm »

I know of no country in which there is so little independence of mind and
real freedom of discussion as in America." --Alexis de Tocqueville,
Democracy in America

"One of the delightful things about Americans is that they have absolutely
no historical memory." --Chou En-lai, former Chinese premier

You can't help but notice is that ANYTHING the United States does involves
"furthering democracy" of "ensuring freedom," up to and including
terrorizing and killing civilians in other countries, testing biological and
chemical weapons, and otherwise destroying people's lives.

We never hear about it in the media, but there's a reason for it: if the
American people knew what was being carried out in their names, they'd
definitely want to put the nation through some serious changes.



The state exists to serve and protect propertarian interests, and there is
ample evidence to show this. Below is a telling quote from an eyewitness and
active participant:

     "I spent thirty-three years and four months in active service in the
     country's most agile military force, the Marines. I served in all ranks
     from second lieutenant to major general. And during that period I spent
     most of my time being a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for
     Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster
     for capitalism.

     "I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of
     it. Like all members of the military profession I never had an original
     thought until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in
     suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of the higher-ups. This
     is typical with everyone in the military service.

     "Thus I helped make Mexico, and especially Tampico, safe for American
     oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for
     the National City Bank boys to collect revenue in. I helped in the
     raping of half-a-dozen Central American republics for the benefit of
     Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify
     Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers and Co.
     in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the sugar
     interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras "right" for American fruit
     companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard
     Oil went its way unmolested.

     "During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a
     swell racket. I was rewarded with honors, medals, and promotion.
     Looking back on it, I feel that I might have given Al Capone a few
     hints. The best he could do was to operate a racket in three city
     districts. The Marines operated on three continents." --General Smedley
     Butler, 1935

If only more of today's military personnel would realize that they are being
used by the owning elites as a publicly-subsidized capitalist goon squad.


Nothing scares those in government more than democracy--it scared the
Founding Fathers, and continues to alarm policy makers today.

Following contains material excerpted from

Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions since WWII by William
Blum, Common Courage Press, 1995. ISBN 1-56751-052-3.

Definitely give it a read if you get the chance.



Ever since the end of World War II, when the US was in the enviable position
as the only superpower untouched by war (contrasted by Europe, Asia, and
Russia, which had been ravaged), what did the self-appointed 'world
policeman' and defender of freedom and liberty set out on doing?

Well, first and foremost the US collaborated with "former" Nazis and
Fascists to help fight the threat posed by socialism. Anticommunism really
determined US foreign and domestic policy for the next 50 years and cost
countless people their lives, their liberty, and their pursuit of happiness.

I will attempt to document these incidents, but it is up to the readers to
research them on their own if so inclined, as there are so many wrongs
carried out by the US in the name of 'democracy' and 'freedom' that I can't
hope to give them a full treatment here or do justice to the victims.

The best I can do here is at least bring these shadow campaigns out in the
open; in the US, information which contradicts official policy proclamations
is simply ignored by the "free" press, "unworthy" of getting attention in
the press (contrasted with extensive coverage of "important" news like the
O.J. Simpson trial)

Assuming the track record of the US is not brushed aside any further than it
already has been, history will not look kindly on the "American way", and
the American people with any sense will be properly outraged at the manifold
crimes perpetuated in their name.


First off, let's see who has been the on the receiving end of American
subversion and outright military assault. Note, that I can't hope to be
thorough in this; but if you're interested, check out Blum's book, and do
your own research.

   * China (1945-60s)
   * Italy (1947-48)
   * Greece (1947-50s)
   * The Philippines (1940s and 50s)
   * Korea (1945-53)
   * Albania (1949-53)
   * Eastern Europe (1948-56)
   * Germany (1950s)
   * Iran (1953)
   * Guatemala (1953-54)
   * Costa Rica (mid-1950s)
   * Syria (1956-57)
   * The Middle East (1957-58)
   * Indonesia (1957-58)
   * Western Europe (1950s and 1960s)
   * British Guiana (1953-64)
   * Soviet Union (late 1940s to 1960s)
   * Italy (1950s to 1970s)
   * Vietnam (1950-73)
   * Cambodia (1955-73)
   * Laos (1957-73)
   * Haiti (1959-63)
   * Guatemala (1960)
   * France/Algeria (1960s)
   * Ecuador (1960-63)
   * The Congo (1960-64)
   * Brazil (1961-64)
   * Peru (1960-65)
   * Dominican Republic (1960-66)
   * Cuba (1959 to 1980s)
   * Indonesia (1965)
   * Ghana (1966)
   * Uruguay (1964-70)
   * Chile (1964-73)
   * Greece (1964-74)
   * Bolivia (1964-75)
   * Guatemala (1962 to 1980s)
   * Costa Rica (1970-71)
   * Iraq (1972-75)
   * Australia (1973-75)
   * East Timor (1975)
   * Angola (1975 to 1980s)
   * Zaire (1975-78)
   * Jamaica (1976-80)
   * Seychelles (1979-81)
   * Grenada (1979-84)
   * Morocco (1983)
   * Suriname (1982-84)
   * Libya (1981-1989)
   * Nicaragua (1981-90)
   * Panama (1969-91)
   * Bulgaria (1990)
   * Iraq (1990-91)
   * Afghanistan (1979-92)
   * El Salvador (1980-94)
   * Haiti (1986-94)



The following leaders have either been assassinated or America attempted to
assassinate them. You will notice some familiar names in the following, so a
clarification is necessary: the US government (using the CIA as the actual
agency that carries these assassinations out) has historically assassinated
(or attempted) two types of leaders in foreign nations: 1) client rulers who
step out of line ('line' being 'obedience to US directives); 2) popular
leaders favored by their people.

The US reacts with lethal aggression against any nationalist movements, even
those which are not even leftist in nature (leftists are automatically
attacked and undermined in US foreign policy). In US "national security"
speak, a "leftist" is anyone who deviates from US policy. It was in this way
that even anti-communists who dared step "out of line" (e.g., put their
nations' interests over obedience to the US) were whacked!

The question you need to ask is what do assassinations and coups have in
common with democracy??? "Democracy" in the US sense of the word means
"capitalism." Anything that deviates from pursuing a capitalist agenda is
"antidemocratic" in the US sense of the word.

Example: The average arable land distribution in the Third World is this: 3%
of the populace (the ruling elite) own 80% of arable land. That means that
97% of the populace of the Third and Fourth World nations are effectively

Not surprisingly, land reform (in the true sense of the word, meaning
"bringing about needed change") is one of the biggest issues in the Third
and Fourth World nations. All socialist movements address this very real
problem, hence their popularity with the people.

Now, the propertarians (e.g., capitalists) of the regimes in question oppose
ANY change in land ownership, because it would cut into their profit,
privilege, and power base--nothing threatens a ruling elite like equality
and justice!

So, when socialists (or even moderate nationalists) try to bring about land
reform to alleviate the crushing poverty of their people, this immediately
gets the attention of the US, which then intervenes with deadly force to
defend the "freedom" of the landowning elites of the world to enjoy their
profits without fear of expropriation.

The US defines that 3% landowning elite as "the people" and ignores the
other 97% of the populace. That's how the US policymakers can pretend that
they are defending "democracy" and "freedom"--they only count the ruling
elite as the populace; this is because, in capitalist society, only those
who own property matter! The rest of us are fodder!

The gross disparity of land ownership is unnatural. Thus, the US supports
genocidal fascist regimes to terrorize the 97% of the populations into
submission; some more recalcitrant people need to be outright pulverized
(Vietnam's 2 million + dead at our hands is the biggest, but not only,
example) for them to stay "in their place".

It is for this reason that the US provides 43% of the world's arms (we are
the largest arms dealer in the world). The client regimes around the globe
are not popular (e.g., not supported by the majority of the people), but are
elitist, and the democratic spirit of the peoples in question can only be
held at bay through constant and brutal use of force.

The "New World Order" is held together with blood, razorwire, and lots of
guns in the defense of wealthy ruling elites at the expense of most of the
world's people. This is what passes for "democracy" in American policy.

Does this match your own thoughts as to what "democracy" is and should be?


*note that this only notes our attempts; not all were successful, although,
in Castro's case, the US kept trying!

  1. 1949: Kim Koo, Korean opposition leader
  2. 1950s: CIA/Neo-Nazi hit list of numerous political figures in West
  3. 1955: JosŽ Antonio Remon, President of Panama
  4. 1950s: Chou En-lai, Prime Minister of China (several attempts)
  5. 1950s: Sukarno, President of Indonesia
  6. 1951: Kim Il Sung, Premier of North Korea
  7. 1950s (mid): Claro M. Recto, Philippines opposition leader
  8. 1955: Jawaharlal Nehru, Prime Minister of India
  9. 1957: Gamal Abdul Nasser,
 10. 1959 and 1963: Norodom Sihanouk, leader of Cambodia
 11. 1960: Brigadier General Abdul Karim Kassem, leader of Iraq
 12. 1950s and 1970s:JosŽ Figueres, President of Costa Rica (two attempts on
     his life)
 13. 1961: Francois "Papa Doc" Duvalier, leader of Haiti
 14. 1961: Patrice Lumumba, Prime Minister of Congo (Zaire)
 15. 1961: General Rafael Trujillo, leader of Dominican Republic
 16. 1963: Ngo Dinh Diem, President of South Vietnam
 17. 1960s: Fidel Castro, President of Cuba (many attempts on his life)
 18. 1960s: Raœl Castro, high official in government of Cuba
 19. 1965: Francisco Caama–o, Dominican Republic opposition leader
 20. 1965: Pierre Ngendandumwe, Prime Minister of Burundi
 21. 1965-6: Charles de Gaulle, President of France
 22. 1967: Che Guevera, Cuban leader
 23. 1970: Salvador Allende, President of Chile
 24. 1970: General Rene Schneider, Commander-in-Chief of Army, Chile
 25. 1970s, 1981: General Omar Torrijos, leader of Panama
 26. 1972: General Manuel Noriega, Chief of Panama Intelligence
 27. 1975: Mobutu Sese Seko, President of Zaire
 28. 1976: Michael Manley, Prime Minister of Jamaica
 29. 1980-86: Muammar Quaddafi, leader of Libya (several plots and attempts
     on his life)
 30. 1982: Ayatollah Khomeini, leader of Iran
 31. 1983: General Ahmed Dlimi, Moroccan Army commander
 32. 1983: Miguel d'Escoto, Foreign Minister of Nicaragua
 33. 1984: The nine comandantes of the Sandinista National Directorate
 34. 1985: Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, Lebanese Shiite leader (80
     people killed in the attempt)
 35. 1991: Saddam Hussein, leader of Iraq



A key part of American-style bourgeois "democracy" involves supporting
fascist strongmen who can keep a country "in line" (meaning, under US
control) in the interests of foreign investors. Since these strongmen are
supported by elites, and have no broad, and thus, democratic, mandate, it is
"necessary" for these dictators to be propped up by generous US military

It is important to note that these despots are not "allies" of the US so
much as pawns. Thus, when they no longer are useful or become troublesome
(as Manuel Noriega and Saddam Hussein recently demonstrated), the US will
not hasten to oust or assassinate them (or attempt to do so).

Ask yourself what supporting fascists can POSSIBLY have to do with

The reason behind this insane policy is business: it's easier to plunder
nations under the rule of petite dictators (and give them their cut, their
"piece of the action") than it is to deal with developing nations looking
after their own interests.

The "freedom" the US is defending is the freedom to pillage, loot, and
plunder Third and Fourth World nations at the expense of their native

Since this policy devastates the nations in question, only elite,
militaristic fascist rulers can keep the people of these nations from acting
in their own best interests! Thus, the US spends enormous sums of taxpayer
money propping these unpopular dictators.

Below is a partial list of neo- or outright fascists that the US has funded
and supported in defense of property: (the US has supported so many, it's
going to take me time to list them all!)

   * Tiburcio Andino (Honduras)
   * Carlos Castillo Armas (Guatemala)
   * Fulgencio Batista (Cuba)
   * Ngo Dinh Diem (Vietnam)
   * "Papa Doc" Duvalier (Haiti)
   * King Fahd (Saudi Arabia)
   * King Hussein (Jordan)
   * Saddam Hussein (Iraq)
   * Chiang Kai-shek (China)
   * Ferdinand Marcos (Phillippines)
   * Joseph DŽsirŽ Mobutu (Congo/Zaire)
   * Manuel Noriega (Panama)
   * Mohammed Riza Pahlavi (the Shah of Iran)
   * The Somoza Family (Nicaragua)
   * Suharto (Indonesia)
   * Rafael Trujillo Molina (Dominican Republic)


Conspiracy / Supreme Court Dictatorship in America
« on: February 16, 2017, 08:35:35 pm »
"Supreme Court Dictatorship in America"
( by Don Bell, _The CDL Report_, Issue 129, June 1990 )

  The conditioning of the people by the brainwashers has been beyond
comparison.  The Socialist Nations of Western Europe and the Communist
Nations of Eastern Europe are merging, as planned, into one great Regional
World Government.  The comparatively free and wealth United States of America
and the basketcase Union of Soviet Socialist Republics are converging
economically and otherwise through most favored trade, aid, educational,
social and financial alliances.  And while the captive peoples of the
Communist countries are given the semblance of freedom and conditional
independence, the people of the United States are losing their freedom
and independence, their standard of living, their republican form of
government and their right to worship as their fathers worshipped.  Most
recent example of the latter is less than a month old.  But the moguls
that manage the media have kept the news off their satellites and out
of their daily and weekly columns to such an extent that few have heard
of the Judicial Tyranny committed by five un-elected rulers we call
Supreme Court Justices.

  On Wednesday, April 18, 1990, the Supreme Court killed our United States
Constitution.  The coup de grace was a simple but fatal action whose reaction
is yet to be felt.  The Court decreed that federal judges have the authority
to order state and municipal elected officials to raise taxes, and to issue
injunctions preventing laws and State Constitutions from being used to do
anything about it.  A Constitutional expert tells us that by this decree
the Supreme Court has abolished the representative form of government at
the state and local level and along with it nullified the US and State
Constitutions, "California's Proposition 13, supply-side economics,
federalism, the separation of powers and the national tax-limitation and
balanced-budget amendment movement."  Quoted remark was by Paul Craig Roberts,
professor of political economy at the Center for Strategic & International
Studies in Washington.  He explains:  "Elected legislators and the people
to whom they are accountable no longer have control over the power of the
purse, or the quantity and quality of public expenditures.  The Court's
ruling ... transfers all meaningful governmental power to the federal
judiciary.  It will take some time for judicial tyranny to become fully
manifest, but the process for establishing judicial rule is now in place.
Unless we revolt, we have lost our freedom."  (Emphasis was added).

  In common Americanese, this is what happened.  A federal judge believed
that racial desegregation in the Kansas City, Mo. public school system was
not up to the standard set by federal judges.  On that pretext he gave
orders for an extravagant school improvement plan that would cost an
estimated $260 million, to include high schools with air-conditioned
classrooms, an alarm system and 15 microcomputers, a 2,000-square-foot
planetarium, greenhouses and vivariums, a 25-acre farm with an air-conditioned
meeting room accommodating 104 persons, a model United Nations wired for
language translations, broadcast-capable radio and television studios with
an editing and animation lab, a temperature-controlled art galley, movie
editing and screening rooms, dust free diesel mechanics rooms, 1,875-square-
foot elementary animals rooms for a zoo project, and swimming pools.  Not
only that, but the federal judge ordered that magnet schools be built
throughout the school district at the additional estimated price of $200
million.  This nearly half a billion dollars was not to be spent to
better educate students, just to make them more comfortable while
enjoying extra-curricular activities.

  The school board, the State Legislature and the people who would have to
pay for the improvements, were shocked.  They didn't have that kind of money
for such a purpose, and the federal judge had no right or authority to issue
such an order.  They pointed out that the power of taxation is a power that
the federal judiciary does not possess.  Only elected legislative bodies
have such power.  So affirms the US Constitution, State Constitutions, and
common sense derived from "taxation without representation" cries that
helped start a revolutionary war.  So, the federal judge demanding and the
state and local elected authorities refusing, the case went to the US
Supreme Court.

  By a vote of 5-to-4 the Supreme Court ruled that federal judges do have
the power of the public purse; Constitutions, state laws, county and
municipal ordinances to the contrary notwithstanding.  The five traitors,
mark them well, were Byron R. White, William J. Brennan, Thurgood Marshall,
Harry A. Blackmun and John Paul Stevens.  The other four Justices were
powerfully and vocally opposed to the decree, but they were a minority.
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy was supported by Chief Justice William H. Rhenquist,
Sandra Day O'Connor and Antonin Scalia, in warning that "Today's casual
embrace of taxation imposed by the unelected, life-tenured federal
judiciary disregards fundamental precepts for the democratic control of
public institutions... [The Court's] assertion of judicial power in one of
the most sensitive of policy areas, that of involving taxation, begins a
process that over time could threaten fundamental alterations of the form
of government our Constitution embodies ...  The power of taxation is one
that the federal judiciary does not possess."  Quoting Judge Robert Bork
(remember him?) to back up his sentiments, Professor Roberts (op.cit.)
warned:  "As a result of the court's ruling, anyone who continues to hold
municipal bonds or real property -- including their homes -- would be
foolish, because federal judges can now wreck the tax base of any state
or municipality and destroy real estate values by running up property taxes.
It is possible that the American people won't accept the usurpation of
power by the judiciary, which in effect turns our legislative bodies into
a cloak for judicial tyranny.  However, so far they have accepted everything
else -- routine release of dangerous criminals, destruction of neighborhood
schools, busing of their children, racial quotas in university administrations
and work-places.  We have become an effete people since the time our
ancestors condemned King George III 'for imposing taxes on us without
consent' and for taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable
Laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our Government."

  There is one hope of defeating this judicial tyranny.  The April 28th issue
of _Human Events_ which we have just received as we write this Report,
contains the following information:

       "In the wake of the Supreme Court's astonishing 5-to-4 decision
        that says federal judges may order local governments to increase
        taxes... Sen. Gordon Humphrey (R-NH) thinks he can make headway
        with S-34, the _Judicial_Taxation_Prohibition_Act_.  The measure
        which had 10 co-sponsors before the decision, would flatly
        prevent judges from compelling state or local authorities to
        impose new taxes or raise old ones...  Humphrey's bill is now
        the only vehicle available to block further judicial tax tyranny."

  As serious as was this granting to un-elected federal judges the power to
tax, an equally important decision had previously been handed down by the
Court in regard to the Fourth Amendment's protection against search and
seizure.  The Amendment states  "The right of the people to be secure in
their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches
and seizures, shall not be violated..."  But the present treasonous Supreme
Court disagreed.  The excuse for making it easier for police to search and
seize people's private property and papers was probably the so-called drug
war.  But the intent also made it easier to seize and confiscate guns.
Anti-gun legislation is not popular; so why not just stage a raid, seize
and confiscate whatever weapons citizens might have with which to defend
themselves?  Weakening the Fourth also could nullify the Second Amendment.
So, in a case possibly designed for just such purpose, the Court "gave police
broad new (and unconstitutional) authority to conduct sweeping searches in
private homes," said an article appearing in the _Amarillo Daily News_ of
Marcy 2, 1990.  The article said:  "The Court decreed that police may search
throughout a house when they have a reasonable suspicion there is a hidden
danger to the arresting officers, even if the arresting authorities are
interested in knowing how this violation of the Fourth Amendment works in
actual practice, then consider the Franklin Sanders case.  A small army
of various types of officers, all supposedly raiding in behalf of the IRS,
invaded the Sanders home, arrested and jailed Franklin and his wife,
isolated, tried unsuccessfully to intimidate and harass their children
for hours.  Being Christian children they were made of stern stuff.  They
confiscated all of Franklin's papers and computer ware.  The officers also
arrested the Pastor and Elders of the Presbyterian Church where the Sanders
family worships.  Undaunted and praising God for his ability to continue in
his calling, he's out on bail ($100,000).  This one-out-of-scores of
examples of how totalitarian tactics are being employed in the United States
should awaken everyone to the dangers facing Christian American families in
this "era of merging."

  This Supreme Court's decision amending the Fourth's protection against
search and seizure is doubly dangerous because it tends to "legalize" a law
passed by the Oklahoma Legislature and signed by Governor Bellman.  An
Oklahoma patriot, Margie M. Martin, of Texhoma, OK, has been fighting this
law, almost single handedly because the media, even the supposedly
conservative media, fail to give her the support she deserves.  This is a
law (House Bill 1750) that makes every item owned by every Oklahoma citizen
taxable.  It also provides that officers may enter a home and check and
record every item (including guns, of course) in the house.  We haven't a
copy of this 96 page bill, but _The Christian World Report_ of May 16, 1989,
gave an excellent report which we copy.

        "The citizens must provide a list of all their possessions
         to the government.  This list must include everything from
         watches to farm tractors.  Citizens who fail to give the
         list are paid a visit by a government agent.  If denied
         entry to the citizen's residence, the government agent
         later returns with a warrant, enters the home and compiles
         the list.  Is this country the Soviet Union or the Peoples
         Republic of China?  No, it is Oklahoma in 1991.  In the
         last legislative session, House Bill 1750 was passed by
         the state legislature and signed into law by the governor...
         The measure goes into effect January 1, 1991.  The law reads:

              "On or before January 1st of each year, the Oklahoma
               Tax Commission shall prescribe for the use of tax
               assessors, suitable bank forms for the listing and
               assessing of all property, both real and personal.
               These forms will then be furnished to the taxpayer
               for listing all personal property.  From January 1
               through the end of February, the country assessor
               must set up a temporary office in each town in the
               county for a minimum of one day each to allow the
               taxpayer to submit the list.  The assessor must
               then be present at the county seat from March 1
               through March 15 to receive lists not turned in
               at the temporary offices.  Personal property, for
               the purposes of ad valorem taxation, includes:
               All goods, chattels and effects: -- All horses,
               cattle, mules, asses, sheep, swine, goats and
               other livestock; -- All household furniture,
               including gold and silver plate, musical instruments,
               watches and jewelry; -- All wagons, vehicles, or
               carriages and all farm tractors, implements or
               machinery; -- Personal, private, or professional
               libraries; -- All other property having an actual,
               constructive, or taxable status.  Taxpayers failing
               to provide the list will be visited by the assessor.
               Prior to entering the premises of any taxpayer for
               purposes of discovering household personal property
               located within a commercial place of business, the
               county assessor or deputy shall request permission
               to enter the premises and shall state the reason for
               the inspection.  If access to the premises is denied,
               the county assessor or deputy shall be required to
               obtain a search warrant in order to conduct an
               inspection of the interior of the premises.  A
               search warrant may be obtained upon a showing of
               probable cause ...  Property not previously listed,
               or undervalued, will result in a penalty of up to
               20% of the value of the property.  At least once
               every four years, the assessor must physically
               inspect all real property in the county'."

  "H.B. 1750 is a cleverly contrived piece of legislation that I believe was
put together by other than Oklahoma Legislators," said Margie Martin.  We
agree.  Who needs the registration of weapons if the authorities, under the
guise of property evaluation, can enter your home, inspect all of your
personal possessions, having a "reasonable suspicion" that you did not
declare certain items, like firearms?  This is the case in Oklahoma, and
similar legislation is being introduced in other state legislatures.  A
respected subscriber and correspondent, Dr. Harry Walkup of Worton, MD, wrote:

      "We are living in troubled times in which the Keynesian/Fabian,
       Socialist, Power-Centralizing Revolutionary Strategy is being
       imposed on us, with its financial policies designed to progressively
       destroy individual economic, political and cultural independence.
       This can only be accompolished if our firearms are confiscated..."

Under firearms registration the complete confiscation of weapons would be
difficult and costly.  But with the death of the Constitution and its Bill
of Rights, plus Judicial Tyranny and Totalitarian Legislation, weapons could
be confiscated from law-abiding citizens, making slaves of us all.  When
situations change, plans may also change:

      "And He said unto them (His disciples), When I sent you without
       purse, scrip and shoes, lacked ye anything?  And they said, Nothing.
       Then He said unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him
       take it, and likewise his scrip:  and he that hath no sword, let
       him sell his garment, and buy one."  ( Luke 22:35,36 ).

                                                      from _Don Bell Reports_

|| A publication of the New Christian Crusade Church
||                      P.O. Box 426
||                      Metairie, LA  70004
||                      James K. Warner, Editor

« on: February 16, 2017, 08:31:43 pm »

I spoke by phone with Sherman Skolnick of the Citizens' Committee
to Clean-up the Courts [CCCC].   Here is my transcription of that
 +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +  +
[Phone rings]
Uh, Sherman Skolnick?
Hi. This is Brian Redman. I talked with you a few days ago?
Yeah, right.
O.K. I got the Barings Bank thing went out on the Internet,  O.K.
I'm also wondering if you have, maybe, 5 minutes, I could ask you
some questions?
I'd be glad.
O.K. What I've done...
By  the  way,  the message was highly detailed.  I hope it didn't
cause you any trouble to transcribe it.
No. As a matter of  fact,  I...   I printed out the transcription
and it's in the mail, O.K.?  So you should be gettin' it...  mmm,
tomorrow or Saturday.
Thank you.
O.K. Uh, I've been runnin' around a lot, you know, so, I...
Thank you for your efforts.
I  have  been  talking to people all over [the] United States and
elsewhere, gathering information on this.  I...  You know, I know
a lot of people.
Um-hmm [understands].
What kind of questions do you have?
O.K. All right, well, number one,  O.K. Let me just kind of throw
something out at ya:  I got this...  You see, what I, the  way  I
had  been  recording  your  recorded  messages before was I had a
micro- cassette recorder that I  would  place right up to the ear
of the phone to record the message.  And I, my idea was,  I  went
to  Radio  Shack  and  they told me that there was this kind of a
gizmo, O.K.?
Yeah, right.  It costs about  $21  and  you plug it directly into
the modular phone line and then into your machine, and it records
directly from the line without any hum or problem.
O.K. So that's what I did.  In fact, I'm recordin' ya right  now,
if that's O.K.?
Yeah, fine.
O.K. So that's...
...checking  out.  Better check out, check a little bit if you're
using it for the first time.
You know what I did, I tested it on your recorded message, and it
seemed to work O.K.,  so...   And  I  just figured, well, I'll do
like a 5 or 10 minute interview and if it turns out O.K.  then  I
could  just  transcribe  the  interview  and  put  it  out on the
Yeah, certainly.
O.K. I just wanted to,  you  know, make sure you understood that,
you know, all that stuff.
O.K. A few questions that  came  up,  all  right,  was  with  the
Barings Bank, uh -- it's a relatively small bank.  You know, like
a billion dollar failure...
Well that's not accurate.
The  total estimated, or expected losses may well exceed over $10
billion.  And  to  understand  that,  you  have  to  consult with
experts on derivatives.
Um-hmm [understands].
In unwinding a derivative trade that has gone bad, it depends  on
the instruments that are involved.  Here what was involved is the
price  of yen and related matters.  While they're unwinding these
transactions, the yen... um, not  the  yen (excuse me), the Nikei
Index may go down 2,000 points.  And if that occurs, as  some  in
the  securities industry expect (although they haven't been asked
about it or quoted in the  financial press), if that occurs, that
the [Nikei] Index goes down 2,000 points, then the  loss  of  the
derivative transactions that have gone sour will be very close to
*10*  *billion* *dollars*.  Not one billion, and not 900 million,
but $10 billion.
O.K. 'Cause there...
It  depends  on  the  unwinding   of  the  trades.   Because  the
derivatives transactions in question here were highly complicated
and are tied in with the Nikei Index.
O.K. Because there was some question.  See, I get  feedback,  all
right?   This  thing  goes out to a lot of readers and I get some
feedback from them.  And  it  occurred  to  me  that, now I had a
chance to, you know, explore some of these issues  more  in-depth
and  kind of...  'Cause they had a lot of questions.  I get a lot
I've already talked off-the-record  with highly-skilled people in
this field.
And they have explained it to me.
Understand something:  um, how can I explain this quickly?  As  a
result of our efforts for over 30-some odd years in investigating
judicial  corruption,  over  the  years we've found out that such
corruption involves banks that  are  owned and operated by judges
and others.  As a result, we became, we have become very adept at
financial research.  And we have sources all over.  And  we  have
talked  to  those  sources, and they estimate that the loss, when
the Barings Bank transactions get  unwound, would be close to $10
O.K. Along the line of sources, I  know  that  you  can't  reveal
these  people,  but  I'm  thinking  more  in terms of, uh you had
mentioned before that  you  read,  for  example, the *Wall Street
Journal*.  Are there other sources out  there,  as  for  reading,
that you would recommend?
Well  I  would  find  it  interesting,  in  the  future, what the
*Economist*, which now is  trying  to  get a larger readership in
the United States, that's a...
That's a London...
...that's a London publication [CN --  a  magazine],  what  their
next  issue  on  this  question  may  deal with.  They may take a
purely British point of view,  or  they  may take a point of view
sympathetic to the Queen's interest  in  Barings.   Although  the
Queen,  also,  has  a stock brokerage -- I believe they're called
COATS(?)  -- that handles,  traditionally,  a lot of the business
of the British monarchy.
O.K. So the *Wall Street Journal*, the *Economist*, there's...
Oh, you mean to get a clear idea of what's going on?
Yeah. Just some of the stuff you read.
...none of these publications, in my opinion, are gonna tell  the
unvarnished  truth  about  what  is involved.  And I can give the
reasons for that.
Because they all  have  their  own  special interests behind 'em?
Well...  Let me just list a few of  the  problems.   One  of  the
largest  securities firms in the world, Nomura Securities, N-o-m-
u-r-a, reportedly is, and has  been, in worse financial condition
than Barings.  However, the Bank of Japan, and others,  may  bail
them  out.   But some brokerages are quietly "red-flagging" them,
which is a trade term  for  avoiding somebody.  For example, when
some brokerages became aware that there was a problem in  Mexico,
they  "red-flagged"  Mexico.   That's  the  way  they  tell their
troops, "No transactions with them" -- you see the point?
Likewise, Goldman-Sachs has  come  within  a hair, reportedly, of
going  under  in  respect  to  the  "Mexican  problem"   --   the
devaluation and the expected defaults by Mexican corporations.
So  the  financial press, to help the established interests, wish
to play down the Barings thing as much as they possibly can as a,
just another "minor matter".  Which I don't believe it is.
O.K. There's a newsletter  called *Strategic Investment*, put out
by Lord Rees-Mogg...
Right!  I read it.  I get copies.  I don't subscribe, but friends
of mine send me copies from time to time.
Same... Yeah. Same with me.
I uh...  In their latest issue, they're talkin' about this  thing
about  how Clinton's puttin' up what they call a "Berlin Wall" to
keep dollars from fleeing  the  country.  Have you heard anything
about that?
Well what I know that's related to it is, the dollar is  hitting,
more  and  more,  new, post-war lows.  And the reason for that is
that expert traders in  the  dollar are expecting the possibility
that the *Deutschmark* will be the new, reserve currency  of  the
world,  rather  than  the  U.S.  dollar.   And  that  is based on
information that Clinton and  his  wife  are  "going to the wall"
[i.e. will face some degree of justice] soon.
In other words, well, there's been leaks from  the  investigation
by  the  independent  prosecutor which supports the idea that the
First Lady is, in the near future, most likely gonna be indicted.
And that will  put  a  tremendous  cloud  over  the Clinton White
House.  And so, in advance of that, the dollar is being dumped --
let's put it that way.
O.K. I'm just basically,  for  myself,  I'm  watchin'  the  *Wall
Street  Journal*  myself  and just noticin' the dollar/yen thing,
how that's...
Notice the split in the  *Wall  Street Journal*:  those that work
on the editorial page continue with their detailed  items,  which
are  more  *news*  items  than editorials, about Whitewater.  The
other day they had a, um...
I saw it. Yeah.
...a  front-page  story   that   "pooh-poohed"  Whitewater.   The
editorials are closer to the truth than the front-page  story  --
which  is  a  different faction within the *Wall Street Journal*.
(I know a lot about the  back office politics of the *Wall Street
O.K. Yeah, like  I  say,  this,  I'm  gonna  have  to  keep  this
relatively brief.  I mean, there's a *lot* of things...
Well then cut out those parts that you feel are not relevant.
No,  it's  *all* relevant, 'til now.  I'm just sayin' that I have
to kind of move along.  You know, I'm lookin' for, at this point,
maybe a 10, 15 minute  interview.  Because I plan on transcribin'
the whole thing.
All right, what subjects do you particularly want to get into?
There's just a few questions that people had, O.K.?   And  you've
answered,  so  far, fine; I'm happy with the answers you've given
me so far.  And I'd like  to  get into more detail.  You know, my
idea is, maybe call you up once a week, ten, fifteen minutes, and
just kinda, you know, "flesh out" things, and...
My opinion is that the Barings Bank collapse is not  an  isolated
event.   It  is  part  of an ongoing series of scandals which, of
which the  Whitewater  scandal  and  the  scandal,  the series of
scandals in Italy, and  in  France  --  there's  some  overriding
connection  between them.  In other words, different factions are
coming out of joint and are fighting with each other, and this is
what happens.  And the financial  press is *not* making any sense
out of  it;  they're  dealt  with  as  if  they're  all  isolated
situations -- which they may not be.
O.K.  With  this (movin' to a different subject), with this thing
of the 41 grand  jury  witnesses  in  Chicago, that you're sayin'
that the Justice Department has got an  assassination  team  that
has been killin' people...
Uh, yes.  The ones that originally contended that were the highly
skilled  lawyers,  including the former Attorney General, Elliott
Richardson, that represented the Inslaw company.  And in rebuttal
to former  judge  Nicholas  J.  Bua's  report  on  the grand jury
investigation of whether Inslaw  was  defrauded  by  the  Justice
Department,    Inslaw's    attorneys   filed   certain   detailed
descriptions,  offering  witnesses,  that  there  is  within  the
Justice Department [an] unmarked  section  where there is a group
there that conducts domestic and foreign assassinations, and that
*they* were responsible for killing a key witness,  a  free-lance
journalist, by the name of Danny Casolaro.
Yeah,  O.K.  What,  what some of my readers were interested in is
possibly a list of the names  of  the victims.  I mean, you don't
have to read, you know, it out over the phone.   I  was  thinking
maybe  I  would  contact  you  by  mail, askin' for a list of the
victims if you have...
I think we have compiled a  great  number of names.  In a federal
court case that we brought, in the Fall of '92, on this question,
we accused Bua and others who were supervising the Inslaw federal
grand jury of not paying attention to the fact that *their*  team
of   investigators   were   in  fact  terrorizing  and  murdering
And we accuse,  in  the  court  record,  a  FBI  agent named Mike
"Chuckie" Peters of the same.
O.K. A lot of this I've pretty much covered already through  the,
posted out on the Internet.
All right.
And  one  other thing that people have kind of asked me questions
about is this thing  that  Tsar  Nicholas  II and the Tsarina and
their family were not actually killed in 1918.
Well there have been a couple of books on this  subject.   And  I
myself,  in  '74, with a group of my associates, went to New York
to spend two whole days interviewing Alexei Romanov, who contends
(and I believe he's correct) that he is the surviving son of Tsar
Nicholas II, and that his  family were *not* murdered, as history
books state, in a basement in Siberia...
All right, so...
...but that they  lived  out  their  lives,  protected  by  their
cousins,  the  British  royal  family, and that they were housed,
under another name, in Poland.   And  it's... well, you'd have to
know a lot about history, you'd have to know  a  lot  about  this
question, to understand the validity of what I'm saying.
Most  of  the  royal  families  of Europe -- Russia, Germany, and
England -- are cousins.  They're related...
...through Queen Victoria.  And, so  the  uh...  And, in 1970, in
one edition only, the *Chicago Tribune* wrote a story about this,
confirming from inside sources that the Tsar, his wife, and their
children were rescued and were not murdered  in  Ekaterenberg(?),
Siberia, as some had contended.
All right, so in the...
I  think  that  I  have extra copies of that, and I will mail you
O.K. What's... One reader...
And the *Tribune* has never  recanted that story or corrected it.
It's a correct story, from United Press International.
O.K. One reader said that there's, there were actually movies  of
Tsar  Nicholas  and his family being shot by the Bolsheviks, from
Not true.
Not true. O.K. And another reader...
What happened is that the Rockefellers, that held $400 million in
gold of the *Romanov* --  not  the Russian government, but of the
*Romanov* private fortune -- have a great interest  to  circulate
those  false  stories.  Otherwise they might have to disgorge the
And they were the  ones  that  financed  the  movie, in the early
'70s, called "Nicholas and Alexandra".  And at the close  of  the
movie,  it  shows... uh, you know:  the Tsar and his family being
shot to death.
You mean there's an  *actual*  movie  of  it happening?  It's not
O.K. And you would...
It's *not* true.
O.K. You would say the  same  for  supposed  DNA  evidence,  that
that's not true?
Oh,  you  mean that recent stuff that came out of the post-Soviet
period there?  I don't believe any of it.
And *you* wouldn't believe any of it either, if you had spent two
entire days questioning and  examining,  you know, uh questioning
Alexei Romanov.  I mean, he's got the Tsarist family face,  which
cannot  --  I mean, I brought artists along to look at that face!
You can't reproduce that face.  You can't fake-up that face.
Further than that, since he was a hemophiliac, as a child he wore
braces.  And we discussed some  inside things about that, some of
the  things  about  wearing  braces  (which,  of  course,  I'm  a
paraplegic myself) that he could not have known otherwise.
I mean, we tested him out  on  every  possible  aspect.   And  he
didn't flunk a single question, no.
All  right,  and  what  about  this  Anastasia?   I myself am not
totally positive on this.  It seems to me that...  I mean, I know
there was this controversy over this woman...
Well... the, what happened is,  at the time that the Rockefellers
sponsored the  Nicholas  and  Alexandra  movie,  to  promote,  to
further  promote  the  idea  that the Tsar had been murdered, the
reason for it is, the  German  high  court at that time (which is
about 1971) had the case of a woman who  used  the  name  "Marian
Anderson",  but  who claimed that she was the surviving daughter,
Anastasia Romanov...
Um-hmm [understands].
...the daughter of the Tsar.   And  she did not succeed in court,
but that does not mean that she didn't necessarily have  a  valid
And  then  in  the  '50s, about 1957, um... what's her name?  The
famous actress... did a movie called "Anastasia".
Yeah, I know the...  I've heard of the movie.  And I can't recall
the actress either.  [CN -- Ingrid Bergman(?)]
O.K. That's...
In other words, there's been various efforts to further circulate
and promote these false stories  that  the Tsar, the Tsarina, and
their children  were  murdered.   It  did  *not*  happen.   Those
that...   And  the story that ran in one edition of the *Tribune*
in 1970 is a  *correct*  story.   They  have never taken it back.
They have never corrected it.
O.K. I just want to close with sayin' most of my readers are very
interested in your material.  And  I'm  real  happy  that  you're
givin'  me  a chance to kind of expand on, you know, these things
that you're saying.
The Tsarist  thing  requires  a  lot  of  details.   I  have only
summarized a *very* *small* number of details.
Yeah.  Uh, we're makin' progress, O.K., is...  What  I'm  sayin',
is that, before, I would put out these 5-minute commentaries that
sometimes would raise further questions and, that I couldn't...
And  the other thing that's in my 5-minute message, which there's
gotta be a lot more details discussed,  that you can't do it in 5
minutes -- and that is the secret pact between...
...the Pope and the Western powers, which expired  in  '93.   And
there's a lot to be said about that.
O.K.  And  I'm  just  sayin', see what I have to do is I've gotta
transcribe this.  And this should  keep  me  busy for a few days,
anyway, gettin' this stuff out.
If this stuff isn't clear, call me and if I'm  here  I  certainly
will  try to...  I tried to summarize this quickly, but you know,
we're "documentors", you know what I mean?
And I tend to immediately  supply highly detailed answers that...
well, would take...
...It would lengthen the thing out.
Let's just say, I don't make idle statements.  Let's put it  that
O.K.  And  the  documents,  I  told ya that, you know, I had made
copies of some of your  commentaries and transcribed 'em.  I sent
those out in the mail to ya.  Like I said, you should be  gettin'
'em Friday or Saturday.
What  is  happening?   In  other  words,  some  of  the others on
Internet are getting back to you with interesting questions, huh?
Yeah!   Yeah.   And  actually,   I've  *routinely*  gotten  these
questions, and I've been in a position of not  really  *knowing*,
you  know?   Sometimes  I  have  *some* knowledge, myself, that I
Understand what our problem  is:   I operate without a secretary.
And my associates are scattered all over.  So  we  don't  have  a
"secretarial  staff"  to  speak  of.   And  I have a listed phone
number and address,  and  were  I  to  get  a  lot  of mail to my
address, I don't think I could, you know, answer  it.   In  other
words,  if  questions  came  to  me, how would I answer all these
letters?  Do you see what I mean?
Yeah, sure.
So if they come to you,  I'll...  You ask your questions and I'll
do my best to answer 'em.
O.K. And when I get done with this, transcribin'  this  interview
and  sendin'  it out, I'll send ya a copy.  Just so you know that
I'm representing you *verbatim* and I'm not...
Right.  And we welcome more questions about the Barings Bank.  We
are in  touch  with  the  most  knowledgeable  people  on various
continents about it.  We've...  We know a great  deal  about  it.
So  we  will have further messages, and I'll be glad to share the
information with you.
O.K. Thanks a lot for your time.
Thank you.
O.K. 'Bye.

« on: February 16, 2017, 08:30:19 pm »


John Connolly

SPY Magazine - Sept 1992 - Volume 6


What? A big private company - one with a board of former CIA, FBI and
Pentagon officials; one in charge of protecting Nuclear-Weapons facilities,
nuclear reactors, the Alaskan oil pipeline and more than a dozen American
embassies abroad; one with long-standing ties to a radical ring-wing
organization; one with 30,000 men and women under arms - secretly helped
IRAQ in its effort to obtain sophisticated weapons? And fueled unrest
in Venezuela? This is all the plot of a new best-selling thriller,
right? Or the ravings of some overheated conspiracy buff,right? Right?



In the WINTER OF 1990, David Ramirez, a 24 year-old member of the Special
Investigations Division of the Wackenhut Corporation, was sent by  his
superiors on an unusual mission. Ramirez a former Marine Corps sergeant
based in Miami, was told to fly immediately to San Antonio along with three
other members of SID-a unit, known as founder and chairman George
Wackenhut's "private FBI," that provided executive protection and conducted
undercover investigations and sting operations. Once they arrived, they
rented two gray Ford Tauruses and drove four hours to a desolate town on the
Mexican border called Eagle Pass. There, just after dark, they met two truck
drivers who had been flown in from Houston. Inside a nearby warehouse was an
18 -wheel tractor-trailer, which the two truck drivers and the four
Wackenhut agents in their rented cars were supposed to transport to Chicago.
"My instructions were very clear," Ramirez recalls. "Do not look into the
trailer, secure it, and make sure it safely gets to Chicago." It went
without saying that no one else was supposed to look in the trailer, either,
which is why the Wackenhut men were armed with fully loaded Remington 870
pump-action shotguns.

The convoy drove for 30 hours straight, stopping only for gas and food. Even
then, one of the Wackenhut agents had to stay with the truck, standing by
one of the cars, its trunk open, shotgun within easy reach. "Whenever we
stopped, I bought a shot glass with the name of the town on it," Ramirez
recalls. "I have glasses from Oklahoma City, Kansas City, St. Louis."

A little before 5:00 on the morning of the third day, they delivered the
trailer to a practically empty warehouse outside Chicago. A burly man who
had been waiting for them on the loading dock told them to take off the
locks and go home, and that was that. They were on a plane back to Miami
that afternoon. Later Ramirez's superiors told him-as they told other SID
agents about similar midnight runs-that the trucks contained $40 million
worth of food stamps. After considering the secrecy, the way the team was
assembled and the orders not to stop or open the truck, Ramirez decided he
didn't believe that explanation.

Neither do we. One reason is simple: A Department of Agriculture official
simply denies that food stamps are shipped that way. "Someone is blowing
smoke," he says. Another reason is that after a six-month investigation, in
the course of which we spoke to more than 300 people, we believe we know
what the truck did contain-equipment necessary for the manufacture of
chemical weapons-and where it was headed: to Saddam Hussein's Iraq. And the
Wackenhut Corporation-a publicly traded company with strong ties to the CIA
and federal contracts worth $200 million a year-was making sure Saddam would
be geting his equipment intact. The question is why. In 1954, George
Wackenhut, then a 34-year old former FBI agent, joined up with three other
former FBI agents to open a company in Miami called Special Agent
Investigators Inc. The partnership was neither successful nor
harmonious-George once knocked partner Ed Dubois unconscious to end a
disagreement over the direction the company would take-and in 1958, George
bought out his partners.

However capable Wackenhut's detectives may have been at their work, George
Wackenhut had two personal attributes that were instrumental in the
company's growth. First, he got along exceptionally well with important
politicians. He was a close ally of Florida governor Claude Kirk, who hired
him to combat organized crime in the state; and was also friends with
Senator George Smathers, an intimate of John F. Kennedy's. It was Smathers
who provided Wackenhut with his big break when the senator's law firm helped
the company find a loophole in the Pinkerton law, the 1893 federal statute
that had made it a crime for an employee of a private detective agency to do
work for the government. Smathers's firm set up a wholly owned subsidiary of
Wackenhut that provided only guards, not detectives. Shortly thereafter,
Wackenhut received multimillion-dollar contracts from the government to
guard Cape Canaveral and the Nevada nuclear-bomb test site, the first of
many extremely lucrative federal contracts that have sustained the company
to this day.

The second thing that helped make George Wackenhut successful was that he
was, and is, a hard-line right-winger. He was able to profit from his
beliefs by building up dossiers on Americans suspected of being Communists
or merely left-leaning-"subversives and sympathizers," as he put it-and
selling the information to interested parties. According to Frank Donner,
the author of "Age of Surveillance", the Wackenhut Corporation maintained
and updated its files even after the McCarthyite hysteria had ebbed, adding
the names of antiwar protesters and civil-rights demonstrators to its list
of "derogatory types." By 1965, Wackenhut was boasting to potential
investors that the company maintained files on 2.5 million suspected
dissidents-one in 46 American adults then living. in 1966, after acquiring
the private files of Karl Barslaag; a former staff member of the House
Committee on Un-American Activities, Wackenhut could confidently maintain
that with more than 4 million names, it had the largest privately held file
on suspected dissidents in America. In 1975, after Congress investigated
companies that had private files, Wackenhut gave its files to the
now-defunct anti-Communist Church League of America of Wheaton, Illinois.
That organization had worked closely with the red squads of big-city police
departments, particularly in New York and L.A., spying on suspected
sympathizers; George Wackenhut was personal friends with the League's
leaders, and was a major contributor to the group. To be sure, after giving
the League its files, Wackenhut reserved the right to use them for its
clients and friends.

Wackenhut had gone public in 1965 ; George Wackenhut retained 54 percent of
the company. Between his salary and dividends, his annual compensation
approaches $2 million a year, sufficient for him to live in a $20 million
castle in Coral Gables, Florida, complete with a moat and 18 full-time
servants. Today the company is the third-largest investigative security firm
in the country, with offices throughout the United States and in 39 foreign

It is not possible to overstate the special relationship Wackenhut enjoys
with the federal government. It is close. When it comes to security
matters, Wackenhut in many respects *is* the government. In 1991, a third of
the company's $600- million in revenues came from the federal government,
and another large chunk from companies that themselves work for the
government, such as Westinghouse.

Wackenhut is the largest single company supplying security to U.S. embassies
overseas; several of the 13 embassies it guards have been in important
hotbeds of espionage, such as Chile, Greece and El Salvador. It also guards
nearly all the most strategic government facilities in the U.S., including
the Alaskan oil pipeline, the Hanford nuclear-waste facility, the Savannah
River plutonium plant and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

Wackenhut maintains an especially close relationship with the federal
government in other ways as well. While early boards of directors included
such prominent personalities of the political right as Captain Eddie
Rickenbacker; General Mark Clark and Ralph E. Davis, a John Birch Society
leader, current and recent members of the board have included much of the
country's recent national-security directorate: former FBI director Clarence
Kelley; former Defense secretary and former CIA deputy director Frank
Carlucci: former Defense Intelligence Agent director General Joseph Carroll;
former U.S. Secret Service director James J. Rowley; former Marine
commandant P. X. Kelley; and acting chairman of President Bush's foreign-
intelligence advisory board and former CIA deputy director Admiral Bobby Ray
Inman. Before his appointment as Reagan's CIA director, the late William
Casey was Wackenhut's outside legal counsel. The company has 30,000 armed
employees on its payroll.

We wanted to know more about this special relationship; but the government
was not forthcoming. Repeated requests to the Department of Energy for an
explanation of how one company got the security contracts for neariy all of
America's most strategic installations have gone unanswered.

Similarly, efforts to get the State Department to explain whether embassy
contracts were awarded arbitrarily or through competitive bidding were
fruitless; essentially, the State Department said, "Some of both. "
Wackenhut's competitors-who, understandably, asked not to be quoted by
name-have their own version. "All those contracts;" said one security-firm
executive, "are just another way to pay Wackenhut for their clandestine
help. And what is the nature of that help? "It is known throughout the
industry," said retired FBI special agent William Hinshaw, "that if you want
a dirty job done, call Wackenhut." We met George Wackenhut in his swanky,
muy macho offices in Coral Gables. The rooms are paneled in a dark, rich
rosewood, accented with gray-blue stone. The main office is dominated by
Wackenhut's 12-foot-long desk and a pair of chairs shaped like elephants-
"Republican chairs," he calls them-complete with real tusks, which, the old
man says with some amusement, tend to stick his visitors. The highlight of
the usual collection of pictures and awards is the Republican presidential
exhibit: an autographed photo of Wackenhut shaking hands with George Bush
(whom Wackenhut, according to a former associate, used to call "that pinko")
as well as framed photos of Presidents Reagan, Nixon and Bush, each
accompanied by a handwritten note. The chairman looks every inch the
comfortable Florida septuagenarian. The day we spoke, his clothing ranged
across the color spectrum from baby blue to light baby blue, and he wore a
iot of jewelry-a huge gold watch on a thick gold band, two massive goid
rings. But Wackenhut was, at 72, quick and tough in his responses. Near the
end of our two-and-a-half hour interview, when asked if his company was an
arm of the CIA, he snapped, "No!"

Of course, this may just be a matter of semantics. We have spoken to
numerous experts, including current and former CIA agents and analysts,
current and former agents of the Drug Enforcement Administration and current
and former Wackenhut executives and employees, all of whom have said that in
the mid-197O's, atter the Senate Intelligence Committee's revelations of the
CIA's covert and sometimes illegal overseas operations, the agency and
Wackenhut grew very, very close. Those revelations had forced the CIA to do
a housecleaning, and it became CIA policy that certain kinds of activities
would no longer officially be performed. But that didn't always mean that
the need or the desire to undertake such operations disappeared. And that's
where Wackenhut came in.

Our sources confirm that Wackenhut has had a long- standing relationship
with the CIA, and that it has deepened over the last decade or so. Bruce
Berckmans, who was assigned to the CIA station in Mexico City, left the
agency in January 1975 (putatively) to become a Wackenhut
international-operations vice president. Berckmans, who left Wackenhut in
1981, told SPY that he has seen a formal proposal George Wackenhut submitted
to the CIA to allow the agency to use Wackenhut offices throughout the world
as fronts for CIA activities. Kichard Babayan, who says he was a CIA
contract employee and is currently in jail awaiting trial on fraud and
racketeering charges, has been cooperating with federal and congressional
investigators looking into illegal shipments of nuclear-and-chemical-weapons-
making supplies to Iraq. "Wackenhut has been
used by the CIA and other intelligence agencies for years," he told SPY.
"When they [the CIA] need cover, Wackenhut is there to provide it for them."
Canadian prime minister Pierre Trudeau was said to have rebuffed Wackenhut's
effort in the 1980's to purchase a weapons propellant manufacturer in Quebec
with the remark "We just got rid of the CIA-we don't want them back."
Phillip Agee, the left-wing former CIA agent who wrote an expose' of the
agency in 1975, told us, "I don't have the slightest doubt that the CIA and
Wackenhut overlap."

There is also testimony from people who are not convicts, renegades or
Canadians. William Corbett, a terrorism expert who spent 18 years as a CIA
analyst and is now an ABC News consultant based in Europe, confirmed the
relationship between Wackenhut and the agency. "For years Wackenhut has been
involved with the CIA and other intelligence organizations, including the
DEA," he told SPY. "Wackenhut would allow the CIA to occupy positions within
the company [in order to carry out] clandestine operations." He also said
that Wackenhut would supply intelligence agencies with information, and that
it was compensated for this- "in a quid pro quo arrangement," Corbett
says-with government contracts worth billions of dollars over the years.

We have uncovered considerable evidence that Wackenhut carried the CIA's
water in fighting Communist encroachment in Central America in the 1980s
(that is to say, during the Reagan administration when the CIA director was
former Wackenhut lawyer William Casey, the late superpatriot who had a
proclivity for extralegal and illegal anti-Communist covert operations such
as Iran-contra). In 1981, Berckmans, the CIA agent turned Wackenhut vice
president, joined with other senior Wackenhut executives to form the
company's Special Projects Division. It was this division that linked up
with ex-CIA man John Phillip Nichols, who had taken over the Cabazon Indian
reservation in California, as we described in a previous article
["Badlands," April 1992], in pursuit of a scheme to manufacture explosives,
poison gas and biological weapons-and then, by virtue of the tribe's status
as a sovereign nation, to export the weapons to the contras. This maneuver
was designed to evade congressional prohibitions against the U.S.
government's helping the contras. Indeed, in an interview with SPY, Eden
Pastora, the contras' famous Commander Zero, who had been spotted at a test
of some night-vision goggles at a firing range near the Cabazon reservation
in the company of Nichols and a Wackenhut executive, offhandedly identified
that executive, A. Robert Frye, as "the man from the CIA. " (In a subsequent
conversation he denied knowing Frye at all; of course, in that same talk he
quite unbelievably denied having ever been a contra.)

In  addition  to  attempted weapons supply, Wackenhut seems to have been
involved in Central America in other ways. Ernesto Bermudez  who was
Wackenhut's director of international operations from 1987 to '89, admitted
to SPY that during 1985 and '86 he ran Wackenhut's operations in El
Salvador, where he was in charge of 1,500 men. When asked what 1 ,500 men
were doing for Wackenhut in El Salvador, Bermudez replied coyly, "Things."
Pressed, he elaborated: "Things you wouldn't want your mother to know about."
It's worth noting that Wackenhut's annual revenues from government
contracts--the alleged reward for cooperation in the government's
clandestine activities-increased by 150 million, a 45 percent jump, while
Ronald Reagan was in office. "You've done an awful lot of research, George
Wackenhut said to me as I was leaving. "How would you like to run all our
New York operations ? "

If that was the extent of Wackenhut's possible involvement in a government
agency's attempt to circumvent the law, then we might dismiss it as an
interesting footnote to the overheated, cowboy anti- Communist 1980s.
However, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida has been
conducting an investigation into the illegal export of dual-use
technology-that is, seemingly innocuous technology that can also be used to
make nuclear weapons  to Iraq and Libya. And SPY has learned that
Wackenhut's name has come up in the federal investigation, but not at
present as a target.

Between 1987 and '89, three companies in the United States received
investments from an Iraqi architect named Ihsan Barbouti. The colorful
Barbouti owned an engineering company in Frankfort that had a $552 million
contract to build airfields in Iraq. He also admitted having designed
Mu'ammar Qaddafi's infamous German-built chemical-weapons plant in Rabta,
Libya. According to an attorney for one of the companies in which Barbouti
invested, the architect owned $100 million worth of real estate and
oil-drilling equipment in Texas and Oklahoma. He may also be dead, there
being reports that he died of heart failure in Hospital in London on July 1,
1990, his 63rd birthday. Barbouti, however, had faked his death once before,
in 1969, after the Ba'ath takeover in Iraq which brought Saddam Hussein to
power as the second-in-command. That time, Barbouti escaped Iraq;
resurfacing several years later in Lebanon and Libya. There are no  reports
that he is living in Jordan -or, according to other reports, in a CIA safe
house in Florida. Those reports can be considered no better than rumor; what
follows, though, is fact.

As reported  on ABC's "Nightline" last year, the three companies in which
Barbouti invested were TK-7 of Oklahoma City, which makes a fuel additive;
Pipeline Recovery Systems of Dallas, which makes an anti-corrosive chemical
that preserves pipes; and Product Ingredient Technoiogy of Boca Raton, which
makes food flavorings. None of these companies was looking to do business
with Iraq; Barbouti sought them out. Why was he interested? Because TK-7 had
formulas that could extend the range of jet aircraft and liquid-fueled
missiles such as the SCUD; because Pipeline Recovery knows how to coat pipes
to make them usable in nuclear reactors and chemical-weapons plants; and
because one of the by-products in making cherry flavoring is ferric
ferrocyanide, a chemical that's used to manufacture hydrogen cyanide, which
can penetrate gas masks and protective clothing. Hydrogen cyanide was used
by Saddam Hussein against the Kurds in the Iran-Iraq war.

Barbouti was more than a passive investor, and soon he began pressuring the
companies to ship not only their products but also their manufacturing
technology to corporations he owned in Europe,  on which, he told the
businessmen, it would be sent to Libya and Iraq. In doing so, Barbouti was
attempting to violate the law. First, the U.S. forbade sending anything to
Libya, which was embargoed as a terrorist nation. Second, the U.S. specified
that material of this sort must be sent to its final destination, not to an
intermediate locale, where the U.S. would risk losing control of its
distribution. According to former CIA contract employee Richard Babayan, in
late 1989 Barbouti met in London with Ibrahim Sabawai, Saddam Hussein's half
brother and European head of Iraqi intelligence, who grew excited about the
work Pipeline Recovery was doing and called for the company's technology to
be rushed to Iraq, so that it could be in place by early 1990. And the owner
of TK-7 swears that Barbouti told him he was developing an atom device for
Qaddafi that would be used against the U.S. in retaliation for the 1986 U.S.
air strike against Libya. Barbouri also wanted the ferrocyanide from Product

Assisting Barbouti with these investments was New Orleans exporter Don
Seaton, business associate of Richard Secord, the right-wing U.S. Army
general turned war profiteer who was so deeply enmeshed in the Iran-contra
affair. It was Secord who connected Barbouti with Wackenhut. Barbouti met
with Secord in Florida on several occasions, and phone records show that
several calls were placed from Barbouti's office to Secord's private number
in McLean, Virginia; Secord has acknowledged knowing Barbouti. He is
currently a partner of Washington businessman James Tully (who is the man
who leaked Bill Clinton's draft-dodge letter to ABC) and Jack Brennan, a
former Marine Corps colonel and longtime aide to Richard Nixon both in the
White House and in exile. Brennan has gone back to the White House, where he
works as a director of administrative operations in President Bush's office.
He refused to return repeated calls from SPY. Interestingly, Brennan and
Tully had previously been involved in a $181 million business deal to supply
uniforms to the Iraqi army. Oddly, they arranged to have the uniforms
manufactured in Nicolae Ceaucescu's Romania. The partners in that deal were
former U.S. attorney general and Watergate felon John Mitchell and Sarkis
Soghanalian, a Turkish-born Lebanese citizen. Soghanalian, who has been
credited with being Saddam Hussein's leading arms procurer and with
introducing the demonic weapons inventor Gerald Bull to the Iraqis, is
currently serving a six-year sentence in federal prison in Miami for the
illegal sale of 103 military helicopters to Iraq. According to former
Wackenhut agent David Ramirez, the company considered Soghanalian "a very
valuable client."

Unfortunately for Barbouti, none of the companies in which he made
investments was willing to ship its products or technology to his European
divisions. That, however, doesn't necessarily mean that he didn't get some
of what he wanted. In 1990, 2,000 gallons of ferrocyanide were found to be
missing from the cherry-flavor factory in Boca Raton. Where it went is a
mystery; Peter Kawaja, who was the head of security for all of Barbouti's
U.S. investments, told SPY, "We were never burglarized, but that stuff didn't
walk out by itself."

What does all this have to do with Wackenhut? Lots: According to Louis
Champon, the owner of Product Ingredient Technology, it was Wackenhut that
guarded his Boca Raton plant, a fact confirmed by Murray Levine, a Wackenhut
vice president. Champon also says, and Wackenhut also confirms, that the
security for the plant consisted of one unarmed guard. While a Wackenhut
spokesperson maintains that this was the only job they were doing for
Barbouti, he also says that they were never paid, that Barbouti stiffed

This does not seem true. SPY has obtained four checks from Barbouti to
Wackenhut. All were written within ten days in 1990: one on March 27 for
$168.89; one on March 28 for $24,828.07; another on April 5 for $756; the
last on April 6 for $40,116.25. We asked Richard Kneip, Wackenhut's senior
vice president for corporate planning, to explain why a single guard was
worth $66,000 a year; Kneip was at a loss to do so. He was similarly at a
loss to explain a fifth check, from another Barbouti company to Wackenhut's
travel-service division in 1987, almost two years before Wackenhut has
acknowledged providing security for the Boca Raton plant .

Two former CIA operatives, separately interviewed, have the explanation.
Charles Hayes, who describes himself as "a CIA asset " says Wackenhut was
helping Barbouti ship chemicals to Iraq, "Supplying Iraq was originally a
good idea," he maintains, "but then it got out of hand. Wackenhut was  just
in  it  for  the money." Richard Babayan the former CIA contract employee,
confirmed Hayes's account. He says that Wackenhut's relationship with
Barbouti existed before the Boca Raton plant opened: "Barbouti was placed in
the hands of Secord by the CIA, and Secord called in Wackenhut to handle
security and travel and protection for Barbouti and his export plans."
Wackenhut, Babayan says was working for the CIA in helping Barbouti ship the
chemical- and-nuclear-weapons-making equipment first to Texas, then to
Chicago, and then to Baltimore to be shipped overseas. All of which makes
the story of the midnight convoy ride of David Ramirez, recounted at the
beginning of this article rather less mysterious. SPY has learned that this
shipment is now the subject of a joint USDA- Customs investigation.

When we asked George Wackenhut what was being shipped from Eagle Pass to
Chicago, the sharp, straightforward chairman at first claimed they were
protecting an unnamed executive. He then directed an aide to get back to me.
Two days later, Richard Kneip did, repeating the tale that had been passed
on to David Ramirez-that the trucks contained food stamps. We told him that
we had spoken to a Department of Agriculture official, who informed us that
food stamps are shipped from Chicago to outlying areas, never the other way
around, and that food stamps, unlike money, are used once and then
destroyed. All Kneip would say then was, "We do not reveal the names of our

Wackenhut's connection to the CIA and to other government agencies raises
several troubling questions:

First, is the CIA using Wackenhut to conduct operations that it has been
forbidden to undertake? Second, is the White House or some other party in
the executive branch working through Wackenhut to conduct operations that it
doesn't want Congress to know about? Third, has Wackenhut's cozy
relationship with the government given it a feeling of security-or worse, an
outright knowledge of sensitive or embarrassing information-that allows the
company to believe that it can conduct itself as though it were above the
law? A congressional investigation into Wackenhut's activities in the
Alyeska affair last November began to shed some light on Wackenhut's way of
doing business; clearly it's time for Congress to investigate just how far
Wackenhut's other tentacles extend.

Additional reporting by Erzc Reguly, Margie Sloan and Wendell Smith

** End of article **

Conspiracy / OUR SENATE?
« on: February 16, 2017, 08:27:45 pm »

                                 OUR SENATE?
               "This  has  been  a  tough  election and I'm happy it's
          over.  And we finally upset  that conservative  who has been
          holding  up  all  the  progressive  legislation  for so many
               "Yes,  finally."  declared  the  financial  backer  and
          mentor of  the new  Senator from  Wisconsin.   "Now we'll be
          able to get more  of  our  legislation  through  the Senate.
          This has  been an  uphill battle  all the  way.  Old Charlie
          Smith sure gave us an intense fight.   If we  hadn't had the
          financial backing from so many of my friends, we never would
          have unseated him."
               They called the Vice-president  to administer  the oath
          to the  newly elected Senator.  The ceremony was set for the
          3rd day of January in his freshly decorated office.  Present
          for the  swearing in  was his family and several friends who
          had arrived in Washington, D.C. only  the day  before.  They
          were  thrilled  at  being  in  the Capitol building.  They'd
          heard so  much about  all the  pomp and  circumstance in our
          Congress.  The Senator's wife and children were smiling from
          ear to ear as was his mother.   She was  swelling with pride
          over her son being elected to the United States Senate.
               The Vice-president joined the happy group.  "Jack, I've
          come to administer the oath of  your office.   Hell,  I know
          you believe in the Constitution, don't you?"
               "Yes Sir, of course."
               The  Vice-president  shook  his  hand  and  immediately
          walked over to offer his congratulations to Jack's family. 
               While the local television  reporters were  present, no
          one  questioned  that  the  oath  was not administered.  The
          happy scene was simply one  of  mass  confusion.   Reporters
          rushed forward  to shake  the hand  of the new Senator.  The
          cameras swung around to the Vice-president.   He  smiled and
          said, "Welcome  to The  United States  Senate!   This is the
          World's Most Exclusive Club." 
               This performance is a continuing charade playing on the
          ignorance  of  the  American  public.    The  "World's  Most
          Exclusive Club" has not  been legally  in session  since the
          election following 1913.  How 'bout that?
               There have  been over seventy years of illegal legisla-
          tion and unconstitutional treaty verification.  70+ years of
          unconstitutional confirmation of federal judges, ambassadors
          and officers of the President's cabinet.   How  can this be?
          Surely no  one in our government would allow such a practice
          to continue if it were true.
               Unfortunately, it is true.    Usually,  when  you don't
          watch the  store . . . you get robbed.  And that is what has
          happened to our government.   WE  haven't been  watching the
          store.   The behind  the scene  power brokers have destroyed
          the form of our  government.   There are  special checks and
          balances  as  protections  which our Founding Fathers estab-
          lished at the Convention.
               Two  branches  of  the  Congress  were  established  to
          protect the  sovereignty of  the states.   This  was a major
          stumbling block in the writing  of  our  Constitution.   The
          first  branch,  the  House  of  Representatives,  were to be
          elected directly by the people.   The representation  in the
          House  would  vary  according  to population.  This is still
          true today.
               The Senate, our second branch, was set up  to represent
          state interests in the new government.  Each state has equal
          representation and voice in national affairs.  Senators were
          elected by  each respective state legislature.  Consequently
          each state became an integral part  in the  formation of the
          new national  government.  They designed this to be the link
          between the state and national systems  of government.   One
          advantage  to  this  system  was our Senators were less vul-
          nerable to graft and  control  by  persons  with  other than
          honorable  motives.    Whenever state legislatures suspected
          Senators were not watching out for  the state's  interest in
          national affairs they were often replaced.
               This was the check and balance against the first branch
          which was elected by popular vote.   (Documents Illustrative
          of the  Formation of the Union of the American States, House
          Document No. 398, 69th Congress, 1st Session,) (1965).
               This principle lasted until  1912.   The power managers
          behind our government convinced the American people they had
          more  wisdom  than  our  Founding  Fathers.    They  had  an
          amendment  to  our  Constitution  introduced  into  Congress
          proposing to give the election of  Senators directly  to the
          people.  This amendment had the net effect of destroying the
          sovereignty of state governments.
               The Secretary of State made the announcement on May 31,
          1913.   He declared  the amendment  ratified by the legisla-
          tures  of  thirty-six  of  the  forth-eight   (sic)  states.
          (ibid., footnote page 1071.)
               Sounds innocent  enough, doesn't  it?  Sounds all legal
          and constitutional.  This is what  dudes in  government want
          you to  believe .  . .  but it's a lie, a fairy tale!  Let's
          examine this sequence of errors.
               In fancy and boldly  written letters,  the introductory
          statement to  our Constitution  declares that  WE THE PEOPLE
          established  the  Constitution  for  the  United  States  of
               The key is WE THE PEOPLE.  We granted permission to the
          new government for certain specified and limited powers.  By
          so doing, we granted the new government operating powers and
          gave them  jurisdiction over  us.   The document  is full of
          'thou shalt  nots'.  Powers which were not granted cannot be
          assumed.   Nor can any powers which were granted be enlarged
          or exceeded.
               The  individual  states  were  really  jealous of their
          sovereignty.  They all  feared the  powers given  to the new
          national government  were not sufficiently restricted.  This
          fear of the  smaller  states  of  domination  by  the larger
          nearly wrecked the Constitutional Convention.  They demanded
          a Bill of Rights be  added  to  the  new  constitution after
                The entire Bill of Rights will get a thorough examina-
          tion in  a later  paper.   For now,  let's concern ourselves
          with one  which proves  NO authority  can be  assumed by the
          national government -- the  Tenth  amendment  clearly spells
          out that  the powers  not delegated  belong to the states or
          the people.
               This amendment  is the  basis to  determine whether the
          national government  has permission  to function  in a given
          area.  If the power was not delegated by us  and spelled out
          in the  document, they don't have it.  This amendment is the
          one the  federal government  chooses to  ignore and probably
          wishes did not exist.
               Another basic assumption we have to acknowledge is only
          we can agree to any changes in the  document.   Therefore we
          are responsible  for the  operation of our government.  They
          are responsible to us.
               To be President of the United States, a  person MUST be
          a natural born citizen of the United States. (Art II, Sec 1)
          This is a fixed, explicit command.  There  are NO exceptions
          allowed.  No emergency allowances or amendment saying anyone
          but a natural born citizen can  be president.   This  is the
          only requirement  in the entire document that a candidate be
          natural born.  It's obvious the Founders put it there  for a
          specific purpose.
               Philander C.  Knox, play  acting as Secretary of State,
          introduced the 17th amendment  into Congress  in 1912.   The
          man  who  was  acting  as president was William Howard Taft.
          Taft was born in Cincinnati, Ohio on September 15, 1857.
               SURPRISE . . . Ohio was NOT admitted to the Union until
          August 7,  1953!   At the time Taft was elected to be presi-
          dent Ohio was simply a territory.  It was not  a state which
          means he  was not  a natural born citizen.  Our Constitution
          was violated.  He was not  eligible to  be president  by any
          stretch of your imagination!
               So our  illustrious Congress hits the panic button in a
          frantic  effort  to  correct  a  major  mistake.    In their
          infinite 'wisdom',  they passed a Joint Resolution admitting
          Ohio as a full and equal member of  the union.   (Public Law
          204, 83rd Congress, 1st Session).
               Section  2  of  that  resolution  states:   "This joint
          resolution shall take effect as of March 1,  1803.  Approved
          August  7,  1953."    Quick  arithmetic  shows  that  to  be
          backdated by 150 years.  That's ex-post facto law.
               They CAN'T do it!  It's a conspicuous  violation of our
          Constitution  which  states:    "No  . . . ex post facto law
          shall be passed." (Art I, Sec 9)   This was added protection
          for our  citizens.  An act which was legal one day could not
          be declared illegal a day, a week, or even years  later.  NO
          law can  be predated  by one  day.   We didn't  agree to any
          change  through  the  amendment  process.    That guaranteed
          protection of no ex post facto law is still the basic law of
          the land.
               Another problem surfaces under  this Public  Law.  They
          used  a  resolution  to  make  a  law when the intent of the
          Founders was for only bills to become law.   Resolutions are
          to express  an opinion  or to  censure some person or action
          but were never to become law.
               Taft was not president and his illegal lackeys  such as
          Philander C Knox were not officials of the government.  They
          introduced this  amendment illegally  into Congress.   It is
          therefore an  unconstitutional act  and of no legal consequ-
               The election of Senators is as it was in the beginning,
          by the  Legislatures of  the various  states, NOT by popular
          vote.  They have not been in session legally since 1913.
               Wait . . . there's more!   Let's  look at  the last two
          lines of Article V of our Constitution.

               ".  .  .  and  that no State, without its consent,
               shall be deprived of  its  equal  Suffrage  in the

               The 'Secretary  of State' announced in 1913 it had been
          ratified by the legislatures  of  thirty-six  of  the forty-
          eight states.
               Article V  says 100% of the states have to agree to any
          change in their equal  voice  in  the  Senate.    Not three-
          quarters as  he announced.   100  PERCENT of the states must
               Delaware and  Utah objected  to the  amendment and nine
          other  states  did  not  act  on it.  Another section of the
          Constitution was  violated in  defiance of  the authority we
          granted.    Thirty-six  states  have  forced a change on the
          other states in their equal voting power in the Senate.
               Some might say they  still  have  equal  suffrage since
          there are two Senators from each state.  (Sounds like a weak
          bureaucratic argument.)   However, they  no longer represent
          primarily the  interest of  the state.   Now they supposedly
          represent the interests of the people.   All  the states did
          not agree to allow for a change of equal voting power.
               These acts  constitute usurpation of powers we granted.
          For a definition of  usurpation, in  Black's Law Dictionary,
          we find:   "The  unlawful seizure or assumption of sovereign
          power.  The assumption of  government  or  supreme  power by
          force or illegally, in derogation of the constitution and of
          the rights of the lawful ruler."
               Isn't this exactly what we  have  just  found  has been
          happening to the authority we granted?
               George  Washington,  in  his  Farewell Address made the
          following remark:   "Usurpation  is the  customary weapon by
          which free  governments are  destroyed."  Another admonition
          we have ignored.  (Messages and Papers of the Presidents, J.
          D. Richardson, 1898)
               To quote  Alexander Hamilton  in The Federalist Papers,
          No. 78:  "There is  no  position  which  depends  on clearer
          principles  than  that  every  act of a delegated authority,
          contrary to the tenor  of the  commission under  which it is
          exercised, is  void."   What they  did is no good . . . they
          broke the law.  (All references to 'paper no.' are from this
               Hamilton goes  on further  in the  same paper to state:
          "To deny this would be to affirm that the deputy  is greater
          than his  principle; that  the servant  is above his master;
          that the representative of  the people  are superior  to the
          people themselves;  that men  acting by virtue of powers may
          do not  only what  their powers  do not  authorize, but what
          they forbid."
               Madison, in  Paper No. 62 makes clear the reasoning for
          the election of Senators by the states:  "In this  spirit it
          may be remarked that the equal vote allowed to each State is
          at once  a  constitutional  recognition  of  the  portion of
          sovereignty  remaining  in  the  individual  States  and  an
          instrument for preserving that residuary sovereignty."
               "No law or resolution can  now  be  passed  without the
          concurrence, first, of a majority of the people, and then of
          a majority of the States."
               Presently, we no  longer  have  that  guarantee  of one
          branch  of  the  Congress  watching the actions of the other
          branch.   The established  check and  balance was destroyed.
          These  people  now  go  willy-nilly  passing  legislation in
          direct contradiction to the intent of  our Founding Fathers.
               As one obvious example, in 1982 a money bill originated
          in the Senate.  Can't be  done legally.   This  is in direct
          violation of a crystal clear restriction in our Constitution
          which  dictates:    "All  Bills  for  raising  Revenue shall
          originate in  the House  of Representatives;  but the Senate
          may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills."
               There was much heavy argument during the Constitutional
          Convention on this very issue of money bills.
               Is it becoming apparent that they now feel the servants
          are above the masters?   After all, who in blazes are you? 
               How do we correct this mess?  I will be  first to admit
          it will  be difficult.   There  is no  question they will be
          reluctant to give up their powers and positions.  They're on
          the big  gravy train  and it's tough to derail.  Phone calls
          and letters to the  offices  of  your  Senators  would  be a
          start.    Letters  to  the  Editors of local newspapers will
          alert other people.  Let's start putting up  some roadblocks
          to derail that train.
               Using Petitions  For Redress  of Grievances to Senators
          and Representatives will be  a  good  tactic.    It  will be
          interesting to see what they have to say about it.
               State Legislatures will have to become involved in this
          fight.  After  all,  it  was  their  power  in  the national
          government  and  their  sovereignty  which  was  diluted and
          destroyed.  I'm also  certain they  know nothing  about this
          issue at  present so  each citizen MUST question their state
               The states  were duped  into accepting  the 17th Amend-
          ment.   The states who did not act on the ratification would
          be the  logical ones  to initiate  the action.   They should
          force the  federales to  have the amendment set aside.  They
          easily repealed the 18th amendment (Prohibition)  by Conven-
          tions in  the States.   We  have to start the action and get
          our  government back  within the  confines of  the authority
          which we granted!
               The filing of a civil suit as a federal question action
          in federal court would be another option.   The action would
          have to  be directly  against the Senate for being illegally
          in session.
               The American people  have  the  intelligence, ingenuity
          and backbone  to get  a job  done once  they are  aware of a
          serious problem.  We are not a nation of wimps . . . not yet
          anyway.   A comment  is necessary concerning our new Senator
          not taking the required oath in our opening illustration.  I
          personally have witnessed such an incident on local televis-
          ion news which concerned a newly elected Congressman.
               This  business of  Congress  passing a law which is 150
          years ex post facto has other serious ramifications.  I will
          cover these in later papers.  More  surprises on the way and
          it involves our friends at the IRS!
               For now,  let's   get  our  Senate  back to it's proper
          representation of each State's interest.  We are  being made
          fools of by our national government.
               Care to  check on how many treaties ratified since 1914
          are not constitutionally  binding?    How  about  the United
          Nations or the giveaway of the Panama Canal?

                      YOUR SUPPORT IS APPRECIATED....

                          PLEASE REGISTER....

                      READ 'SALES PITCH' CHAPTER....

« on: February 16, 2017, 08:25:00 pm »

        Did 22 SDI Researchers really ALL Commit Suicide?     

   Fifty-year-old Alistair Beckham was a successful British aerospace-
projects engineer.  His specialty was designing computer software
for sophisticated naval defense systems.  Like hundreds of other
British scientists, he was working on a pilot program for America's
Strategic Defense Initiative--better known as Star Wars.
And like at least 21 of his colleagues, he died a bizarre, violent
   It was a lazy, sunny Sunday afternoon in August 1988.  After
driving his wife to work, Beckham walked through his garden
to a musty backyard toolshed and sat down on a box next to the
door.  He wrapped bare wires around his chest, attached the to
an electrical outlet and put a handkerchief in his mouth.  Then
he pulled the switch.

   With his death, Beckham's name was added to a growing list of
British scientists who've died or disappeared under mysterious
circumstances since 1982.  Each was a skilled expert in computers,
and each was working on a highly classified project for the
American Star Wars program.  None had any apparent motive for
killing himself.
   The British government contends that the deaths are all a
matter of coincidence.  The British press blames stress.  Others
allude to an ongoing fraud investigation involving the nation's
leading defense contractor.  Relatives left behind don't know
what to think.
   "There weren't any women involved.  There weren't any men involved.
We had a very good relationship," says Mary Beckham,
Alistair's widow.  "We don't know why he did it...if he did it.
And I don't believe that he =did= do it.  He wouldn't go out to
the shed.  There had to be something...."

   The string of unexplained deaths can be traced back to March
1982, when Essex University computer scientist Dr. Keith Bowden
died in a car wreck on his ay home from a London social function.
Authorities claim Bowden was drunk.  His wife and friends say
   Bowden, 45, was a whiz with super-computers and computer-
controlled aircraft.  He was cofounder of the Department of Computer
Sciences at Essex and had worked for one of the major Star Wars
contractors in England.
   One night Bowden's immaculately maintained Rover careened
across a four-lane highway and plunged off a bridge, down an
embankment, into an abandoned rail yard.  Bowden was found
dead at the scene.
   During the inquest, police testified that Bowden's blood
alcohol level had exceeded the legal limit and that he had been
driving too fast.  His death was ruled accidental.
   Wife Hillary Bowden and her lawyer suspected a cover-up.  Friends
he'd supposedly spent the evening with denied that Bowden had
been drinking.  Then there was the condition of Bowden's car.
   "My solicitor instructed an accident specialist to examine
the automobile," Mrs. Bowden explains.  "Somebody had taken the
wheels off and put others on that were old and worn.  At the inquest
this was not allowed to be brought up.  Someone asked if the car
was in a sound condition, and the answer was yes."
   Hillary, in a state of shock, never protested the published
verdict.  Yet, she remains convinced that someone tampered with
her husband's car.  "It certainly looked like foul play,"
Hillary maintains.
   Four years later the British press finally added Bowden's
case to its growing dossier.  First, there appeared to be two
interconnected deaths, then six, then 12--suddenly there were 22.
   Take 37-year-old David Sands, a senior scientist at Easams
working on a highly sensitive computer-controlled satellite-
radar system.  In March 1987 Sands made a U-turn on his way to work
and rammed his car into the brick wall of a vacant restaurant.
His trunk was loaded with full gasoline cans.  The car exploded
on impact.
   Given the incongruities of the accident and the lack of a suicide
motive, the coroner refused to rule out the possibility of foul
play.  Meanwhile, information leaked to the press suggested
that Sands had been under a tremendous emotional strain.
   Margaret Worth, Sand's mother-in-law, claims these stories
are totally inaccurate.  "When David died, it was a great mystery
to us," she admits.  "He was very successful.  He was very confident.
He had just pulled off a great coup for his company, and he was
about to be greatly rewarded.  He had a very bright future
ahead of him.  He was perfectly happy the week before this
   Like many of the bereaved, Worth is still at a loss for
answers.  "One week we think he must have been got at.  The next
week we think it couldn't be anything like that," she says.

   This wave of suspicious fatalities in the ultrasecret world
of sophisticated weaponry has not gone unnoticed by the United
States government.  Late last fall, the American embassy in London
publicly requested a full investigation by the British Ministry
of Defense (MoD).
   Members of British Parliament, such a Labour MP Doug
Hoyle, copresident of the Manufacturing, Science & Finance Union,
had been making similar requests for more than two years. 
The Thatcher government had refused to launch any sort of inquiry.
   "How many more deaths before we get the government to give
the answers?" Hoyle asks.  "From a security point of view, surely
both ourselves and the Americans ought to be looking into it."
   The Pentagon refuses comment on the deaths.  However, according
to Reagan Administration sources, "We cannot ignore it anymore."
   Actually, British and American intelligence agencies are on
the situation.  When THE SUNDAY TIMES in London published the
details of 12 mysterious deaths last September, sources at the
American embassy admitted being aware of at least ten additional
victims whose names had already been sent to Washington.  The
sources added that the embassy had been monitoring reports
of "the mysterious deaths" for two years.
   English intelligence has suffered several damaging spy scandals
in the 20 century.  The CIA may suspect the deaths are an indication
of security leaks, that Star Wars secrets are being sold to the
Russians.  Perhaps these scientists had been blackmailed into
supplying classified data to Moscow and could no longer live with
themselves.  One or more may have stumbled onto an espionage ring
and been silenced.
   As NBC News London correspondent Henry Champ puts it,
"In the world of espionage, there is a saying:  Twice is coincidence,
but three times is enemy action."
   Where SDI is concerned, a tremendous amount is at stake.
   In return for the Thatcher government's early support
of the Star Wars program, the Reagan Administration promised
a number of extremely lucrative SDI contracts to the British
defense industry--hundreds of millions of U.S. dollars the struggling
British economy can little afford to lose.
   Britain traditionally has one of the finest defense industries
in the world.  Their annual overseas weapons sales amount to almost
$250 billion.  The publicity from a Star Wars spy scandal could
seriously cut into the profits.
   It would appear that only initial promises made to Prime Minister
Thatcher hold the U.S. from cutting its losses and pulling out.
A high-ranking American source was quoted in the SUNDAY TIMES
saying, "If this had happened in Greece, Brazil, Spain,
or Argentina, we'd be all over them like a glove!"
   The Thatcher government's PR problem is that the scandal centers
around Marconi Company Ltd., Britain's largest electronics-defense
contractor.  Seven Marconi scientists are among the dead.
   Marconi, which employs 50,000 workers worldwide, is a subsidiary
of Britain's General Electric Company (GEC).  GEC managing
director Lord Wienstock recently launched his own internal
   Yet, the GEC and the Ministry of Defense still contend that
the 22 deaths are coincidental.  A Ministry of Defense
spokesman claims to have found "no evidence of any sinister
links between them."
   However, an article in the British publication THE INDEPENDENT
claims the incidence of suicide among Marconi scientists is
twice the national average of mentally healthy individuals.  Either
Marconi is hiring abnormally unstable scientists or something
is very wrong.

   Two deaths brought the issue to light in the fall of 1986.
Within weeks of each other, two London-based Marconi scientists
were found dead 100 miles away, in Bristol.  Both were involved
in creating the software for a huge, computerized Star Wars simulator,
the hub of Marconi's SDI program.  Both had been working on the
simulator just hours before their death.  Like the others, neither
had any apparent reason to kill himself.
   Vimal Dajibhai was a 24-year-old electronics graduate who
worked at Marconi Underwater Systems in Croxley Green.  In August
1986 his crumpled body was found lying on the pavement 240 feet
below the Clifton Suspension Bridge in Bristol.
   An inquest was unable to determine whether Dajibhai had been
pushed off the bridge or whether he had jumped.  There had
been no witnesses.  The verdict was left open.  Yet, authorities
did their best to pin his death on suicide.
   Police testified that Dajibhai had been suffering from depression,
something his family and friends flatly denied.  Dajibhai had
absolutely no history of personal or emotional problems.
   Police also claimed that the deceased had been drinking with
a friend, Heyat Shah, shortly before his death, and that
a bottle of wine and two used paper cups had been found in his
car.  Yet, forensic tests were never done on the auto, and those
who knew Vimal, including Shah, say that he had never taken
a drink of alcohol in his life.
   Investigating journalists found discrepancies in other evidence.
"A police report noted a puncture mark on Dijabhai's left buttock
after his fall from the bridge," explains Tony Collins, who
covered the story for Britain's COMPUTER NEWS magazine.
"Apparently, this was the reason his funeral was halted seconds
before the cremation was to take place.
   "Members of the Family were told that the body was to be taken
away for a second postmortem, to be done by a top home-
office pathologist.  That's not normal.  Then, a few months later,
police held a press conference and announced that it hadn't
been a puncture mark after all, that it was a wound caused by a
bone fragment.
   "I find it very difficult to reconcile the initial coroner's
report with what the police were saying a few months later," Collins
   Officials didn't fare any better with the second Bristol fatality.
Police virtually tripped over themselves to come up with a
motive for the apparent--and unusually violent--suicide of Ashaad
   Sharif was a 26-year-old computer analyst who worked at the
Marconi Defense Systems headquarters in Stanmore, Middlesex.
On October 28, 1986, he allegedly drove to a public park not
far from where Dajibhai had died.  He tied one end of a nylon
cord around a tree and tied the other end around his neck.  Then
he got back into his Audi 80 automatic, stepped on the gas and sped
off, decapitating himself.
   Marconi initially claimed Sharif was only a junior employee,
and that he had nothing to do with Star Wars.  Co-workers stated
otherwise.  At the time of his death, Sharif was apparently about
to be promoted.  Also, Ashaad reportedly worked for a time
in Vimal Dajibhai's section.
   The inquest determined that Sharif's death was a suicide.
Investigating officers maintained that the man had killed
himself because he'd been jilted by an alleged lover.  Ashaad
hadn't seen the woman in three years.
   "Sharif was said to have been depressed over a broken romance,"
Tony Collins explains.  "But the woman police unofficially say
was his lover contends that she was only his landlady when he was
working for British Aerospace in Bristol.  She's married,
has three children, and she's deeply religious.  The possibility
of the two having an affair seems highly unlikely--especially
since Sharif had a fiancee in Pakistan.  His family told me that
he was genuinely in love with her."
   Police suddenly switched stories.  They began to say that Sharif
had been deeply in love with the woman he was engaged to, and that
he'd decapitated himself because another woman was pressuring
him to call off the marriage.
   Authorities claimed to have found a taped message in Sharif's
car "tantamount" to a suicide note.  On it, officers said,
he'd admitted to having had an affair, thus bringing shame on his
family.  Family members who've heard the tape say that it
actually gave no indication of why Sharif might want to kill himself.
   Sharif's family was told by the coroner that it was "not in
their best interest" to attend the inquest.
   "It's been almost impossible to get to information about
deaths that should be in the public domain," Tony Collins laments.
"I've been given false names or incorrect spellings, or I've not
been told where inquests have taken place.  It's made it very
difficult for me to try to track down the details of these cases."
   In the Sharif case, two facts stand out:  Ashaad had no history
of depression, and there was absolutely no reason for him to be
in Bristol.

   A widely help theory among the establishment press is that
the mysterious deaths are stress-related accidents or suicides.
Such theories may not be far off the mark.
   According to a high-ranking British government official,
for the past year and a half the Ministry of Defense has been
secretly investigating Marconi on allegations of defense-
contract fraud--overcharging the government, bribing officials.
The extensive probe has required most of the MoD's investiga-
tive resources, conceivably reaching as far as Marconi's sub-
contractors and into MoD research facilities such as the Royal
Military College of Science and the Royal Air Force Research Center.
   Almost all of the dead scientists were associated with one
or more of these establishments.
   If Marconi employees were being forced by management to perform
or to cover up illegal activities, it may be that the stress
did indeed get to them.
   "In America, there are considerable incentives for people
to blow the whistle if they're being asked to perform illegal
acts like ripping off the government," a confidential source
in Parliament explains.  "However, in this country there have
been perhaps 20 people who've blown the whistle, and none
of them have ever worked again.  They didn't receive any compensation.
Here, you don't get any recognition.  You get threatened with
prosecution under the Official Secrets Act.  They can fire you.
Then they can take away your home and get you blacklisted.
   "It's an impossible position to be placed in," the source
adds.  "It's quite conceivable that these people could
have killed themselves because they felt terribly ashamed
of what they'd done.  For that matter, some of the accidents
or suicides could have been men who'd taken bribes but who couldn't
face the embarrassment of public disclosure."
   If Marconi =was= systematically defrauding the government
for millions of pounds each year, perhaps an employee stumbled
upon incriminating evidence and had to be done away with.  It would
be easy enough to make it look like an accident.
   Consider the peculiar death of Peter Peapell, found dead
beneath his car in the garage of his Oxfordshire home.  Peapell,
46, worked for the Royal Military College of Science, a world
authority on communications technology, electronics surveillance
and target detection.  Peapell was an expert at using computers
to process signals emitted by metals.  His work reportedly included
testing titanium for its resistance to explosives.
   On the night of February 22, 1987, Peapell spent an enjoyable
evening out with his wife, Maureen, and their friends.  When they
returned home, Maureen went straight to bed, leaving Peter to put
the car away.
   When Maureen woke up the next morning, she discovered that Peter
had not come to bed.  She went looking for him.  When she reached
the garage, she noticed that the door was closed.  Yet she could
hear the car's engine running. 
   She found her husband lying on his back beneath the car,
his mouth directly below the tail pipe.  She pulled him into the
open air, but he was already dead.
   Initially, Maureen thought her husband's death an accident.
She presumed he'd gotten under the car to investigate a knocking
he'd heard driving home the night before, and that he'd gotten
stuck.  But the light fixture in the garage was broken,
and Peter hadn't been carrying a flashlight.
   Police had their own suspicions.  A constable the same
height and wieght as Peter Peapell found it impossible to crawl
under the car when the garage door was closed.  He also found
it impossible to close the door once he was under the car.
   Carbon deposits from the inside of the garage door showed that
the engine had been running only a short time.  Yet, Mrs. Peapell
had found the body almost seven hours after she'd gone to bed.
   The coroner's inquest could not determine whether the death
was a homicide, a suicide or an accident.  According to Maureen
Peapell, Peter had no reason to kill himself.  They had no marital
or financial problems.  Peter loved his job.  He'd just received
 a sizable raise, and according to colleagues, he'd exhibited
 "absolutely no signs of stress."

   We may never know what is killing these scientists.  Everyone
has a theory.
   The National Forum Foundation, a conservative Washington
D.C., think tank, believes the deaths are the work of European-
based, left-wing terrorists, such as those who took credit for
gunning down a West German bureaucrat who'd negotiated Star Wars
contracts.  The group also claims the July 1986 bombing death
of a researcher director from the Siemens Company--a high-tech,
West German electronics firm.  They have yet to take credit
for any of the scientists.
   A more outrageous theory suggests that the Russians have developed
an electromagnetic "death ray," with which they're driving the
British scientists to suicide.  A supermarket tabloid contends
the ultrathin waves emitted by the device interfere with a person's
brain waves, causing violent mood shifts, including suicidal depres-
   The genius of such a weapon is that the victim does all
the dirty work =and= takes all the blame.  Yet, if the Soviets
=have= actually developed such a weapon, why waste it on 22
British defense workers?
   Are the scientists victims of a corrupt defense industry?
Have they been espionage pawns?  Are the deaths nothing more
than an extraordinary coincidence?  Guess.

                      DOSSIER OF DEATH

AUTO ACCIDENT--Professor Keith Bowden, 45, computer scientist,
Essex University.  In March 1982 Bowden's car plunged off a bridge,
into am abandoned rail yard.  His death was listed as an accident.

MISSING PERSON--Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Godley, 49, defense
expert, head of work-study unit at the Royal Military College
of Science.  Godley disappeared in April 1983.  His father
bequeathes him more than $60,000, with the proviso that he claim
it be 1987.  He never showed up and is presumed dead.

SHOTGUN BLAST--Roger Hill, 49, radar designer and draftsman,
Marconi.  In March 1985 Hill allegedly killed himself with a shotgun
at the family home.

DEATH LEAP--Jonathan Walsh, 29, digital-communications expert
assigned to British Telecom's secret Martlesham Health
research facility (and to GEC, Marconi's parent firm).  In November
1985 Walsh allegedly fell from his hotel room while working
on a British Telecom project in Abidjan, Ivory Coast (Africa).
He had expressed a fear for his life.  Verdict:  Still in question.

DEATH LEAP--Vimal Dajibhai, 24, computer-software engineer (worked
on guidance system for Tigerfish torpedo), Marconi Underwater
Systems.  In August 1986 Dajibhai's crumpled remains were found
240 feet below the Clifton suspension bridge in Bristol.  The death
has not been listed as a suicide.

DECAPITATION--Ashaad Sharif, 26, computer analyst, Marconi Defense
Systems.  In October 1986, in Bristol, Sharif allegedly tied
one end of a rope around a tree and the other end around his neck,
then drove off in his car at high speed.  Verdict:  Suicide.

SUFFOCATION--Richard Pugh, computer consultant for the Ministry
of Defense.  In January 1987 Pugh was found dead, wrapped head-to-
toe in rope that was tied four times around his neck.  The coroner
listed his death as an accident due to a sexual experiment
gone awry.

ASPHYXIATION--John Brittan, Ministry of Defense tank batteries
expert, Royal Military College of Science.  In January 1987
Brittan was found dead in a parked car in his garage.  The engine
was still running.  Verdict:  Accidental death.

DRUG OVERDOSE--Victor Moore, 46, design engineer, Marconi Space
Systems.  In February 1987 Moore was found dead of a drug overdose.
His death is listed as a suicide.

ASPHYXIATION--Peter Peapell, 46, scientist, Royal Military College
of Science.  In February 1987 Peapell was found dead beneath
his car, his face near the tail pipe, in the garage of his Oxfordshire
home.  Death was due to carbon-monoxide poisoning, although
test showed that the engine had been running only a short time.
Foul play has not been ruled out.

ASPHYXIATION--Edwin Skeels, 43, engineer, Marconi.  In February
1987 Skeels was found dead in his car, a victim of carbon-monoxide
poisoning.  A hose led from the exhaust pipe.  His death is listed
as a suicide.

AUTO ACCIDENT--David Sands, satellite projects manager, Eassams
(a Marconi sister company).  Although up for a promotion, in March
1987 Sands drove a car filled with gasoline cans into the brick
wall of an abandoned cafe.  He was killed instantly.  Foul play
has not been ruled out.

AUTO ACCIDENT--Stuart Gooding, 23, postgraduate research
student, Royal Military College of Science.  In April 1987
Gooding died in a mysterious car wreck in Cyprus while the College
was holding military exercises on the island.  Verdict:
Accidental death.

AUTO ACCIDENT--George Kountis, experienced systems analyst
at British Polytechnic.  In April 1987 Kountis drowned after his
BMW plunged into the Mersey River in Liverpool.  His death is listed
as a misadventure.

SUFFOCATION--Mark Wisner, 24, software engineer at Ministry
of Defense experimental station for combat aircraft.  In April
1987 Wisner was found dead in his home with a plastic bag over
his head.  At the inqust, his death was rules an accident due
to a sexual experiment gone awry.

AUTO ACCIDENT--Michael Baker, 22, digital-communications
expert, Plessey Defense Systems.  In May 1987 Baker's BMW
crashed through a road barrier, killing the driver.  Verdict:

HEART ATTACK--Frank Jennings, 60, electronic-weapons engineer
for Plessey.  In June 1987 Jennings allegedly dropped dead of a
heart attack.  No inquest was held.

DEATH LEAP--Russel Smith, 23, lab technician at the Atomic Energy
Research Establishment.  In January 1988 Smith's mangled body
was found halfway down a cliff in Cornwall.  Verdict:  Suicide.

ASPHYXIATION--Trevor Knight, 52, computer engineer, Marconi Space
and Defense Systems.  In March 1988 Knight was found dead in
his car, asphyxiated by fume from a hose attached to the tail
pipe.  The death was ruled a suicide.

ELECTROCUTION--John Ferry, 60, assistant marketing director for
Marconi.  In August 1988 Ferry was found dead in a company-owned
apartment, the stripped leads of an electrical cord in his
mouth.  Foul play has not been ruled out.

ELECTROCUTION--Alistair Beckham, 50, software engineer, Plessey.
In August 1988 Beckham's lifeless body was found in the garden
shed behind his house.  Bare wires, which ran to a live main,
were wrapped around his chest.  Now suicide note was found,
and police habe not ruled out foul play.

ASPHYXIATION--Andrew Hall, 33, engineering manager, British Aero-
space.  In September 1988 Hall was found dead in his car, asphyxiated
by fumes from a hose that was attached to the tail pipe.  Friends
said he was well liked, had everything to live for.  Verdict:


   The magazine, date, and author of this article are all unknown.

   Additional information concerning this subject will be uploaded
in the near future as a part of a series of files on this subject.
ANY and ALL information that you may have concerning this topic
may be sent to Mike Carrillo, 2419 Forest Shadows, St. Louis,
MO  63136.  You may also contact me on Wierdbase (314) 741-2231,
CIA (314) 739-0262, or the Darkside BBS (314) 298-7486.


Conspiracy / The Lincoln Murder Trial
« on: February 16, 2017, 08:23:42 pm »
Note: This message is awaiting approval by a moderator.
From [email protected] Feb  5 12:13:07 1995
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 95 11:34:47 CST
From: Brian Redman <[email protected]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
Subject: Mask For Treason

[Originally posted under aegis of "Conspiracy
for the Day", August 2 through August 6, 1993]
Mask for Treason: The Lincoln Murder Trial
by Vaughan Shelton
+                                                               +
| "The history of the controversial Conspiracy Trial of 1865    |
+  as most Americans know it is a textbook version pared down   +
|  to a digestible nubbin... [The] basic account, with some     |
+  modifications, is the same one the engineers of the          +
|  Conspiracy Trial set out to promulgate. In a way their       |
+  success in planting such a version on the pages of American  +
|  history was a triumph in propaganda. For even before the     |
+  trial began, the first gusts of a storm of protest were      +
|  shaking the legend."                                         |
+                                                               +
                  The Riddle of Louis Paine
Louis Paine was one of the eight tried in the Conspiracy Trial of
1865. He was one of the four persons (Louis Paine, Mrs. Mary E.
Surratt, George Atzerodt, and David Herold) subsequently executed
by the government on July 7, 1865.
Paine was arrested on April 17, 1865 (three days after the
assassination of Lincoln) when he had the misfortune of knocking
on the front door of a boardinghouse operated by Mrs. Surratt
while government detectives were on the premises. Three weeks
later, Paine was charged with conspiring to assassinate (along
with seven others) President Lincoln, Vice-President Johnson,
Lieutenant General U.S. Grant, and Secretary of State Seward.
"In addition to the sweeping general charges, Paine individually
was accused of entering Seward's house on the night Lincoln was
murdered and attempting to stab the Secretary of State to death."
It was charged that "...hunger drove him to return to Mrs.
Surratt's house [three days after the alleged attack on
Seward]... disguised as a laborer."
"Even today, a century later [c. 1965], his [Paine's] image is
unchanged from that given him by the prosecution at the
Conspiracy Trial: A homicidal, half-witted brute without a
flicker of remorse for the vicious crime he had attempted but
"But the persistence of the prejudice against this young man for
a full century [c. 1965]... is a phenomenon of mass thought-
conditioning that has no parallel."
"Even while the Trial was in progress, the possibility that the
hate campaign being directed against the Booth 'conspirators' was
a screen for a less visible conspiracy in high places was being
hinted in the press." And when the Trial and execution had been
carried out, the accusations of a frame-up did not diminish but
rather increased. "In February of 1866 President Andrew
Johnson... shouted during a speech from the White House steps:"
"   ... Are those who want to destroy our institutions and      "
"   change the character of the government not satisfied...     "
"   with one martyr? Does not the blood of Lincoln appease      "
"   the vengeance and wrath of the opponents of this            "
"   Government?... Have they not honor and courage enough to    "
"   effect the removal of the presidential obstacle otherwise   "
"   than through the hands of the assassin?                     "
"In spite of the fact that the legend of the Booth
'conspiracy'... has remained the general basis for textbook
versions of the episode for a hundred years..." suspicions have
remained of a "...plot within a plot." Those looking into the
historical material on the subject are often "...left with a
strong impression that Edwin Stanton and certain of his political
and official associates must surely have had a hand in the
intrigue to remove President Lincoln by assassination."
Louis Paine did not know Booth and had nothing to do with the
"conspiracy" for which he and the others were tried. "...Of the
eight defendants at the Conspiracy Trial *he was the most
innocent*." Ever since Paine's trial and execution, " has
been the almost universal belief that his real name was Lewis
Powell... There *was* such a man [i.e. Lewis Powell], and he
played a leading part in the bloody events of Good Friday, April
14, 1865. But he vanished that same night and never reappeared
under his own name, though he evidently lived for many years
Louis Paine was *not* Lewis Powell. "Louis Paine was the *real
name* of the young man who was tried, convicted, and hanged."
"In the spring and summer of 1865 the country was under the
control of the military establishment." Edwin Stanton presided
over a War Department [B.R. Now called a "Defense Department."]
that wielded great power.
Stanton and his accomplices organized "...the nation's grief and
[focussed] it upon the project of finding and punishing the
murderers... the country was kept in a state of hysteria on this
one theme."
"This favorable atmosphere of directed emotion allowed the
Department's Bureau of Military Justice to stage a mockery of a
trial and erect a legend to screen two ominous realities: First,
that the assassination was one phase of a power grab within the
federal government. Second, that the removal of Abraham Lincoln's
restraining influence at a time when Congress was not in session
had cleared the way for a military dictatorship headed by
Secretary of War Stanton."
Today, we can get a very detailed view of the events of that
time. This is due in part to the fact that the "...telephone had
not yet been invented, [and so] communications between officials
in the War Department were routinely conveyed in written form."
The situation following the assassination of Lincoln was one of
great hysteria. Furthermore, the various agencies investigating
the murder of Lincoln and attempted murder of Seward lacked
overall coordination. One aspect of the confusion then prevailing
can be seen in the case of Louis Paine. "As late as April 24, ten
days after the assassination, a memo written in the Bureau of
Military Justice listed the prisoners committed by [that date]."
The list did not include Louis Paine, although he had been
arrested in connection with the assassination on April 17th.
Paine was a great puzzle to the investigators. At first he was
willing to talk freely, "...though he denied knowing anything
about a conspiracy to assassinate the President." However for
some reason he suddenly refused to talk to anyone and remained
that way "...until six weeks later, two weeks after the Trial had
begun, when he just as suddenly decided to communicate with his
baffled attorney, Colonel William E. Doster."
There was only one witness that the government had against Paine
in the days following the assassination: a young black servant
who had opened the door to the man who tried to murder Seward had
positively identified Paine as being that man.
                       Seward's Assailant
"Many historians have sensed that a sinister force was in motion
behind the scenes at the Conspiracy Trial." However, the primary
force behind the scenes was *not* Stanton but rather Stanton's
Secret Service chief, Colonel Lafayette Baker.
On Tuesday, April 18, 1865, Baker composed the first public
"wanted" notice on Booth and "Seward's assailant." The
description of Seward's assailant was extraordinarily detailed
and specific. In fact, the "...handbill's description of an
unnamed man was *an almost perfect description of Louis Paine.*"
Paine had been arrested on Monday, April 17. Until Paine's
arrest, "...the War Department's official conception of the
appearance of Seward's assailant... was of a man who looked like
George Atzerodt [who did not resemble Paine]."
Thus, since the War Department's description of the man and the
suspect described in Baker's handbill were so different in
appearance, at least one of the two descriptions was wrong. The
author contends that "Lafayette Baker composed the handbill with
its description of Louis Paine *after he had [already] seen him in
"Later, at the Conspiracy Trial, ... [witnesses to the attack
upon Seward] would testify under oath that the gaslights at the
house that night had been few and turned down quite low, leaving
the hallways and Secretary Seward's room in semidarkness."
Contrast the above-mentioned "semidarkness" with the description
of the assailant in Baker's "wanted" handbill:
"   Height 6 feet 1 inch; hair black, thick, full, and     "
"   straight; no beard nor appearance of beard; cheeks     "
"   red on the jaws; face moderately full; 22 or 23 years  "
"   of age; eyes, color not known -- large eyes not        "
"   prominent; brows not heavy but dark; face not large    "
"   but rather round; complexion healthy; nose straight    "
"   and well formed, medium size; neck short and of        "
"   medium length; hands soft and small; fingers tapering; "
"   shows no sign of hard labor; broad shoulders; taper    "
"   waist; straight figure; strong looking man; manner     "
"   not gentlemanly, but vulgar. Overcoat double-breasted; "
"   color mixed of pink and gray spots, small -- was a     "
"   sack overcoat, pockets inside and one on breast, with  "
"   lapels or flaps; pants black common stuff; new heavy   "
"   boots; voice small and thin, inclined to tenor.        "
"The handbill description could have been written *only* after
someone had observed its subject closely and at leisure under an
excellent light, someone who had the authority to tell the
prisoner to hold out his hands palms up."
Also worth noting is that whoever Seward's assailant was *knew*
exactly where in the house to find the Secretary of State. The
man who attempted to murder Seward got past the servant at the
front door and fought his way upstairs to Seward's bedroom -- all
without hesitation. He knew where to find Seward that night. As
none of the witnesses remembered ever having seen the man before,
it is probable that Seward's assailant had received inside
information from *someone*.
"Whoever it was who rang the Seward doorbell the night of April
14 and tried to stab Secretary Seward to death... knew on which
floor of the mansion and in which room to find his victim; yet he
was not known to the Seward family or the servants... The
assailant was *sent* by someone -- probably paid by someone --
who could tell him the best time to arrive at the house and the
floor and room where his victim could be found."
                     Mechanics of the Trial
"The case of Louis Paine was the real puzzler. There was every
indication that the young man was a total stranger in Washington,
known to no one. The residents of the Surratt boardinghouse...
were unanimous in doubts that they knew him." The other
"conspirators" did not know Paine, yet he was charged with being
part of their "conspiracy."
"As we encounter more and more evidence that Louis Paine and his
fellow defendants were deliberately framed by officials of the
War Department, the reader should be reminded that this was not
merely a hysterical national situation in which, because of
pressure to find *someone* to punish for the murder of the
President, several suspicious-seeming individuals were made the
scapegoats by biased or overzealous prosecutors at a court
"The procedures of these courts had only a vague connection with
the established legal processes of the land. Defendants were
presumed guilty and, as [Paine's attorney] Colonel Doster
remarked in his reminiscences, '... were called on to *prove
their innocence*.'"
In his reminiscences of the Trial, written forty years later,
Paine's attorney Colonel Doster reveals some of his frustrations
with the proceedings:
"   ...this was a contest in which a few lawyers were on one    "
"   side, and the whole United States on the other -- a case    "
"   in which, of course, the verdict was known beforehand...    "
"   During lunch one of the members of the commission           "
"   remarked, 'Well, Payne [sic] seems to want to be hung, so   "
"   I guess we might as well hang him.                          "
Colonel Doster further remarked upon "...The licence with which
the Government dragged into this trial a thousand details of
yellow-fever plots, steamboat burnings, and other things that
were utterly foreign to the issue and which had no other effect
than to inflame the public against the prisoners, showed a
barbarous disregard or rather contempt for the settled barriers
of legal inquiry."
These extraneous and irrelevant matters which the Government
continuously threw into the case served to "...rekindle all the
passions of wartime... by using the witness stand to review all
the 'atrocities' perpetrated by the South during the
As the higher-ups pulling the strings in this trial must have
known, these theatrics played well to most of the nation. "In the
1860's it was quite possible for a few clever lawyers and
unscrupulous detectives to stage a treason trial in the nation's
capital with all the flimflam of a medicine show."
                    The Arrest of Louis Paine
"At the time of his [Paine's] arrest and for a few hours
afterward... Louis Paine answered the questions put to him
willingly and with apparent candor. But something happened during
that period which caused him to decide to hold his peace... The
nature of his interrogation may have convinced him that he had
been elected as a whipping boy no matter what he said... Within a
short time after his arrest he entered a stolid silence which he
did not break for six weeks."
As noted previously, Paine had been arrested when he knocked at
the front door of Mrs. Surratt's boardinghouse while it was in
the process of being raided. A detective Richard C. Morgan,
present at the arrest, gave the following testimony on May 19,
1865, at the Trial:
    About twenty minutes past 11 o'clock on the evening of
    the 17th of April, ...I went to the house of Mrs.
    Surratt for the purpose of... arresting the inmates of
    the house; after we had been at the house about ten
    minutes, ...I heard a knock and a ring at the door at
    the same time; ...[We opened the door and] the prisoner,
    Payne [sic], came in... [I asked] "who do you want to
    He [Paine] replied, "Mrs. Surratt."
    I [Detective Morgan] said, "what did you come here for,
    this time of night?" He said he came to dig a gutter;
    that Mrs. Surratt had sent for him; ...I asked where he
    last worked, and he said somewhere on Ninth street; I
    asked him where he boarded, he said he had no boarding
    house, that he was a poor man, and earned his living
    with the pick-axe in his hand.
    I asked him why he came at this time of night? He said
    he came to see where it was to be dug, so that he could
    commence early in the morning; I said, have you had no
    previous acquaintance with Mrs. Surratt? He said, No; I
    said, why did she select you for this work? He replied,
    that she knew he was working in that neighborhood; that
    he was a poor man and she came to him; ...I asked him
    where he was from; he said from Fauquier county, Va.;
    previous to this he had pulled out an oath of
    allegiance, handed it to me and said, that will show you
    who I am.
[B.R. This "Oath of Allegiance" that is mentioned was, from what
I can gather, a signed loyalty oath carried by laborers,
drifters, transients, and others which allowed them to travel
freely in search of work. My sense is that it served as a sort of
passport or identity paper.]
[B.R. What I find interesting about this "Oath of Allegiance" is
that it may have been the precursor to our modern "Pledge of
Allegiance." The "Oath of Allegiance" involved a signed pledge of
loyalty to the federal government. If one wanted to work, one was
forced to grant recognition to the Union. In the "Pledge of
Allegiance" which I was required to recite every day in grade
school, we pledged our allegiance to "*one nation*"... a nation
that was "*indivisible*." To me it is interesting how this modern
day "Pledge of Allegiance" is redundant on the theme of union
(i.e. "one nation"... "indivisible," as if stressing the point).]

 Brian Francis Redman    [email protected]    "The Big C"
    Coming to you from Illinois -- "The Land of Skolnick"       

Conspiracy / Groom Lake Desert Rat Issue #11
« on: February 16, 2017, 08:12:37 pm »
The Groom Lake Desert Rat Issue #11 is posted here with the permission of the
author Glenn Campbell.

Posted by Michael Curta, Colorado MUFON

THE GROOM LAKE DESERT RAT.   An On-Line Newsletter.
Issue #11.  July 15, 1994.
 -----> "The Naked Truth from Open Sources." <-----
Written, published, copyrighted and totally disavowed by
[email protected]. See bottom for subscription/copyright info.

In this issue...

[Note: This file ends with "#####".]

 ----- A NUCLEAR THREAT -----

The following anonymous press release was passed to us by friends
of ours in Washington who thought we would want to know.  It was
sent to them by a confidential source who supposedly obtained it
from the U.S. office of the Russian news agency TASS.  Presumably,
TASS received it by mail or fax from persons unknown.






ANALYSIS.  You know darn well the place that's going to be
targeted.  Vegas!  Blowing up any other part of Nevada would be
pointless since it's a wasteland anyway.  You can't do much damage
to the Nevada Test Site.  It's already been nuked!  The Sons and
Daughters wouldn't want to blow up Area 51 either because then
they could be destroying the very evidence they seek.  No, Las
Vegas is the only place worth blowing up, and all we can say is,
"Bravo!"  We saw the exact same thing at the end of the recent
broadcast of Steven King's "The Stand."  Lucifer and his disciples
got bombed on Fremont Street, taking the rest of the town with
them.  We thought it was the most upbeat part of this end-of-the-
world mini-series.

We would never condone any such terrorist action.  Still, if it
has to happen, there could be worse places.  The cultural losses
will be nil, and many of those lives so tragically lost are, quite
frankly, the sort of low-life Vegas scum this country can do
without.  We'll miss the all-you-can-eat buffets and the four (4)
24-hour Wal-Marts, but, heck, we'll survive.  If it means driving
to Cedar City to shop, we'll make that sacrifice.  They've got a
Wal-Mart there and a couple of big supermarkets, and those good
Mormon people--the original "Downwinders"--have plenty of
experience in dealing with fallout. 

The loss of Las Vegas could be seen as a tragic but ultimately
beneficial societal cleansing, but we are not sure it will help
much in cracking the UFO mystery.  This event is going to create a
lot of noise, both literally and figuratively.  It could take a
decade to mop up the mess, and in the meantime no one is going to
be thinking much about the alleged alien/extraterrestrial crafts
at Groom/Papoose lakes.  If anything, an event like this would
encourage even closer military control of Southern Nevada.

 ----- BUT IS IT TRUE? -----

On the subject of UFOs at Area 51, Psychospy is proud to sit
squarely on the fence.  Whatever the truth may be, we don't yet
find the evidence compelling enough to march on the White House or
blow up a major city in protest.  We've heard endless stories of
amazing lights in the sky in this area.  Most of these, including
many well publicized reports and the things that we've seen
ourselves, appear to us to be routine misperceptions of military
flares and aircraft lights.  Newcomers do not appreciate the huge
volume of military traffic here or the difficulties of judging the
motion of a distant light.  Even the few sighting reports that we
can't explain don't seem to lead us anywhere.  So you've seen a
unworldly light in the sky.  Even if it happened as you say it
did, where does the investigation lead you?  All you can usually
conclude, after recording the sighting, is that the case is --

Forty-five years of collecting sighting reports has lead the UFO
movement nowhere.  Idealistic investigators have filled out
thousands of neatly ruled forms recording the size of the object,
its brightness and structure, its movement across the sky, a
description of the occupants if they land and step outside... 
Most such reports rely on human perception and memory and thus are
automatically suspect.  The endless stacks of sighting reports,
although periodically regurgitated for books and TV shows, mostly
collect dust in archives and result in no practical human effect. 
The skeptics remain skeptical, while the believers can only agree
that "They are here!" and it's time to get mad as hell about it.

Get mad at whom?  Why, the government of course.  It's senseless
to get angry at the aliens, because they apparently don't give a
damn what we think and certainly aren't going to sit around to be
harangued.  The government, on the other hand, can't escape the
wrath of its citizens, and it has to respond at least when its
funding is threatened.  The focus of attention by UFO activists is
the U.S. Air Force, on the theory that if anybody knows anything
about ships in the sky, it must be them.  They've got aircraft on
continuous patrol, spy satellites ringing the globe, advanced
radar blanketing the skies, some totally "boss" radio and video
equipment and satellite dishes that can get ALL the channels.

If the UFOs are real, then it is a reasonable assumption that the
Air Force knows more about them than we do and that it is
withholding this information from the public.  That doesn't
necessarily imply that the Air Force has any answers.  Perhaps
they have only attained a more advanced state of befuddlement than
the rest of us and are loathe to admit how confused they are.  On
the other hand, the Air Force could be engaged in extensive
contacts and agreements with the aliens.  The aliens could already
be entrenched here, messing with our society--or at least our
minds--and telling the governments of the world what to do.

The only flaw in any government cover-up theory is our knowledge
about how the government functions in all its other activities. 
The only human bureaucracies we have ever had experience with seem
mildly incompetent and usually leak their secrets like a sieve. 
If many workers know about the Air Force's UFO data, it is hard to
imagine them all keeping quiet.  Washington is full of Deep
Throats, frustrated with their employer, who are dying to spill
the beans about whatever scandal they have access to.  That a
government agency is involved in any kind of alien research
program is instantly newsworthy to both skeptics and believers. 
In the cutthroat underworld of Washington politics and media, it
is hard to imagine any such program surviving for very long
without its existence being leaked and widely criticized.

On the other hand, maybe the story has been leaked all along but
sounds just too wacky for most people to take seriously.  It has
been widely reported that the captive aliens at Area 51 like
strawberry ice cream.  Even if a report like this is true, it
doesn't go far in endorsing the alien presence in most people's
eyes.  The mainstream media can't do much with a far out story
unless there is some reportable human connection.  That the aliens
eat strawberry ice cream isn't news.  What might make the papers
is the atrocious price the government is paying for that ice cream
and how it has given all the business to Baskin-Robbins without
competitive bidding.

The only sort of government UFO research program we find credible
would be a relatively small and heavily compartmentalized one
accomplishing what we expect of government bureaucracies--that is,
very little.  There is only one thing that the government does
well, and that is stonewall.  Since arriving in Rachel, we have
upgraded our estimates of the government's ability to withstand a
siege and keep its workers quiet.  Easily 10,000 employees have
worked at Groom Lake over the years, but hardly any will speak
about the place publicly.  What most of these people know is
probably mundane, but the fact that the government can keep such
tight control over so many people suggests that the enforcement
mechanism is highly effective.  Most workers turn pale if you ask
them the price of a steak at the commissary; they really clam up
when you ask them anything serious.

We have developed a respect for the government's ability to
withhold static knowledge--that is, to stockpile data and not let
anyone else have it.  At the same time, since coming here, we have
significantly downgraded our estimates of what workers can
accomplish in such an oppressive environment.  Security
restrictions eat up resources, cripple scientific communication
and sap all initiative and creativity from the human employees. 
Given enough funding for guards, locks and redundant safeguards,
the government might be able keep an exotic body of knowledge
secret for decades, but at the cost of not being able to do
anything with it.

If the government is withholding proof of alien life, here's what
to look for:  A vault of poorly processed data, guarded by morons
and managed by bureaucrats who are crippled by their own
regulations.  Nothing is accomplished in this air conditioned
sanctum.  Meetings are held and problems discussed, but real
actions and decisions are always put off for another day.  As long
as the data remains secure and funding to maintain the security
apparatus continues to roll in, there's no pressure to do anything
at all.

So what is really out there at Area 51, beyond the impressive
security, inside the deep bunkers, behind the big steel doors? 
Maybe alien craft, maybe Auroras--or maybe just a bunch of bored
technicians sitting around in white lab coats playing cards.


"THE MEDIA: OUT OF CONTROL?" was the cover story on the June 26
issue of the NEW YORK TIMES SUNDAY MAGAZINE.  There was also, on
page 32, a 5-page article by Donovan Webster entitled "'Area 51'--
The cold war still rages in the Nevada desert, site of an air base
so secret it doesn't exist."  A Times reader
(al[email protected]), posted this summary to the Skunk
Works mailing list....

   "As previously noted, the NY Times Magazine, 26 June issue,
contained an article on Glenn Campbell and Groom Lake.  The writer
spent a day with Glenn, observing Groom and dodging the security
folks, only to end up being ID'ed and released by a local
sheriff's deputy.  There was also more detail than I've seen
elsewhere about the pending lawsuit against the Government filed
by 39 former Nellis area workers who claim that they were exposed
to hazardous materials emanating from open burn pits at Groom.

   "As the article focused on Glenn and the politics surrounding
the base secrecy issue, there was little technical detail on any
of the testing supposedly going on at Groom.  Aurora and the TR-3A
were mentioned, but only in passing.

   "Perhaps the most interesting part of the article, for me, was
the following quote from an Air Force spokesman (no unit or
organization affiliation given):"

   <quote> Meanwhile, as Campbell continues playing to an ever-
increasing audience, his efforts are not lost on the Air Force,
which he's placed on his "Desert Rat" mailing list for free.  "We
read his publication," says Air Force Col. Douglas Kennett, "and
we know what Mr. Campbell's doing near a base that may--or may
not--exist.  While Mr. Campbell says the base is there, and while
the Soviets appear to have photographed a base there, the Air
Force is aware of those times when Mr. Campbell or Russian spy
satellites might be looking us over--and we can adjust our
activities for that.  That is, if any activities are going on at a
base that may--or may not--exist."

 ----- NOTABLE QUOTES -----


From a television column in the WASHINGTON POST, July 12:

   "When we started typing this item we asked ourselves--have we
on a very slow summer day been reduced to this?...

   "On Oct. 1 Larry King will do a live, on-location special, with
phone calls, of course, from Rachel, Nev., 'in the shadow of the
U.S. government's super secret air base known as Area 51' on

   "It's called 'The UFO Cover Up: Live from Area 51.'  Area 51,
TNT explains, 'also known as Groom Lake, is an enormous military
installation hidden deep in the hostile Nevada Desert--so secret
the Pentagon won't confirm its existence.'  Larry's guests will
include Glenn Campbell, who heads Secrecy Oversight Council in
Rachel, and technology expert Mark Farm[er] (a.k.a. Agent X) 'who
specializes in spying on secret government aviation projects'...

   "And when we had finished typing this item we were forced to
ask ourselves--has Larry King been reduced to this?..."


From an article in the NEW YORK TIMES, July 4, about attempts by
Senator Robert Byrd to force the Air Force to revive the SR-71
Blackbird--"Spy Plane That Came in From Cold Just Will Not Go Away
in the Senate"...

   "When the Pentagon canceled the Blackbird in 1990, citing the
huge cost of operating and maintaining the fleet, it assured
Senator Byrd and a handful of his senior colleagues on the Armed
Services and Intelligence Committees that it was working on a very
fast, very expensive, very secret reconnaissance plane to be a
successor to the Blackbird.

   "But that program collapsed after consuming several hundred
million dollars, according to members of Congress and their aides. 
And despite rumors that another successor is in the works, they
said, nothing of the sort is on the horizon at the secret Air
Force base in Nevada where classified prototypes of state-of-the-
art aircraft are flown."

COMMENTS:  You can take this any way you want.  If true and no
Aurora is flying, then protecting it is no longer an issue of
national security--is it?  Shouldn't it be revealed to the
taxpayer exactly how many hundreds of millions of dollars were
spent?  (We suspect a very large "several.")


The following comes from an amusing government-sponsored document
entitled, "Meeting the Press:  A Media Survival Guide for the
Defense Manager," by Judson J. Conner.  (Sent to us by
[email protected].)  It's a slim book packed with practical
tips for military commanders on "Facing a Swarm of Killer
Reporters," handling a "Press Ambush" and otherwise managing those
pesky journalists.  We read it in one sitting and eagerly
recommended it to those on both sides of the microphone. 
Available for $5 per copy from the U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington DC 20402.  Visa/MC: 202-783-3238.  Among the

   "Common sense and military policy dictate that you should
answer press queries fully and accurately, even when those answers
tend to make you look bad.  But human nature advises otherwise,
and it is often difficult to choke back the impulse to evade the
hard questions.  This impulse can really do you in, for evasions
always come back to haunt, and they are malevolent ghosts.

   "A 'no comment' can be equally damaging.  The reporter will
probably quote you in the story, not only to let the public (and
his editor) know that he offered you a chance to tell your side,
but also to let everyone know you are guilty.  The dictionary
tells us that 'no comment' merely means you prefer not to talk
about the subject, but the readers know better.  They know very
well you are pleading the Fifth Amendment to cover up your


From an article in the LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, July 4, about the
pending promotion of Nellis Air Force Base commander Maj. Gen.
Thomas R. Griffith--"Commander's career soars to new heights":

   "[Griffith] defended the Air Force's recent move to withdraw
4,000 acres of public land as a buffer zone around its secret
Groom Lake base in Lincoln County, 35 miles west of Alamo.

   "'If we have to take security measures to do the things we want
to do, we'll do it.  We just can't have Boy Scouts roaming around
in the area,' he said.

  "'When decisions are made, they're based on the recommendation
of people like me who are in the service of our country,' he said. 
'At some point people have to have confidence in us and (in) the


The following graffiti was found on a military "Restricted Area"
sign in a remote area of public land near Freedom Ridge.  As seen
in the New York Times Magazine, June 26, Psychospy had drawn a big
"X" across the sign and written "Misplaced Sign" on it because it
was well outside the actual military border.  Additional graffiti
has appeared on the sign within the past week, author unknown:

   "Glenn Campbell is a stupid faggot and so are his loyal

 ----- CLARIFICATION -----

Some readers got the impression from DR #10 that Psychospy was
ready to throw in the towel on the land grab.  Responding to the
continuing MFF, we said:

   "We almost wished they would just take the damn land and be
done with it."

We assure both our supporters and the loyal opposition that we
were speaking figuratively and our siege has not ended.  Just
recently, in fact, we installed at our Research Center a big
satellite dish, the ultimate status symbol here in the outback and
a clear message to our enemies (who are everywhere) that we are
here for the long term.  As an added benefit, we now receive the
trash/sleaze/Simpsons/X-Files network, east and west feeds, so we
can watch ourselves on "Encounters" twice on the same night.

The land grab fight is not over, and regardless of what the
outcome may be, there is still plenty of political mileage on
those 4000 acres.  You never what may turn up there:  maybe the
Nicole Simpson murder weapon!  Whatever cards Fate may deal us, we
assure the public that Psychospy and his faggot minions will
cheerfully take advantage of the hand.  The stated reason for the
withdrawal ("To ensure the public safety, blah, blah...") is
plainly insufficient and we believe creates a legal vulnerability. 
This, in turn, generates free floating political energy which
might be tapped in elegant ways that may not yet be obvious. 
"Opportunistic" describes our philosophy.

----- INTEL BITTIES -----

"Encounters" segment on Groom will run on Friday, July 22, at 8 pm
in most cities (not tonight as reported in DR #10).

TRESPASSER CASE RESOLVED.  Just before the date of their
rescheduled trial, the four of seven accused trespassers reached a
deal with the D.A.  Two pleaded "no contest" and each paid a
reduced fine of $100 (compared to $250 each for the three who
pleaded "no contest" in January).  In exchange, charges were
dropped against the two remaining defendants.  Mounting costs and
emotional fatigue apparently prompted the defendants to bow out. 
Although the resolution was a compromise, we are pleased overall. 
We suspect that the small-town Alamo Justice Court, presided over
by a non-lawyer, would have found them guilty, and the appeal to a
higher court, although winnable, would have been costly.  The
government oversight group Citizen Alert did the same in 1988 when
several members entered the Groom Range to work a mining claim. 
They were arrested and found guilty in the same Justice Court. 
They appealed to a higher court and won their case--but at a cost
of thousands of dollars in legal fees and four years of "due
process."  Stretching out the latest case for over six months at
least created a newsworthy cause and placed some political
pressure on the local and military authorities.  In the smaller
battles of a larger war, the "process" is often more valuable than
the end result.

WILDLIFE REFUGE LAND ACTION.  An amendment to Senate Bill 823 now
pending in Congress would transfer control of certain bombing
areas in the Desert Wildlife Range to exclusive Air Force control. 
Although news of this action initially prompted suggestions of a
"new Groom land grab," we now see no obvious connection between
this and the Freedom Ridge withdrawal.  The areas involved are 20-
60 miles southeast of Groom in an area that is already off limits
to the public.  The principal public concern seems to be the
endangered desert tortoise--Nevada's version of the hated spotted
owl.  At present the land is jointly administered by the Nellis
Bombing Range and the Wildlife Range, and the pending action would
amend that arrangement to give the AF exclusive control over the
limited areas where bombs already fall.  Presumably, this would
allow the strengthening of environmental rules outside the bombed
areas (turtle paradise), while permitting the AF to continue its
business within specified zones (turtle 'Nam).  From what we know,
we're inclined to support the AF on this one.  We would agree with
the brass that realistic exercises are necessary for defense
readiness, and it's hard to be environmentally dainty when you are
bombing things.

NEW PRODUCTS.  The official unofficial GROOM LAKE HAT has just
arrived at our Research Center.  This is a black, all-cotton
baseball cap with a three-inch version of the popular Groom Dry
Lake cloth patch attached to the front.  It is now available for
$12 each plus the usual shipping....  We have also received a new
shipment of the USGS SATELLITE IMAGE MAP showing the semi-secret
Tonopah Test Range and vicinity, available for $8.  This is a full
color satellite photo in poster size, 24" x 40", covering the
Cactus Flat 1:100,000 quadrangle and clearly showing the TTR
runways and hangars....  Add $3.50 postage per order (USA priority
mail--ask for intl.).  Checks to "Secrecy Oversight Council."  Our
catalog is available upon request.


(c) Glenn Campbell, 1994.  ([email protected])

This newsletter is copyrighted and may not be reproduced without
one year following the date of publication, you may photocopy this
text or send or post this document electronically to anyone who
you think might be interested, provided you do it without charge. 
You may only copy or send this document in unaltered form and in
its entirety, not as partial excerpts (except brief quotes for
review purposes).  After one year, no further reproduction of this
document is allowed without permission.  (These revised terms--six
months extended to one year--also apply to previous back issues.)

Email subscriptions to this newsletter are available free of
charge.  To subscribe (or unsubscribe), send a message to
psych[email protected].  Subscriptions are also available by regular
mail for $15 per 10 issues, postpaid to anywhere in the world.

Back issues are available on various bulletin boards and by
internet FTP to, directory
/pub/trader/secrecy/psychospy.  Also available by WWW to

Current direct circulation:  1138 copies

The mail address for Psychospy, Glenn Campbell, Secrecy Oversight
Council, Area 51 Research Center, Groom Lake Desert Rat and
countless other ephemeral entities is:
     HCR Box 38
     Rachel, NV 89001 USA


« on: February 16, 2017, 07:57:21 pm »


You may recall seeing the December 24, 1990, issue of Newsweek
on the newsstands. The cover had a granite wall with raised
lettering, spelling out the words, "Thought Police." If you
read the article, you learned about something called
"politically correct thinking."

A growing number of institutions of higher learning around the
country have been establishing new and stringent linguistic
and behavioral guidelines for their students and faculties.
All words and actions that may in any way be interpreted to
contain racial, sexist or homosexual slurs carry increasingly
severe penalties. For students, it can mean anything from a
financial fine to expulsion from the school. For faculty, it
can mean grounds for dismissal, denial of tenure or lack of

From the Newsweek article, the innocent and uninformed reader
would have gained the impression that this new form of thought
police was merely the temporary, if irritating, excesses of a
few campus administrators, faculty members and students trying
to redress the racist and sexist insensitivities of the past.

Even the discussion in the article about the often dramatic
changes being introduced into core liberal arts curricula at
these institutions was made to seem as merely the movement
towards a more pluralistic view of man, society and culture.
The dominant focus in liberal arts education on Western
culture and tradition will now be modified. Other cultures,
other world philosophies, other conceptions of man and
community will be presented on an equal footing with the
European and American contributions to the human heritage.

And what about the "thought policemen"? Newsweek ended the
topic with an article by a young man who had been a thought
policeman at one of these campuses. He assured the readers
that he and others were merely trying to raise the
consciousness of their fellow students so that they would be
more aware of the "oppressiveness" of traditional language.
What if students were not interested in attending the
"reeducation" programs on campus? The author said, "Attendance
wasn't mandatory, but did we know who wouldn't show? You bet."

Contrary to the general impression that Newsweek conveyed, the
movement for "politically correct thinking" is potentially one
of the most dangerous intellectual currents in American
academia today. Some of the recent books that explain what its
proponents are all about include Destructive Generation by
David Horowitz and Peter Collier, Tenured Radicals by Roger
Kimball, and The Hollow Men by Charles Sykes.

What is the world-view of these advocates of "politically
correct thinking"? In an excellent article entitled, "The
Storm over the University," which appeared in the December 6,
1990, issue of The New York Review of Books, the well-known
philosopher John Searle gave a succinct summary:

     "The history of `Western Civilization' is in large
     part a history of oppression. Internally, Western
     civilization oppressed women, various slave and serf
     populations, and ethnic and cultural minorities
     generally. In foreign affairs, the history of Western
     civilization is one of imperialism and colonialism. The
     so-called canon of Western civilization consists in the
     official publications of this system of oppression, and
     it is no accident that the authors in the `canon'  are
     almost exclusively Western white males, because the
     civilization itself is ruled by a caste consisting almost
     entirely of Western white males."

As the authors to whom I have referred demonstrate, many of
the proponents of "politically correct thinking" in American
academia are refugees and exiles from the leftist political
causes of the 1960s--for example, they who resisted American
intervention in Vietnam because they supported socialist
revolution in the Third World. They protested against "the
establishment" at home because they hated capitalism and saw
themselves as the vanguard of a coming "people's democracy"
that would replace the existing "fascist Amerika"; and because
they hated the "commercial society" and resented the
"oppression" of market relationships.

Unable to win their war in the streets or in the political
world, they retreated into the halls of ivy, which they now
increasingly dominate. Everything they dislike is the product
of "white capitalist power." Everything they cherish is found
in the non-market communalism and collectivism of the Third

They use all the standard Marxian ideological and linguistic
tricks. Language has no inherent objective meaning; words are
tools of "class," "race" and "sexual" exploitation. Truth is
not merely difficult to discover; it, in fact, does not exist.
The claim that there are universal truths about man, society
and nature--truths that are valid for all people in all
places at all times--are philosophical tricks used by the
"ruling class" to get the masses to accept their inferior
stations in life and view their oppression and exploitation as
both inevitable and necessary.

Even to think or speak in terms of individuals and individual
rights is considered suspect; any person who does so is either
the victim of or the apologist for the male, capitalist
exploiting class. The rulers wish to deceive us into thinking
about ourselves as "mere individuals" so they can hide from
view the race, sex and class relationships that are the actual
foundations of the existing social order.

The perversity of this view, of course, is that Western
civilization has, in fact, been the most liberating cultural
force in human history. It was ancient Judaism that told
earthly rulers that there is a Higher Law and a Higher
Morality than any man can create; and every man, as a creation
of God, has recourse to that Higher Law and Morality against
the tyranny of worldly rulers. It was Christianity that taught
that every man is unique and precious in the eyes of God; that
no worldly ruler may set himself between the individual and
his relationship to God. Thus, Judaism and Christianity laid
the foundation for our modern principles of individual freedom
of thought and action.

From the ancient Greeks, Western man gained his appreciation
of and confidence in the power of his reason to understand and
master the forces of nature. And from the Romans have come our
tradition of natural law and the rule of law.

It is modern capitalism that has created the moral order of
voluntary and peaceful relationships among men. It is the
market economy that has generated the prosperity and
opportunities that are liberating both the body and spirit of
increasingly larger numbers of human beings of all races and
religions around the globe.

In terms of freedom, prosperity and the promotion of human
dignity, Western civilization wins hands down against every
other civilization in human history. This is precisely why the
proponents of "politically correct thinking" wish to banish
open discourse and cross-cultural ethical and philosophical
comparison. Only by denying that such comparisons are
possible, and only by impugning the motives of those who
oppose them can they win--in other words, a victory through
intellectual sleight of hand.

What about the opponents of "politically correct thinking"?
Their arguments are usually sound and their defense of Western
culture meritorious. But their strategy, in my opinion, is
wrong. They hope to defeat the "cultural leftists" of academia
through appeals to the constitutional right of "freedom of
speech" or through political counterattacks in the university
structure designed to recapture the halls of ivy.

While the ideologues of "politically correct thinking" are not
limited to state-run universities, as Charles Sykes' expose of
Dartmouth College revealingly demonstrates, it is there that
the battle needs to be fought and won.

But the answer is not to capture the state universities for
"the Right." Rather the answer is to defeat the cultural
leftists by denying them the source of their power: the
socialist educational system. State universities dominate
higher education in the United States. And what government
does not control directly, it indirectly controls and
manipulates through the regulations that come with government
grants and scholarships to nominally private schools. (My
employer, Hillsdale College, is practically the only
institution of higher learning in America that takes no
government money in any form and, as a result, is totally
independent of government control.)

Eliminate government-provided and subsidized education, and
these economically privileged and politically protected
islands of philosophical collectivism will be forced to fight
for their financial support in a marketplace of ideas. It
would be a marketplace in which they would have to persuade
the consumers of education that what they have for sale is
actually worth the price of admission. The cultural leftists
would no longer have their ideas subsidized by the general
taxpaying public. They would no longer have a protected corner
of the intellectual market through their special-interest
influence on the socialized educational process.

Parents and students who desired an education inspired and
policed by "politically correct thinking" would be asked to
pay for the opportunity. Those who preferred a traditional
liberal arts education emphasizing the Western heritage would
be asked to do the same.  The entire controversy would be
diffused because it would be depoliticized through the
privatization of education. And in a real marketplace of
ideas, I personally have little doubt about which of the
intellectual alternatives would tend to capture the largest
free-market share.

Professor Ebeling is the Ludwig von Mises Professor of
Economics at Hillsdale College, Hillsdale, Michigan, and also
serves as vice-president of academic affairs for The Future of
Freedom Foundation, P.O. Box 9752, Denver, CO 80209.

From the April 1991 issue of FREEDOM DAILY,
Copyright (c) 1991, The Future of Freedom Foundation,
PO Box 9752, Denver, Colorado 80209, 303-777-3588.
Permission granted to reprint; please give appropriate credit
and send one copy of reprinted material to the Foundation.

Conspiracy / A plutonium economy
« on: February 16, 2017, 07:55:45 pm »
From: [email protected] (Brad Pierce)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,,alt.individualism
Subject: A plutonium economy vs. a free democracy
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 02:08:20 GMT
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department
Lines: 269

[From "The Russian Threat, Its Myths and Realities" (c) 1983,
Gateway Books, London, by Jim Garrison and Pyrae Shivpuri, pp 231-236.]

   The growing erosion of civil liberties in Western Europe and the
United States is closely linked with the nuclear energy-nuclear
weapons complex, which mandates a psyche all its own.  This complex
creates the necessity for secrecy on the one hand and greater
protection of investment on the other.  Not only are there high
financial and environmental risks but also potential ramifications
beyond national boundaries.  Because of the `plutonium culture'
generated by the nuclear complex, the age old dilemma of striking a
balance between state authority and the rights of the individual is
being forced to opt for increasing state control, and diminishing
individual freedom.  The plutonium culture allows for no other
   Each operating nuclear reactor produces between 400 to 600 pounds
of plutonium waste each year.  Less than one millionth of a gram, if
ingested, can cause cancer and/or genetic mutation.  Twenty pounds,
if properly fashioned, can be made into a nuclear bomb.  Because of
this, *the different aspects of the plutonium economy must be as
tightly guarded as nuclear weapons themselves*.  Nuclear weapons are
kept at military facilities generally away from population centres
and specifically under guard in a military system predicated upon
discipline, hierarchy and authoritarian leadership.  Similar
protection for the `atoms for peace' programme will have a
devastating impact upon the democratic freedoms and civil liberties
of the citizens.
   The potential problem with the plutonium economy and its relation
to human freedom has been succinctly expressed by a statement made by
Dr. Bernard Feld, Chairperson of the Atomic and High Energy Physics
Department of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology:

   Let me tell you about a nightmare I have.  The Mayor of
   Boston sends for me for an urgent consultation.  He has
   received a note from a terrorist group telling him that they
   have planted a nuclear bomb somewhere in central Boston.  The
   Mayor has confirmed that 20 pounds of plutonium is missing
   from Government stocks.  He shows me the crude diagram and a
   set of the terrorists outrageous demands.  I know--as one of
   those who participated in the assembly of the first atomic
   bomb--that the device would work.  Not efficiently, but
   nevertheless with devastating effect.  What should I do?
   Surrender to blackmail or risk destroying my home town?[9]

   The dangers are real, so real that government planners in every
country with nuclear programmes have undertaken steps to be prepared
for Dr. Feld's scenario.  In 1975, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) commissioned a specific study of the problem.  One of the
participants, Professor John Barton, Professor of Jurisprudence at
Stanford University Law School, prepared a paper entitled
`Intensified Nuclear Safeguards and Civil Liberties.'  The document
began by stating that:

   Increased public concern with nuclear terrorism, coupled with
   the possibility of greatly increased use of plutonium in
   civilian power reactors, are leading the US Nuclear
   Regulatory Commission (NRC) to consider various forms of
   intensified safeguards against theft or loss of nuclear
   materials and against *sabotage*.  The intensified safeguards
   could include expansion of personnel clearance programs, a
   nationwide guard force, *greater surveillance of dissenting
   political groups,* area searches in the event of a loss of
   materials, and creation of *new barriers of secrecy* around
   parts of the nuclear program.[10]

   It is important to be clear what the above statement implies.  The
governments supporting nuclear power are attempting to protect the
plutonium economy from two perceived enemies:  first, those who would
use the nuclear materials to terrorise the country through some type
of nuclear sabotage;  and second, those who seek to stop nuclear
power, meaning anti-nuclear `dissenting political groups'.  This
requires a nationwide guard force to be created specifically to deal
with any terrorism and the erection of new barriers of secrecy around
the nuclear programmes to keep public knowledge and participation at
a minimum.  Both sets of enemies would be subject to greater
surveillance through electronic listening devices such as phone taps.
   In Britain, for instance, it is accepted as a matter of course
that anyone working for the Atomic Energy Authority be `positively
vetted' before being appointed.  The Official Secrets Act, moreover,
allows the government and the atomic industry to keep the nuclear
installations cloaked in secrecy and the employees forbidden to
communicate anything about their work.  In 1976, Britain also became
the first country to establish by law a nationwide guard force of
constables under the direct control of the atomic authorities in
order to guard nuclear facilities and specifically the plutonium
stores.  This guard force has privileges in relation to carrying
weapons not granted to any other British police unit.  Indeed, so
sensitive are these privileges that under the Official Secrets Act,
information about them has not been made available to the public.
This force is mandated not only to guard against possible terrorism
but to keep tabs on `dissenting political groups.'
   Jonathan Rosenhead, of the London School of Economics, points out
that this type of political control is very easily overlooked by the
general populace because it is specifically designed and intended to
be used as inconspicuously as possible.  In America, political
scientists refer to this technique as the "politics of the iron fist
in the velvet glove."  "What the ruling groups prefer", he says,

   is to produce a situation in which no one dares oppose their
   plans.  Their favourite methods are therefore to exploit
   people's dependence on consumer goods and on their jobs and
   exercising prevention controls by means of intensive
   surveillance.  In the event of open conflict breaking out in
   spite of that, they would hope at least to contain it by
   `limited operations.'[11]

   What needs to be remembered in assessing this state of affairs is
that plutonium, if it is to be used, must be protected by police
state methods.  We just cannot have something that can be used for
nuclear bombs and can damage and mutate human life with the
lethalness of millions of cancer doses per pound floating about in a
free society.  *A plutonium economy and a free democracy are a
contradiction in terms.*  This is a fact that has been recognised by
leading legal experts and politicians alike.  Writing in the "Harvard
Law Review," Russell Ayres states flatly that `plutonium provides the
first rational justification for widespread intelligence gathering
against the civilian population.'[12]  The reason for this is that
the threat of nuclear terrorism justifies such encroachments on civil
liberties for `national security' reasons.  It is inevitable,
therefore, says Ayres, that "plutonium use would create pressures for
infiltration into civic, political, environmental and professional
groups to a far greater extent than previously encountered and with a
greater impact on speech and associated rights".  Sir Brian Flowers,
in Britain, has come to similar conclusions.  At the end of his
environmental impact statement for the plutonium economy in the
United Kingdom, known as the Flowers Report, he made it quite clear
that Britain could not have both plutonium and civil liberties.
Rather, he said, to adopt the plutonium economy would make
`inevitable' the erosion of the freedoms that British people had
fought for over the centuries and have come to assume and accept as
inalienable rights.
   What is happening to Western Europe and the US should not be seen
as an abnormal occurrence;  rather, it should be viewed as the
*logical progression* of what the adoption of the plutonium economy
in any country implies.  There are certain psychological implications
inherent in the use and development of nuclear weapons.  There are
direct physical results on both workers and public alike from the
nuclear fuel cycle.  So, too, the plutonium economy makes inevitable
the erosion of human rights.
   Observers in the Netherlands and West Germany refer to the decline
of the "Rechtsstadt" (meaning a state guided by laws which are both
just and accepted) and the rise of the "Machtstadt," where state
authority is based on power equations.  In the US, it is sometimes
referred to as a `national security state'.  We prefer the term
"totalitarian democracy" to characterise the governments of the US
and Western Europe.  It denotes a governmental system of
parliamentary democracy within which the official bureaucracy, the
police, and the legal authorities are vested with almost total power
over the individual.
   It has been apparent for some time that the drive in the West for
all-out growth, dictated by the need for capital accumulation and
profits, has been creating problems that existing institutions, be
they national or international, are simply not equipped to handle.
These include:

    * the alienation through and ruthlessness of the
      multinational corporations;

    * the frustrations of an economy where automation and
      machinery are replacing human skills and ingenuity;

    * the gnawing fears and anxieties aroused by the `diseases
      of affluence,' notably cancer, heart disease and stress;

    * and the looming threat of environmental destruction, be
      it at the local or planetary level, from chemical
      pollution, or the plutonium economy.

   As long as the boom lasted, and Western affluence was sustained
these pressures could be ignored.  But that `boom-balloon' has burst.
The energy crisis is deepening.  The economic reality of increased
unemployment and inflation is becoming more and more depressing.  The
pressures of burgeoning populations, as also the youth demanding
employment and a piece of the good life, are becoming unbearable.
   In order to survive this `crisis of capitalism', the dominant
forces in industry and government are forcing through a ruthless
restructuring and re-grouping of the economic system.  In Western
Europe this is reflected in the wholesale writing-off of vast sectors
of traditional industry such as steel and textiles and the resultant
social decline of whole areas.  The trend is to form blocs such as
the EEC but this in turn places increased strain on the member states
and does little more than paper over the fundamental problems with
another layer of bureaucracy.  Under this weight, the welfare state
that grew up in the decades after World War II is being dismantled,
to squeeze just a bit more money to spend, as often as not, on more
weapon systems.  In the process, yet another safety net is removed
for the individual who is the victim of the capitalist system.  If it
is any consolation, Marxism hasn't come up with any answers either.
   Those in power know they have no way to solve the problems or meet
the demands of their youth, of the millions of unemployed, of the
anti-nuclear movement, of the populations in economically depressed
areas, of the victims of industrial disasters, or of any other
discontented groups.  The only valid answers are ones which involve
fundamental changes in our thinking and in our system itself, and
these are ones which those in power are not in a position to offer.
So they placate their constituencies with promises which they know
they cannot fulfil.
   This only adds to the frustration of those who can no longer wait.
The next stage after fruitless protest cannot fail to be a challenge
to that part of the system of which the individual has become the
victim.  If this challenge is met with either refusal or with
repression, the frustration of those in protest can lead to violent
action.  Protest by violence against the system which cannot meet
their demands when peacefully presented is labelled by those in power
as `terrorism.'
   Foreseeing this scenario, the reaction of the dominant groups is
to proclaim the necessity to prepare in time to deal effectively with
those who are discontented.  When there are violations that cannot be
put right, then freedom to criticise and, in the end, democracy
itself become hostage to `effective governance.'  It is an axiom of
history that when the people begin to question the right of their
leaders to govern, the leaders question the right of the people to
   The irony of this situation within the conflict of East-West
relations is that although the starting point of their analyses are
different, the conclusions drawn by the Soviet leaders and the
governing groups in the West are the same:  both regard effective
governance as being hindered by a genuine democratic government.  The
result in the East has been the `dictatorship of the proletariat';
in the West, `totalitarian democracy.'
   While it is true that the system of repression in the West is not
as extensive or as brutal as in the East, except in isolated cases,
what is necessary to remember is that the *mentality* of the
oppressor, whether in the Kremlin or in 10 Downing Street or in the
White House, is the same.  What is different are the *mechanisms*
which oppress the people below.  In both cases what is achieved is
the setting up of a *standard of behaviour* which, because there are
no alternatives allowed, becomes the *pattern of behaviour.*  This
creates a dangerous person-into-machine social norm.  In the Soviet
Union this has been done with a ruthlessness that needed only the
unity and discipline of the Party;  in the West mass control has been
achieved by subtle manipulation that needs either public ignorance or
public apathy to be effective.  Social control is justified,
particularly as far as the plutonium economy is concerned, by the
over-riding necessity to avoid the catastrophe which might occur
either through carelessness, disobedience, or `terrorism.' This
cultivated attitude enables the Western technocrats to represent
themselves to the public as the guardians of the society in the
emergency situation they themselves inspired and engineered.
   The tragedy of the Russian people is the suffering of individuals
endowed with a passion for personal freedom so profound as to verge
on the anarchic, and yet who have been forced to live under a
despotism resolutely intent upon the suppression of that freedom.
   The tragedy unfolding in the West is of a people who achieved
liberty at great cost, but who now, faced with the despotism inherent
in the plutonium economy, are abnegating it.  They are rendering
themselves subservient to those few who wish to build a national
security state supplied with nuclear energy and armed with nuclear
weapons.  Our leaders are depriving us of the very liberties they
have been entrusted to defend.  Moreover, they are manipulating the
`Russian threat' to justify such actions, all the while claiming that
they are protecting democracy.  Never before have so few asked so
many for so much for the sake of so little.

 [9] In Robert Jungk, "The Nuclear State," trans. Eric Mosbacher,
     London, 1979, pp. 118, 19.

[10] "Intensified Nuclear Safeguards and Civil Liberties," Nuclear Reg.
     Comm. Cont. No. AT(49-24)-0190, Washington, DC, 31 Oct. 1975, p. 1.

[11] In Jungk, "Nuclear State, op. cit., p. 132.

[12] In Ibid., p. 142

Conspiracy / Budget Mess
« on: February 16, 2017, 07:49:35 pm »

The following discussion of our country's budget crisis was
taken from a Reader's Digest Feb. 91 issue. It was written
by Fred Barnes. It is to be taken very seriously...

               Dirty Secrets Behind the Budget Mess.

During last year's budget crisis, Rep. Harris Fawell
(R.,Ill.) had a helpful idea. Why not slash unnecessary
spending Congress had planned for itself? On the floor of
the House, Fawell proposed an amendment cutting $375,000 for
renovations to the House beauty parlor and $25,000 for a
study on a proposed gym for House staffers.

Fawell was shouted down and labeled a sexist for targeting
the unprofitable, taxpayer-subsidized beauty parlor. House
Democratic leaders arranged a non-recorded vote so no one
could be blamed for killing the amendment.

In a federal budget of nearly $1.4 trillion, the money saved
by Fawell's modest proposal would have been insignificant.
But the episode reflects an enduring truth: despite pious
talk, Congress continues to spend taxpayer's money at a
furious clip, and the executive branch usually goes along
willingly. What's more, they go to extraordinary lengths to
deny it.

When the five-year "deficit reduction" agreement was reached
last fall, officials claimed $42 billion in savings. That's
a sham!!! What they didn't mention-and the press didn't
report-is that actual spending will INCREASE by $111
billion, or $480 for every man, woman & child in the nation.
Worse, the deficit, according to governments own official
figures, will grow larger.

On the very day the deal to curb the deficit was forged,
Congress voted to increase social-welfare spending this year
by $22.6 billion, The five-year deal includes $136 billion
in additional funds for non-defense discretionary programs.
Mandatory outlays for Social Security and Medicare will rise
more than $200 billion.

A culture of spending dominates our national capital. An
"iron triangle" of the unelected-executive branch
bureaucrats, Congressional committee staffers, special
interest lobbyists-aggressively protects each program and
pushes unrelentingly for more. Members of Congress believe
spending helps them get re-elected. With few exceptions,
agency heads appointed by the President regard greater
outlays as a measure of their success.

In four years as Education Secretary, William Bennett
learned this the hard way. At first he loyally defended
President Reagan's proposed cuts. He found himself nearly
alone among Cabinet members. Over the next two years, he was
attacked by educators, reviled by his own bureaucrats and
overruled by Congress. In 1987 Bennett rebelled and insisted
on a boost in spending. "There was no political gain in
ruthless cutting," a Bennett aide says. "You could be a
reformer but not a cutter."

Official Washington has created a myth to justify higher
spending in the 1990s. As Sen. Robert Byrd (D.,W.Va.) puts
it, domestic discretionary spending is the "little runt pig"
on the federal budget that has been on the cutting table for
years. It hasn't. Domestic spending was trimmed in 1982,
then grew rapidly during the next eight years. Outlays for
many programs rose substantially, including education for
the handicapped (50%), National Institute of Health (47%),
National Science Foundation (36%), medical care for veterans
(25%) and Environmental Protection Agency (22%).

The biggest problem on Capital Hill, says Rep. Dick Armey
(R.,Texas), is "the committee mystique." Members from
farming areas angle to get on the Agriculture Committee.
Those from port cities join the Merchant Marine and
Fisheries Committee. Those eager to keep military bases in
their district hope to serve on the Armed Services

There's a tacit rule: to get what you want, you go along
with what other committee members want. And it's taboo to
challenge the programs of another committee. "You don't want
them challenging yours," says Rep. Tim Penny (D., Minn.), a
leader for deficit reduction.

Rep. Vin Weber (R., Minn.) a conservative who believes in
spending reductions, was happy to leave the Budget
Committee, which cuts, and join the Appropriations
Committee, which spends. Weber had discovered Washington's
dirty little secret: cutting is a political minus.

Chairmen of the appropriations subcommittees retaliate when
they're crossed. After Fawell criticized nonessential
spending in an "emergency" appropriations bill last year,
extra funding for a project in his district was deleted.
When Rep. Clay Shaw (R., Fla.) voted against the wishes of
Rep. William Lehman (D., Fla.), a subcommittee chairman,
Lehman scratched $1 million in funding for a tunnel in
Shaw's district.

Budget watchdogs such as Penny and Rep. Bob Walker (R., Pa.)
are treated like pariahs. "A large number of colleagues
wouldn't come to dinner at my home," Penny says. An
Appropriations Committee member once remarked of Walker:
"The only cement that will ever be poured in Walker's
district is that around his feet when we throw him in the

"in a corporation, everything is geared toward minimizing
overhead," says Mark Everson, a Chicago manufacturer who was
a top official in three Washington agencies from 1982 to
1988. "In government, almost nothing is." Like many others,
Everson discovered another of Washington's dirty budget
secrets. Instead of being rewarded, officials who make
economy a top priority can count on being criticized by
Congress, jumped on by lobbyists and undermined by
bureaucrats in their own agencies.

When Charles Heatherly became head of the Small Business
Administration (SBA) in 1986, the agency was facing $345
million in bad loans. Heatherly was hauled before a
Congressional committee-but not for the bad loans. His
transgression was trying to streamline the SBA by
jettisoning failed programs. A phalanx on interest groups-
the National Small Business Association, Small Business
United and the American Association of Minority Enterprise
Small Business Investment Companies-weighed in against him.
To SBA bureaucrats, Heatherly was the enemy. "Not one of
them came to me at SBA and said, 'We're with you on this.
What can we do to help?'" Heatherly says.

Because the big spenders presented a united front and
taxpayers made little noise, the SBA was kept alive and
spared further budget cuts. "The iron triangle worked," says

Sometimes the triangle can be very clever. For fiscal year
1991, the Senate and House would have agreed to a smaller
appropriation for the SBA. The Senate voted to give the
agency $440 million; the House voted $438 million. But the
Senate-House conference did not come up with a compromise
figure you might expect, $439 million. Instead, it pegged
SBA spending at $469.5 million.

This upward compromise is but one trick Washington employs
to create the illusion of spending reduction. Here are seven


Imagine a company president who hopes for a $100,000 pay
increase. Instead he receives a $75,000 hike, and then he
claims a $25,000 pay cut. Crazy? in Washington it's routine.

Rather than use this year's level of spending as the
starting point for next year's budget, an artificial "base
line" is created, the effect of which is automatic spending
increases every year. Then, if proposed outlays are less
than the base line, Washington claims a "cut"-even though
spending actually rises.

That's what is happening now. The base-line budget for the
current fiscal year originally called for spending to rise
$130.8 billion. But because it will go up "only" $111
billion, Congress and the White House insist spending was
cut by $19.8 billion. With a projected revenue increase of
$22.2 billion, they claim a total "savings" of $42 billion.


Last year, Congress "reduced the deficit" $2 billion by
dropping the Postal Service subsidy from the official
budget. The subsidy was still paid, only it was done off-
budget. Off-budget programs include direct loans, loan
guarantees, federal insurance and government enterprises.

Of course, real money is involved whether or not a program
is formally in the budget. In 1989, loan defaults and write-
offs were $14.4 billion and insurances losses $67.2 billion,
all picked up by the taxpayer. The total liability of
taxpayers for off-budget programs is almost $6 TRILLION, or
$67,000 for every U.S. household.


With great fanfare and self-congratulation, legislators
established spending ceilings. Then these limits were
quietly ignored.

The original Gramm-Rudman deficit reduction law of 1985
called for gradually  declining deficits. The first ceiling,
for 1986, was topped by $49.3 billion. In 1987 the law was
changed, and the deficit was supposed to have dwindled to
$100 billion in 1990. It was $220 billion. Now Washington
projects declining deficits in 1993 and 1994. Good Luck...!


In 1983, Congress approved $8 billion to build a space
station. By 1987 the price was $12 billion. Now it's $36
billion. Agriculture Department economists said the 1985
farm bill would cost $54 billion. A month later, after the
bill was passed, the estimate was upped to $85 billion.

"There's a generic pattern ," says Congressional staffer
Frank Gregorsky. "Once the legislation is passed, once the
various clients are mobilized, once the bureaucracy is
engaged, once the contractors start marking up-expenditures
overshoot the promised levels." Spenders get their foot in
the door by underestimating the costs of new programs.


In recent years, emergency appropriation bills have become
vehicles for pork-barrel spending.

Last year President Bush asked for "dire emergency"
appropriation to pay for flood relief in the South and aid
to Panama. Congress tacked on another $1.4 billion-including
$3 million for a convention center in Washington, D.C. $5.8
million for a Franklin Roosevelt memorial and $750,000
toward a ferryboat for American Samoa.


A clever way to increase a discretionary program is to
switch funds into it from an entitlement program, which has
no ceiling and thus requires no new appropriation.

"A classic abuse of transfer authority," note budget experts
John Cogan and Tim Muris, was the shift of food-stamps into
the Agriculture Department's extension service. The
Agriculture Stabilization and Conservation Service (ASCS)
supposedly suffered a cut of $300 million in real spending
between 1981 and 1989. Actually, funds were transferred from
the Commodity Credit Corporation, which pays for farm price
supports. ASCS spending actually ROSE by one third.


Last year alone, Sen. Dale Bumpers (D., Ark.) says an
appropriations committee got 2800 requests from other
Senators to designate funds for projects in their home
states. During the 1990 budget "crisis", Rep. Walker pointed
out ten research projects that were sneaked into the Energy
Department's budget and deserved cutting. One allocated $4.8
million to a technology center at Indiana State University
in the district of Rep. John Myers (R., Ind.). Funds for it
and the other projects Walker cited were overwhelmingly

In Washington, D.C., where there are no farms, $1 million
was appropriated for the Agriculture Extension Service. Also
approved was $500,000 to restore the boyhood home of
bandleader Lawrence Welk in Strasburg, N.D. This expenditure
was sought by Sen. Quentin Burdick (D., N.D.). It prompted
Rep. Silvio Conte (R., Mass.) to say: "That is right-and a
one, and a two, and a three, and a four, and a $500,000.
What will they do for an encore? Earmark funds to renovate
Guy Lombardo's speedboat? Or restore Artie Shaw's wedding
tuxedo?" Despite Conte's ridicule and criticism by President
Bush, the Welk project was not killed.

Even the defense budget is used for earmarking. Tucked into
the 1991 Pentagon budget was $5 million to build a new
parliament building in the Solomon Islands and $10 million
for a National Drug Intelligence Center that federal
official wanted in Washington. Not surprisingly, the drug
intelligence center will be located in the home state of
Rep. John Murtha (D., Pa.), chairman of the House
Appropriations defense subcommittee.

Political scientist James Payne, an expert on government
spending, measured the ratio of those witnesses at
Congressional hearings who testified for spending programs
to those who testified against. His finding: pro-spenders
outnumber opponents by 145 to one. Payne also found that
roughly half the pro-spending witnesses are federal
administrators and another ten percent are state and local
officials. It's only human nature that they'd have kind
words for their own programs and ask for more money.

When will the spending binge cease? Not until taxpayers rise
up. THIS MEANS YOU!!! "Congress is going to go on spending
until the public stops them," laments Walker. "Politicians
respond to special-interest groups," says Penny. "They've
been forgetting there's a general interest group-taxpayers."
It's time for taxpayers to remind them.


 Another file downloaded from:                               NIRVANAnet(tm)

 & the Temple of the Screaming Electron   Jeff Hunter          510-935-5845
 The Salted Slug                          Strange              408-454-9368
 Burn This Flag                           Zardoz               408-363-9766
 realitycheck                             Poindexter Fortran   415-567-7043
 Lies Unlimited                           Mick Freen           415-583-4102
 Tomorrow's 0rder of Magnitude            Finger_Man           415-961-9315
 My Dog Bit Jesus                         Suzanne D'Fault      510-658-8078
 New Dork Sublime                         Demented Pimiento    415-566-0126

   Specializing in conversations, obscure information, high explosives,
        arcane knowledge, political extremism, diverse sexuality,
       insane speculation, and wild rumours. ALL-TEXT BBS SYSTEMS.

  Full access for first-time callers.  We don't want to know who you are,
   where you live, or what your phone number is. We are not Big Brother.

                          "Raw Data for Raw Nerves"


Conspiracy / Masonry's Origin Solved?
« on: February 16, 2017, 07:47:31 pm »


Founding of the Modern Conspiracy to Rule the World

                               Mystery of Masonry's
                                  Origin Solved?

      Long-time readers will recall, probably with considerable
irritation, that we have been promising a definitive article on Francis
Bacon and the founding of the "modern" conspiracy since 1985.  Each time
we thought we were ready to finalize such a report we have discovered more
sources of information that threw the premises of the work up to that
point into doubt.

      In spite of our promise that research was nearing completion in the
Washington DC:  Third and Final Rome?  catalog issued this Summer, a new
hypothesis has again cast doubt on our previous work.  Initially in 1985,
our theory was that the conspiracy was essentially Anglophile at core
beginning with Henry VII (1485-1509) and coming into its own with
Elizabeth I (1558-1603), suffering setbacks under the Catholic or Catholic
leaning Stuarts, but emerging triumphant with William of Orange's
"Glorious Revolution" of 1688 that resulted in the founding of the Bank of
England, Masonry, and the Royal Society under the patronage of the Crown,
thus, setting the stage for true world domination.

      The Crown was seen as gathering otherwise unorganized and powerless
anti-Vatican forces into alliance with it such as Jews and Moslems (esp.
mystics--cabalists & sufis), Gnostic heretics, Templar heretics, etc.
rather than as a product of such anti-Vatican forces.  This allowed the
Crown to strike a pose above the fray while its Jewish and Secret Society
organs did its dirty work and received the blame...a theory the Crown
itself promoted with the unconscious help of the Vatican!

      This theory met nearly 100% disagreement from all points on the
conspiracy research spectrum!  Of course, this was of no concern to us
since we consider the "established" conspiracy theories to be planted by
the conspiracy itself.  However, several books on the "continuity" of
Masonry began to sway our enthusiasm for our thesis.  Pro-Masonic scholar
John J. Robinson in his Born in Blood:  The Lost Secrets of Freemasonry
seemed to make an excellent case that Freemasonry was simply the Knights
Templar "revealing" in 1717 their unbroken existence since the attempted
Vatican suppression of their order in 1307.  Peter Partner's The Murdered
Magicians:  The Templars and Their Myth seemed to second this thesis on a
"power of myth" if not physical continuity basis.  Until now, we futilely
hashed over the pro's and con's with numerous correspondents while the
projected report languished.

      Not until Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh of Holy Blood/Holy Grail
fame came out with their The Temple and the Lodge were we able to return
to our original thesis with good conscience.  Baigent and Leigh were able
to show convincingly how Templarism had survived continuously as Masonry,
originally under the patronage of the heretical Robert Bruce of Scotland,
and later under fragmented, doctrinally questionable, but basically
Vatican aligned, auspices, especially the Stuarts (Jocobites).

      However, Baigent and Leigh also showed clearly that the founding the
Grand Lodge in 1717, far from being a "revealing" of a pre-existing Secret
Society, was an artificial take-over of Masonry by the then Protestant
Crown of Britain based on its military triumph over the pro-Stuart
Scottish Rebellion of 1715.  This was necessary to remove pro-Stuart
(Jacobite) and pro-Vatican elements from Masonry world-wide in preparation
for turning Masonry into Britain's premier covert intelligence service
(See August- September 1985 issue of the Project, page 6--"1717").  The
success of the British Crown in capturing Masonry ineluctably lead to
eventual Vatican repudiation of its previously loyal, if somewhat
heretical, underground intelligence network!



II.  Catalog of Books on the Founding of the Conspiracy

                    A-albionic Research Catalog of 08/06/94

All of the following books are stocked for immediate shipment
though rare and out-of-print items may occasionally require a
30-60 day wait.  We recommend that you inquire regarding availability
before you order.

Check or money order with order please or add $12.00 COD fee.
Please add $3.00 for postage and handling with all order.

This catalog is not copyrighted, but please keep the address
of A-albionic Research attached if you distribute it.

A-albionic Research
PO Box 20273
Ferndale, MI 48220-0273

fax 313-885-1181

e-mail: [email protected] 
Title: Founding of the (anti-Catholic) Conspiracy to Rule the World

Title: Bacon-Masonry
Revealing the Real Meaning of that Mystic Word and the True Name of
that Lost Word with Evidence Showing Francis Bacon to be the Original
Designer of Speculative Freemasonry

Author: Trudhope, George V.
Year: 1954 Pages: 0132 Paperback Price: $12.00 In Print

Reveals Francis Bacon as the founder of Masonry.
Title: Born in Blood
The Lost Secrets of Freemasonry

Author: Robinson, John J.
Year: 1989 Pages: 0376 Hardcover Price: $18.95 In Print

Contents: Pro-Masonic scholar presents a very convincing case that Masonry
descends directly from the persecuted heretics of the Knights Templar. See
Figure 1. for fascinating origin of just one Masonic symbol.  This very
frank books admits role of Masons behind various brutal episodes of "World
Revolution"!  Must reading!
Title: Early Life of Lord Bacon Subtitle: Newly Studied Author: Woodward,
Parker Year: 1902 Pages: 0120 Paperback Price: $35.00 In Print Contents:
Amplifies the case that Francis Bacon was the illegitimate son of Queen
Elizabeth I and author of a vast array of Elizabethan writings, including
Shakespeare by responding to some of the critics.
Title: Francis Bacon Subtitle: The Temper of a Man Author: Bowen,
Catherine Drinker Year: 1963 Pages: 0244 Hardcover Price: $16.50
Rare/Out-of-Print Contents: Standard biography lionizing Bacon as the
founder of modern empirical science
Title: Freemasonry Came to America with Captain John Smith in 1607

Author: Trudhope, George V.
Year: 195? Pages: 0015 Pamphlet Price: $8.00 Reprint

Reveals Francis Bacon as the intellectual founder of America.
Title: Holy Blood/Holy Grail
Do Ancient Parchments Found in France Reveal the Startling Truth? 
Their Discovery has Led to One of the More Controversial Books of the
20th Century--Did Jesus Marry and Father a Child?  Are His Descendants
Alive Today?

Author: Leigh, & Henry Lincoln, Michael Baigent, Richard
Year: 1983 Pages: 0489 Paperback Price: $5.95 In Print

Apparent attempt to seed or transplant the anti-Vatican social power
organism, commonly called the conspiracy, from Britain to Europe. 
Continental re-tread of British Israel as Britain loses central role
to a unified Europe?
Title: Knights Templar

Author: Howarth, Stephen
Year: 1982 Pages: 0319 Hardcover Price: $25.00 In Print

Detailed history of the order.  Includes details and geopolitical
overview too often overlooked by ideologues pro and con.
Title: Messianic Legacy
Startling New Evidence About Jesus Christ and a Secret Society Still
Influential Today!

Author: Leigh and Henry Lincoln, Michael Baigent, Richard
Year: 1986 Pages: 0477 Paperback Price: $4.95 In Print

Follow-up to Holy Blood/Holy Grail
Title: Murdered Magicians
The Templars and their Myth

Author: Partner, Ph.D., Peter
Year: 1987 Pages: 0209 Hardcover Price: $17.95 In Print

Academic scholar examines the history of the Templars and the "Secret
Society Magical Myth" that has grown-up around them since their
suppression in 1307.  Valuable source book for those seeking to
confirm or debunk the Templar theory of the founding of the
Title: Mythology of Secret Societies

Author: Roberts, J. M.
Year: 1972 Pages: 0359 Hardcover Price: $55.00 Rare/Out-of-Print

Are "Secret Societies" pre-mass media propaganda instruments?  Are
their zealous "enemies" the best agents for spreading their "never
secret" message?  Amazingly the writing of this book by a fellow of
Merton College at Oxford was supported by the Rockefeller Foundation!
From the dust jacket blurb:  "...explores hitherto neglected
territory...a specter that haunted European politics in the 18th and
early 19th centuries, the bogy of the revolutionary conspiracy of the
secret societies--above all, of the freemasons.  The book throws a
penetrating light on a murky area of shifting and proliferating
alliances between evanescent and shadowy organizations, and plots the
careers of many of the conspirators who became demon kings of
revolutionary Europe.  But his main concern is with the belief in a
plot, rather than with the plotters themselves, at with the effects of
this belief on political action...the continually expanding myth,
frequently spilling over into pure fantasy, exerted increasing
pressure; it was a sinister fiction, but the effects it was allowed to
produced were all too real." 
Title: New Atlantis

Author: Bacon, Francis
Year:  Pages:  Hardcover Price: $25.00 In Print

Founding document of the Modernist, Judeo-Masonic Anglophile Royalist
conspiracy to rule the World?
Title: Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age

Author: Yates, Dame Francis A.
Year: 1979 Pages: 0217 Paperback Price: $30.00 Rare/Out-of-Print

Establishment scholar clearly describes the founding of the conspiracy
as an occult, pro-Jewish, Protestant, anti-Catholic project of the
British Monarchy.  Identifies the intriguing role of Queen Elizabeth
I's "magician", John Dee, in propounding the first "British Israel"
theory to undergird the fledgling British Imperialism.  Must reading!
Title: Private Life of the Virgin Queen

Author: Beaumont, Comyns
Year: 1947 Pages: 309 Hardcover Price: $75.00 Rare/Out-of-Print

The story of Queen Elizabeth I's double life that resulted in an
illegitimate son Francis Bacon, the real Shakespeare and founder of
the modern conspiracy to rule the world!
Title: Secret Teachings of All Ages

Author: Hall, Manly P.
Year: 1928 Pages: 0241 Softcover Price: $35.00 In Print

This beautiful, over-sized, Diamond Jubilee Edition of Hall's 1928
classic on secret society lore has important (to the Project theory)
chapters on Francis Bacon's identity with Shakespeare, his founding of
the Masonic and Royal Societies, and status as a high ranking member
of the Rosicrucian.
Title: Spear of Destiny
The Occult Power Behind the Spear Which Pierced the Side of
Christ..Did Hitler Make a Pact with the Devil?  In this book you may
find the ultimate explanation of his evil genius and assent to
power..The Occult Power behind the amazing Spear which piercedthe side
of Christ.

Author: Ravenscroft, Trevor
Year: 1973 Pages: 0361 Paperback Price: $25.00 Rare/Out-of-Print

Fascinating history...unfortunately from spiritual reading of the
"Akashic Records" by a student of Rudolf Steiner.
Title: Strange Case of Francis Tidir

Author: Woodward, Parker
Year: 1901 Pages: 0117 Reprint Price: $28.50 Xerox

Classic work on the thesis that Francis Bacon was the illegitimate son
of Queen Elizabeth I.  Did Francis Bacon found the "modernist,
anti-Vatican "the conspiracy" through his writings (including
Shakespeare and Spenser) and joining/leading/organizing the Masons,
Rosicrucian, Royal Society, and British colonies in North America?
Title: Temple and the Lodge

Author: Baigent and Richard Leigh, Michael
Year: 1989 Pages: 0306 Hardcover Price: $22.95 In Print

Important evidence tracing Masonry to the Templars.  Very important
information on the founding of the Grand Lodge in England in 1717
indicating a take-over by the Judeo-Masonic-Protestant British Crown
of a nominally Catholic, marginally heretical underground descending
from the Templars for conversion into a world-wide anti-Vatican
intelligence apparatus.
Title: Thousand-Year Conspiracy
Secret Germany Behind the Mask

Author: Winkler, Paul
Year: 1943 Pages: 381 Hardcover Price: $54.00 Rare/Out-of-Print

As Germany rises again on the world stage, this time perhaps as the
dominant force in a united Europe, this book becomes more and more
important.  With slight adjustments, this book fits perfectly with the
Project theory of Judeo-Masonic-Anglophile vs. Prusso-Vatican
conspiracy theories.  Important information on the ancient Guelph vs.
Ghibelline conflict within the Christendom which eventually coalesced
into the current duality.  Also explores the "2-Germanies" theory: the
one Germany of totalitarian/militarist Prussians and Vatican aligned,
the other Germany of cultured commerce by Merchant Princes of
independent City States and British aligned.  Note:  The second
Germany provided Britain with its Royal Family.
Title: Sword and the Grail
Of the Grail and the Templars and a True Discovery of America

Author: Sinclair, Andrew
Year: 1992 Pages: 245 Hardcover Price: $22.50 In Print

The true discovery of America 100 years before Columbus?  Reveals
secrets of the Grail, the Knights Templar, and the origin of the

Number of Catalog Entries:  20


III.  New Book Refutes Gun Control

Title: Stopping Power
Why 70 Million Americans Own Guns--Winner of the James Madison Award

Author: Schulman, J. Neil
Year: 1994 Pages: 288 Hardcover Price: $22.95 In Print

Very important book on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.  Exhaustive
legal and historical analysis of the 2nd Amendment proves the founders
intended the American people to be armed, period!

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 20