Monday, July 28, 2014

The Psychic Deception - Part II

by Anthony Forwood

The Hidden Keys

During the rapid growth of the spiritualist movement in the latter half of the 19^th century, when séances were becoming very popular and were producing such paranormal physical phenomena as table-rappings, apparitions, levitations, materializations, etc., the acclaimed scientist William Crookes began conducting experiments to assess the existence of a ‘psychic force’ that was apparently causing these phenomena. After performing extensive experiments, he was able to confirm unequivocally that such a force existed that could move objects at a distance. In 1874, he published his findings in a paper titled Researches in the Phenomena of Spiritualism, which made a powerful impression on the intellectual minds of the day and helped to create a climate receptive to the creation of a scientific body for the purpose of formally investigating paranormal phenomena and mediumship. This led to the Society for Psychical Research being established in England in 1882 by a number of eminent scientists and other learned professionals, who set about testing the abilities of many reputed psychics and mediums over the years. Although they were able to document many extraordinary phenomena, from the very start, this scientific body appears to have been used by the powers-that-be to contain the growing spiritualist movement while exploiting it for its own purposes. Throughout this organization’s existence (it still exists today), a number of its members have been intent only on exposing fraudulence or otherwise debunking any phenomena that was legitimately produced by explaining how it might have been faked. This contributed to the decline of interest in physical mediumship.

At the time that the Society for Psychical Research was first established, the association between hypnosis and spiritualistic phenomena was still well recognized, and many of the books and articles being published on either one of these subjects at that time would also include discussion of the other, as though it were impossible to discuss them separately. But at a certain point, this association between the two became ignored and forgotten. At about the same time as this, the more remarkable phenomena associated with mesmerism were suddenly becoming less and less common to the point of becoming virtually nonexistent. The study of hypnosis found its way into the newly developing domain of psychology, while anything of a paranormal nature came to be derided and discredited more and more by the scientific establishment – helped to a large degree by the many charlatans who began to be publicly exposed or debunked by this organization.

But more than all this, the reason for the degradation in the type of phenomena being produced under hypnosis seems to have been directly due to the influences of James Braid, who, by changing the methods of inducing hypnotic trance, changed the whole situation. To paraphrase Hudson J. Thompson:

[A]s soon as it was found that the mesmeric or hypnotic sleep could be induced by causing the subject to gaze upon a bright object held before his eyes, all other methods were practically abandoned. […]

[I]n the old mesmeric method, fixity of gaze and concentration of will on the part of the operator, were considered indispensable to success. It seems clear, then, that it is to this change of methods that one must look for an explanation of the change in results. […]

[W]hen a mesmerist employs the old methods of inducing the subjective state - passes, fixed gazing, and mental concentration - he hypnotizes himself by the same act by which he mesmerizes the subject.

The key requirement for establishing a telepathic connection between the mesmerist and his subject, therefore, was that the mesmerist had to be in a semi-hypnotic state when he induced a trance state in his subject. Braid’s theories and methods essentially removed this important factor, and whether intentional or not, the way that hypnotic techniques changed after Braid made his discoveries in the mid-1800s had a definite negative impact on the ability to elicit the paranormal phenomena associated with hypnosis. The missing key was the semi-hypnotic state of the hypnotist. Thompson explains this in a way that is quite understandable and needs no improvement on:

The far-reaching significance of this fact will be instantly apparent to those who are aware that telepathy is the normal means of communication between two subjective minds, and that it is only between subjective minds that telepathy can be employed. The objective mind has no part or lot in telepathy until the threshold of consciousness is displaced so as to enable the objective mind to take cognizance of the message. It will be understood, therefore, that when the subject is mesmerized, and all his objective senses are in complete abeyance, and the operator with whom he is en rapport is in a partially subjective state, the conditions exist which render possible the exhibition of telepathic powers.

I should point out at this time that this crucial factor explains why psychic performance can appear to be so temperamental, in that the phenomena associated with spiritualists and psychics has often failed to manifest, and often in the most embarrassing moments, particularly during formal testing or in front of a large audience. The reason for this is well understood by psychics today (as well as those professional skeptics who make a name for themselves through their ability to ‘debunk’ these abilities), who recognize that the mere presence of anyone with a skeptical attitude will make it difficult, if not impossible, for them to perform.

This key factor also explains how channeled communications can seem to be coming from the deceased loved one of a person who is present at a séance when they’re not necessarily spirit communications at all. In a séance setting, most or all of the participants are essentially in a semi-hypnotic state during the height of a successful session, and all are in rapport with each other at that time and focused on the same general outcome. A ‘group mind’ is established at this point, and when a ‘spirit’ appears to come through, the medium, being the outlet for that group mind, is actually subconsciously picking up information from the thoughts and memories of the participants. An opposite effect will occur when a skeptic is present. Their doubtful thoughts are picked up on just as easily, and they act as a counter suggestion that interferes with the ability of the medium to operate.

Let’s now look at how the powers-that-be might have exploited these deeper secrets for their own purposes…

The Psychic Infiltration

We saw in Part One that Saint-Yves’ Synarchist ideologies had been adopted by certain secret societies, most notably the Rosicrucians and Theosophists, both of which have since openly promoted the idea that a group of supernatural beings secretly guide the affairs of mankind and communicate telepathically with certain chosen individuals for that purpose. The Freemasons also adopted similar ideologies but have always publicly downplayed the more mystical aspects, although they are still there at the core of their teachings. Of the former two secret societies, we can see that they’ve had a great deal to do with the creation of the New Age movement, promoting a ‘new religion’ and a ‘spiritual science’ that attracted those who weren’t satisfied with traditional belief systems, while Freemasonry has been more focused on attracting those who were more traditional in their beliefs and would have to be more carefully introduced to the deeper teachings. But in all cases, they teach the idea that supernatural beings are at the core of these secret societies, through which they govern the affairs of the human race, and it is through the inner teachings of these secret societies that they offer a means for personal spiritual development towards the lofty state of godhood. This is the lure that draws in the unwary with good intentions as much as it does the unscrupulous with bad.

It is my belief – based on all of the information I have presented so far and the timing of the events being outlined – that when the early mesmerists first began discovering the psychic phenomena associated with their art, those within the highest degrees of these secret societies immediately recognized the value that these talents might offer if they could exploit them for the purpose of directing and controlling certain individuals, and so they set out to locate those among their membership who were both skilled in the mesmeric art and trustworthy to their plans, and put them to the task of finding individuals who showed the qualities of character that were known to make the best trance subjects: individuals who were completely trusting of the mesmerist and his skills, who showed a strong response to the trance state and could produce the desired telepathic phenomena associated with it, and who the mesmerist could therefore telepathically communicate his thoughts to. At this point – if the mesmerist proved successful – the individual would be used as a ‘channel’ to communicate with what would purportedly be those supernatural intelligences that were at the core of the secret society’s esoteric teachings. These mesmerists, along with their mediums, would form private spiritualist groups around themselves, to which would be invited those persons in positions of influence and power who were either already members of the secret society or who would eventually be brought into it, and these spiritualist groups would be used to lead these people to believe that the secret society was truly in touch with the supernatural beings described within their doctrines – the Mahatmas, Ascended Masters, Great White Brotherhood, Secret Chiefs, etc. – and that their members were engaged in a Great Work of millennial proportions that would elevate humanity to a new level of existence, and that they had been specially chosen by these supernatural beings to take part in this endeavor.

In considering how convincing such an encounter with these ‘supernatural beings’ might be, it should be remembered what was quoted from Hudson J. Thompson in Part One regarding the abilities of one so hypnotically entranced:

Place a man of intelligence and cultivation in the hypnotic state, and give him a premise, say in the form of a statement of a general principle of philosophy, and no matter what may have been his opinions in his normal condition, he will unhesitatingly, in obedience to the power of suggestion, assume the correctness of the proposition; and if given an opportunity to discuss the question, will proceed to deduce therefrom the details of a whole system of philosophy. Every conclusion will be so clearly and logically deducible from the major premise, and withal so plausible and consistent, that the listener will almost forget that the premise was assumed.

The most interesting of all is how he had described the results of his experiment:

But the most remarkable of all was the wonderful system of spiritual philosophy evolved. It was so clear, so plausible, and so perfectly consistent with itself and the known laws of Nature that the company sat spell-bound through it all, each one almost persuaded, for the time being, that he was listening to a voice from the other world.

It’s important to understand here that a person who is put into a properly induced trance state is not dependent on just their own memory and imagination, but is able to pick up the thoughts and memories of the hypnotizer, as well as those of anyone else they have developed sympathetic rapport with, which will include to one degree or another all of those people taking part in a channeling group. With the proper suggestions already planted in the mind of the entranced medium, this telepathic connectivity to a group of properly prepared individuals provides all that would be necessary for the medium to access and communicate information of a very complex nature that might otherwise be outside of their own limited knowledge and abilities, and to be able to present that information in a meaningful dialogue with such articulation and eloquence as to seem to come from a greater intelligence than any of those present.

Also remember that a person in such a trance state will often take on a different personality and speak in an entirely different voice, and that this can be induced with a simple suggestion, so that the voice they use in trance can sound like what these supernatural beings might be imagined to sound like. Also remember that this second personality carries with it its own continuous memory that’s completely separate from the medium’s normal memory, so that what is communicated during trance can be progressively built on from one session to the next, slowly developing into an ever more complex and detailed discourse that could easily rank with some of the works of the greatest minds in history.

From this, the reader should be able to conceive how hypnotic trance phenomena could be exploited in order to give the appearance of legitimacy to the idea that supernatural beings were communicating to certain individuals who were dedicated to fulfilling a ‘Great Work’ around which their secret society was established.

There is one more point I should touch on here. This regards the fact that as a hypnotist continues working with his trance subject over a number of sessions, the ability to put them into trance and the subsequent telepathic connectivity becomes progressively stronger to the point that he can soon put his subject into a trance state from a remote distance by thought alone. Similarly, where the same group of people continue to meet and take part in séances or channeling sessions, the ‘group mind’ that is established becomes stronger over time, to the point that these people become telepathically connected in a similar way, whether or not they are ever conscious of the fact.

Of Influencing Machines and Mystic Boxes

Is there any other evidence to be found that these secret societies were dabbling with hypnosis and psychic phenomena as far back as when Mesmer was first becoming popular with his discoveries? Yes…

In the late 1700s, when the psychic phenomena associated with mesmerism was becoming well recognized among experimenters in France, there was already evidence that it was being covertly used by these secret societies for sinister purposes. The story of James Tilly Matthews is a case in point. Matthews was an English spy who ended up in a French prison in 1793. He would later claim that while there, a group of Jacobins (a Masonic offshoot) had implanted a magnetic device in his head, and that they were able to control him remotely from their secret lair through an ‘influencing machine’ that sent out magnetic rays to affect the magnetic device in his head. He even drew up detailed diagrams of the machine – housed in an artfully decorated wooden casing with brass fittings and consisting of a series of levers and knobs that were used to manipulate the magnetic rays – and provided an explanation for how it worked. He claimed that these Jacobins could implant thoughts in his head, inhibit his speech, alter his reasoning abilities, etc. He also claimed that members of this group would materialize in his dreams and interrogate him while he slept. He claimed that there were other groups with similar machines that were being used against various politicians and public figures in Britain, France, Prussia, and elsewhere.

Given what we’ve learned that hypnosis is capable of so far, it’s very possible that Matthews was under its influence and that this group was in telepathic communication with him. However, whether or not a machine or an implanted device was actually involved is another matter. It’s not my intention to argue that this was necessarily the case, since it doesn’t seem to be necessary at all, but nonetheless there is further evidence that came to light one hundred years later that very similar machines were in the possession of the Freemasons.

A number of books from the late 1800s refer to what was described as a portable wireless telephone that was in the possession of each of the members of the Supreme Council of Freemasonry – at a time when wireless (radio) was still unknown. The device was called the ‘Arcula Mystica’ or ‘Mystic Box’, of which there were reportedly only seven in existence – at the Masonic headquarters in Charleston, Borne, Berlin, Washington, Monte Video, Naples and Calcutta. It was described as having a trumpet-shaped mouthpiece and a bell-shaped hearing piece attached by a cord to the main body, similar to early telephones. Seven mounted golden statuettes designated each of the seven directories, which were manipulated in various ways to call the other Masonic headquarters. The existence of these devices was never verified, but perhaps there was actually something to these claims, or at least to the claims that these Masonic leaders were able to communicate over such long distances. Perhaps they were communicating telepathically, and these machines served as a mechanical ‘medium’ of some sort. I will have to leave this to the reader to speculate on for themselves.

One more piece of supporting evidence to all of this has just come to my attention, so I will briefly include it here. In The Hidden Life in Freemasonry, by Charles W. Leadbeater, we find a discussion of the underlying mechanisms involved in a certain Masonic ritual:

Everywhere on the surface of the earth there are great magnetic currents passing both ways between the poles of the earth and the equator, and others coming at right angles to them round the earth. The CoMasonic procession of entry into the Lodge makes use of these currents, forming of the space which we circumambulate a distinct eddy or specially magnetized portion of space.

As the Brn. march round the floor, singing, they should be thinking of the words of the introcessional hymn and canticle, and taking care that the procession is well done and in good order; but in addition they should be deliberately directing their thoughts to the magnetization of the mosaic pavement and the space above it. In ancient Egypt it was considered to be the duty of the R.W.M. to direct the currents and form the eddy in them, so as to magnetize very strongly the floor round which he passed. It is for this purpose that the officers and distinguished visitors pass clear round the Lodge, and even go over some of the ground twice; for they do not go straight to their places on first approaching them as do the E.A.s, the F.C.s and the M.M.s, but continue so as to complete the circumambulation, as described in The Ritual of Universal Co-Masonry (5thEdition).

With us also it is the Master of the Lodge who is responsible for the magnetization of the double square, but the Brn. ought all to help in that work. The object is to charge that space heavily with the highest possible influence, and to erect a wall round it in order that the influence may be kept in place. The part played by the thought-form is much like that of a condenser. It matters not how much steam may be generated, it is useless for work unless it is enclosed and kept under pressure. In this scheme we accumulate and use the force which otherwise would scatter itself freely over the surrounding neighbourhood.

As has been explained in Chapter III, when the floor has thus been set apart and prepared, no one passes across it except the candidates who are taken there for the purpose of initiation and are intentionally submitted to the influence of its magnetism, the Thurifer when he is censing the altar, and the I.P.M. when he goes down from the dais to perform the duty of opening the V.S.L. or of altering the position of the s … and c … as we change from one degree to another. One other exception is made when the S.D. during the ceremony of lighting the candles comes to the altar to receive the sacred fire from the I.P.M. The I.P.M. lights a taper at the sacred fire, and with it kindles the small candle standing in an ornamental brass vessel, which the S.D., as Lucifer, carries to the R.W.M. and the W.W.s.

The floor has now rushing across it magnetic currents or lines of force like the warp and woof of a piece of cloth, and this forms the foundation upon which we build the great thought-form which is one of the objects of our Masonic meeting. In view of the enormous value of the thought-form made on the floor of the Lodge, we can see how important it is that none should disturb or confuse the currents by walking in the wrong direction, or by bringing into the Lodge thoughts of ordinary business - the cares and worries and conflicts of the world of daily life. We go to the Lodge to do a definite piece of work for humanity, and we must devote our entire attention to it during the whole time of the meeting.

The singing of the introcessional canticles is intended to help us to harmonize our minds. The words of the canticles tell us of the basis upon which all edifices are built, T.G.A.O.T.U., who is Himself the foundation and structure of all things, because there is nothing that is not part of Him. Every member, as he goes round in the procession, should be dedicating himself and all his thought and strength to the great work about to be undertaken.

The reader who has followed me this far will see that the above is describing a basic method for establishing group hypnosis during a Masonic ceremony, which incorporates visualization and meditation techniques to lead the participants into a single uniform mental state before their main proceedings begin.

There is still more to come, so stay tuned…

Monday, July 21, 2014

Derrick Robinson - Exposing The Most Harmful Infiltrator Among Us (by BobS)

[I was recently directed to this article by another TI. It reveals evidence of Derrick Robinson's intentions to destroy the credibility of all real TIs and to assure that efforts at exposing the targeting situation will fail. It also shows possible evidence that Derrick Robinson might have been a handler for Aaron Alexis, the recent shooter in Washington.]

Most Harmful Infiltrator – COINTELPROContinuesToday.comExposing The Most Harmful Infiltrator Among UsDerrick Robinson (FFCHS)

Exposing an infiltrator - Part 1: Strategy of Success and Strategy of Failiure

In a message dated 4/11/2011 9:31:30 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
_________@___.com writes:

Can't you just imagine how the "handlers" are enjoying this? "Divide and
conquer" is a common tactic. J Edgar Hoover used that very tactic in the
COINTELPRO project. Don't play into their hands. We are all tortured for no
reason. Let's support each other and band together. As a unified group we'll
be more effective.

Response by Bob S:

______, no one wants a united TI community more than I do, but I want the
community to be united in carrying out a legal strategy that can achieve a
solution. Derrick wants a community that is united in carrying out his
strategies of failure. Which do you want?

As a lawyer, it has been my profession to explain to clients how to follow a
strategy of success and how to avoid a strategy of failure. Do you think that
I should not use my legal skills by telling TI's how they can succeed in
ending their torture? Do you think I should not tell them that Derrick has
been leading them for five years to follow strategies that are intended to
fail and which are certain to fail?

As a lawyer, I know what you do not know about the difference between a
strategy that is designed to succeed and a strategy that is designed to fail.
Do you think that I should not share my knowledge with you and with all the
other TI's who are in desperate need of finding and following the best
possible legal strategy to give them the best possible chance of achieving a
solution?

Do you think that I should stand aside and let you and other TI's be
continually deceived and defeated by an infiltrator who has proved over and
over for five years that his mission is to keep defeating you and to keep
preventing you from ever achieving a solution?

You obviously don't understand that this is what Derrick has been doing
deliberately and intentionally for the past five years. If you understood what
he was doing, you would be applauding my effort in trying to turn the
community away from Derrick's strategies of certain failure and toward the
best possible strategy for achieving success.

If you want to have a solution that can end your torture, it is your
responsibility, _____, to read my legal explanations carefully enough so that
you fully understand the difference between Derrick's strategies of certain
failure and my strategy for achieving your objective. I've explained this many
times before, but you and other TI's have not been paying enough attention to
understand what makes the difference between a winning strategy and a losing
strategy.

In future emails, I'm going to explain it to you once again. This time you'd
better pay close attention because your choice between a strategy that can
succeed and a strategy that is certain to fail is the most important choice
you will ever make. The rest of your life depends on it.

Bob S

Exposing an infiltrator - Part 2: Responsibility of Directors

In a message dated 4/12/2011 9:33:55 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
_________@___.com writes:

Bob, You do not address me directly in your emails to selected targets, as
you doubtlessly know that I am a member of the board of directors of FFCHS.

Response by BobS:

Hello ________,

I have not heard of you before, but Derrick has been on my mailing list
throughout the past five years. He has heard me explain a great many times how
to follow a legal strategy that can succeed. He has also heard me explain why
each of his strategies is certain to fail. As you should know, Derrick has
been 100% consistent in choosing strategies that he knew would fail.

Some of the Directors were on my list, but they asked to be removed. They
didn't want to know why Derrick's strategies were certain to fail. They didn't
want to consider following the best strategy that a lawyer could devise to
bring an end to TI torture.

If the Directors wanted carry out their purported objective of ending the
torture, why would they refuse to listen to the clear legal explanations that
I have repeated over and over as to what they must do to obtain evidence to
prove specific responsibility for specific harm so that they can then go to
court and win?

It is the legal responsibility of the Directors to set the policies that the
President will carry out. It is the legal responsibility of the Directors to
establish policies that will fulfill the purposes of the organization. It is
also the legal responsibility of the Directors to see that the President
carries out policies that are designed to achieve the purpose of the
organization.

Most of the FFCHS Directors have drastically and flagrantly violated their
legal responsibilities. Instead of setting policies that would serve to carry
out the purposes of the organization, they have permitted Derrick to set
policies that directly violated the purposes of the organization. They have
rubber stamped all of Derrick's destructive policies.

My question to you, _______, is: where is your sense of responsibility as a
Director of FFCHS? Don't you have any care or concern about meeting your legal
responsibilities? Don't you care about the personal liability that you are
incurring by violating your responsibilities? Your current email shows that
you do not. Neither you nor any of the other current Directors have ever made
any attempt to meet your legal responsibilities as Directors of a non-profit
corporation. The few Directors who wanted to meet their legal responsibilities
were forced to resign in protest against the violations of those
responsibilities by the President and the other Directors who approved the
President's constant violations.

You are violating your responsibility now,________. You are acting directly
contrary to your responsibilities by supporting and by defending Derrick's
five-year record of intentional failure to meet his responsibilities as
President of FFCHS.

The questions that I am asking you must ultimately be answered by you and by
every other FFCHS Director. The longer you continue to violate your
responsibilities, the worse harm you will be doing to the TI's that you
pretend to be serving and the greater your personal liability will be to those
TI's for working to defeat them while taking there money to use in working to
benefit them. I thus urge you and all Directors of FFCHS to start meeting for
the first time the legal responsibilities that you have been so clearly and
openly violating up to now.

You can try claiming ignorance as an excuse for failing to meet your
responsibilities in the past, but you can't keep claiming ignorance when I am
now putting Derrick's five year record of proven subversion directly before
you and demanding that you meet your responsibility as Directors by removing
this infiltrator from office.

If you refuse to meet your responsibilities as Directors and if you and the
Board continue to condone and to cover up Derrick's five year record of
intentional failure, then you are proving that the Board is as corrupt as the
President. You will each be held personally liable to all the TI's who have
been deceived into contributing money which the Directors have authorized
Derrick to use in for purposes which were directly the opposite of the
purposes for which the money was contributed.

The longer that you and the other Directors continue to violate your legal
responsibilities, the more harm you will be doing to the TI community and to
yourselves!

Exposing an Infiltrator - Part 3: Demand for Retraction

Derrick, In your Newsletter of a week ago, you said this about me and my
associates at www.CointelproToday.org:

Finally, there are tons of other myths, lies, convoluted, and sometimes
insane tales being told by this group to newcomers hoping to steer all of
you from FFCHS.

Bob S' Response:

You're not going to get away with such vague lies about us, Derrick. Tell me
specifically what you are describing as “Myths, lies, convoluted, and
sometimes insane tales” so that I can reply to your charges.

Well, I've waited 6 days, and I haven't heard any attempt from you to explain
or support your vague but serious charges against us. So I'm demanding that in
your Newsletter today you give specific details of what you claim to be “tons
of other myths, lies, convoluted, and sometimes insane tales being told by
this group to newcomers hoping to steer all of you from FFCHS.”

We both know that you can't do this. You know that if you deny the truth of
anything we've said about you, I can very thoroughly prove the truth, but go
ahead and try to tell me about the tons of myths, lies and insane tales that
you accuse us of telling about you. I'll be more than happy to prove the truth
of anything that we have said.

You say that we are telling lies “to newcomers hoping to steer all of them
from FFCHS”? No, we only need to tell them the truth to achieve that result.

Are we trying to steer newcomers away from FFCHS? Of course we are, but not
just newcomers. We are also trying to make experienced TI's understand the
dire necessity of breaking free of FFCHS as the only means of saving their
lives. As long as they keep trusting in you, they are doomed to eternal
DEW-COINTELPRO torture.

You know that you have operated FFCHS throughout its existence as an Anti-TI
Activist organization. How could it be anything else when it is controlled by
a thoroughly proven COINTELPRO infiltrator and a Board of Directors who are so
irresponsible that they automatically approve every one of your ridiculous
strategies of certain failure?

Don't bother to deny it, Derrick? The jig is up! Your five year record proves
the truth about you beyond any possible question or doubt.

(Derrick) You also said in your Newsletter a week ago:
I cannot say for certainty that Bob and his group are government operatives,
however, if there are such operatives among us, I believe they must be
working with that group to lead them to say and do the things that they are.

In my response, I said:

Derrick has no evidence whatsoever to support his false charges. That's why he
can't say any such thing “for certainty.”

But I have five years of documented evidence to fully support the charge that
I am now making against Derrick. I CAN say for certain that Derrick is a
COINTELPRO infiltrator.

I would not make this charge if I did not have very strong evidence to prove
it.

I've waited 6 days for you to produce some evidence to support your charge
against me or against anyone working with me. I know that you have no such
evidence, but I'm asking you again today, April 16, 2011, to produce in
today's FFCHS Newsletter any evidence that you claim to have to support your
accusation against me or against anyone working with me.

I will refute any evidence that you purport to offer. I know that you have no
evidence, but I don't expect you to have enough integrity to retract your lies
about us. There is no such thing as a COINTELPRO infiltrator with integrity.

Making false charges with no evidence behind them is the essence of
McCarthyism. Refusing to give evidence while refusing to retract your lies
about us puts you in the same category as Senator McCarthy. It proves how
morally corrupt you are. What else can we expect from a COINTELPRO
infiltrator?

So you have these three choices:

Trying in vain to support lies that you know you can't support.

Publishing a full retraction in your Newsletter.

Proving yourself to be as morally corrupt as Senator Joseph McCarthy by
doing neither of the above.

Tell me which of these three alternatives you prefer, Derrick, and we'll take
it from there.

Exposing an Infiltrator - Part 4: The Strange TI Mystery

In a message dated 4/16/2011 11:02:55 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
_________@___.com writes:

Bob you worry too doggone much about what Derrick says.

BobS Responds:

How long have you been on my mailing list? Years, I think, but somehow you are
still missing the point of all that I've been saying for those years and all
that I'm saying now.

I don't worry about what Derrick says about me. I couldn't care less about
anything he says about me if he were not doing such extremely serious damage
to you and to all other TI's by persuading you to follow his losing strategies
instead of following the only winning strategy. It is this intentional harm to
TI's that outrages me.

When he uses lies to get you to follow his bad strategies instead of my good
strategy, I refute the lies, but it doesn't seem to matter to you that he was
lying. You are still supporting him.

If you could see what I see, you would be as outraged as I am, but you don't
understand anything that I've explained. That puzzles me. Why are you closing
your eyes to truth that is so very obvious? Why do so many other TI's do the
same?

If you're able to get some results for us, your actions will speak far louder
than anything Derrick says about you.

This comment shows a total misunderstanding of everything I've said for eight
years. Don't you know that if I could work by myself to end your torture,
that's what I would have been doing for all those years instead of writing
emails to TI's?

I have been writing emails for those eight years explaining over and over what
TI's must do to make it possible for an attorney to achieve a solution for
them. There isn't any attorney in the world who can help you unless and until
you do the necessary work to help yourselves.

For what it's worth, I believe in you and bless you for your efforts, but I
think Derrick is making a little headway too.

How can you say that you believe in and bless my efforts when for years you
have ignored all my efforts to persuade you to do what you need to do to end
the DEW-COINTELPRO torture? Do you even know what my strategy is? I doubt it.

You are badly mistaken in thinking that Derrick has made any headway. He has
maliciously wasted five years of your time and all the money that he could
squeeze out of TI's in that time. He has only harmed you. His intent to harm
you instead of help you is unquestionably clear from his five year record.

Do you realize how strange it is that TI's have been getting eight years of
free legal advice on how they can end their misery, but they have never
followed the legal advice? They have instead spent the eight years following
ridiculous strategies from non-lawyers.

It doesn't do any good for the lawyer to explain why these strategies are
certain to fail. It doesn't do any good for him to keep explaining how to
follow a strategy that can succeed. TI's are determined to keep following
losing strategies for eight years in spite of all the legal advice to do
otherwise. No matter how many times they fail, they never give up hope that
the non-lawyer can solve their extremely serious problems. They never try
following the strategy recommended to them by a lawyer.

This makes as much sense as trusting a snake oil salesman to cure cancer.. If
the cancer keeps getting worse, do you keep buying more bottles of snake oil
or do you turn to an oncologist who has the medical skill to give you the best
chance of survival? The unbelievable, inexplicable TI choice has been to keep
buying more bottles of snake oil.

There is nothing like this self-destructive behavior outside the TI community.
Except at places like Jonestown and Waco. Is FFCHS an on-line cult?

How else can anyone explain this incredibly strange TI behavior? I truly would
appreciate an explanation from anyone who can understand it. I am quite
baffled by it.

Don't you find anything strange about this, Arielle? If it somehow makes sense
to you, would you please explain it to me?

Exposing an Infiltrator - Part 5: Derrick's Monstrous Lies

In a message dated 4/17/2011 4:40:53 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
_________@___.com writes:

Finally, you could have come to us with your "winning strategy" like most
people with suggestions, like people did last night. But not once did you do
that...We might have been able to work with your plan, but whatever ideas
you had got lost in all the uproar.

On April 17, Derrick sent out the above outrageous lie as his excuse for not
following an attorney's recommendation of the only strategy that could succeed
in bringing an end to DEW-COINTELPRO torture. He claimed that I had never
explained my strategy to him.

Derrick was lying! He knew that I had explained my strategy to him when I
first met him in 2006. He knows that I kept repeating this explanation over
and over throughout the years that followed.

Derrick always knew what my strategy was, and he always rejected my strategy
without giving any explanation. He always led TI's to follow strategies of his
own, which he knew would fail. He knew that they would fail because I kept
explaining to him why they would fail.

My profession is advising clients on the difference between strategies of
failure and strategies of success. Derrick's profession is to always follow
the strategies of failure.

Derrick made a fatal mistake by claiming on April 17 that the reason he never
considered my strategy was that I never told him what it was. Not once, says
Derrick, did I ever come to him to recommend my winning strategy. If I had
done so, he might have worked with me.

What a monstrous lie! I cannot count the number of times that I explained to
Derrick in the past five years why my strategy could succeed and why each of
his strategies was certain to fail.

Did Derrick hope that I do not have the documentation to disprove his lie?
That was a foolish gamble. I do have the documentation. This was a lie that
Derrick could not lie his way out of.

I started assembling documentation to prove how thoroughly and how frequently
I had explained my strategy to Derrick, but on April 20, I received an email
in which Derrick disproved his own lie!

In a message dated 4/20/2011 11:02:59 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
__________@___.com writes:

Apparently, we were not the first to ignore his advice. When Bob first came
to us, he stated that people wouldn't listen to him, even though he was an
attorney. I thought well we'd listen. I did and found that his strategies
were often not sound on several topics. After a while I realized why people
weren't listening to him.

There you have it. Derrick now admits that I told him my strategy after he had
claimed three days earlier that I had never told him what it was. He has
replaced one monstrous lie with another monstrous lie. Now he is claiming that
he rejected my strategy because it was “not sound.”

Derrick has never given me any rational reason for rejecting my strategy.
Sometimes he has twisted and distorted my strategy to transform it into
nonsense. Then he can disagree with the nonsense that he has created, but
Derrick has never offered any reason for disagreeing with the strategy that I
have explained to him so many times. He can't do so now. Ask him to tell you
why my strategy is “not sound.” I guarantee you that he can't give you any
rational reason.

What incredible arrogance for Derrick, who knows nothing about law, to tell an
experienced lawyer that his legal strategy is "not sound:"! Derrick's idea of
a good legal strategy was to spend two years and $27,000 preparing to go to
court without having any evidence to prove responsibility for harm. Now he is
telling you that it was "not sound" for me to tell him and his attorney how to
get the evidence needed to make successful litigation possible.

Getting this evidence is what my strategy is all about. When we have the
evidence to prove responsibility for harm, it won't be necessary to pay an
attorney to go to court for us. Attorneys will be chasing after us begging to
let them represent us on a contingency.

I can't imagine a worse strategy than what Derrick pretended to believe was a
good strategy. But he is saying now that my strategy of forcing a
congressional investigation in order to obtain the evidence to make successful
litigation possible was “not sound.”

My strategy could have turned Derrick's bad strategy into a good strategy, but
Derrick didn't want you to have a good a strategy. He wanted you to waste your
time and money on his bad strategy.

My view is the direct opposite of Derrick's. I say that a good strategy is to
get the evidence we need before we go to court. Derrick says that a good
strategy is to prepare to go court without the evidence needed to win. Derrick
tells you how to lose. I tell you how you can win. That's the difference
between the way a legitimate TI thinks and the way an infiltrator thinks.

Derrick didn't like my strategy because he knew that it could succeed. To
Derrick, a good strategy is one that he knows will fail. A bad strategy is one
that can succeed. Derrick has always worked to achieve failure because for
him, failure is success, and success would be failure. By an infiltrator's
standards, Derrick has been highly successful in always achieving failure.

If you aren't convinced yet of Derrick's true motives, try asking him these
question:

Why did he tell you on April 17 that he didn't follow my strategy because I
never told him what it was?

Why did he reverse himself on April 20 when he told you that he listened to
my strategy but rejected it?

Why did he decide that my strategy was "not sound"?

If he thinks it is "not sound" to follow my strategy for obtaining evidence
of responsibility before going to court, does he think it is more sound to
follow his strategy of preparing for two years to go to court without
evidence?

Tell me what Derrick says, and I'll Tell you how he is lying to you. There's
no way that Derrick can answer these questions without lying, and there's no
way that he can tell lies that will be believable.

Derrick, the jig is up! You are exposed as an infiltrator! Legitimate TI's
will never give you another dollar for you to use in working against them!

Exposing an Infiltrator - Part 6: Repealing a Protective Law

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Good and bad legal strategies for achieving a TI solution
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 21:33:11 -0700
From: Bob S
To: tedgunderson1, Gordon ormand, dcr618, "Jim McCue"

To the lobbying team:

I am the only experienced attorney who is also an experienced TI. I have been
trying for years, without success, to persuade TI activists to follow
effective legal strategies instead of ineffective or harmful strategies.

The difference between good and bad legal strategies is what makes the
difference between success and failure in any difficult project. Nothing could
be more difficult than attempting to achieve a legal solution to TI problems.

Using the best possible legal strategies will not guarantee success for TI's,
but using invalid, ineffective, or harmful legal strategies will guarantee
failure. It is thus of the most extreme importance for activists to follow
valid and effective legal strategies and to avoid invalid, ineffective or
harmful strategies. We will then have a fighting chance. Using bad legal
strategies gives us no chance at all.

Dedicated activists, with the best of intentions, do not have the legal
knowledge and experience to judge what strategies are valid or invalid;
effective or ineffective: beneficial or harmful. This is not a criticism of
our activists. It takes three years of law school and a good amount of
experience in the practice of law before a lawyer reaches the point of being
well qualified to devise and recommend to clients the best legal strategies
for achieving their objectives. The average person, undertaking a difficult
legal project by using his own judgment is certain to make legal blunders.

TI activists have not recognized the need for obtaining and following sound
legal advice on the best legal strategies. They have made bad legal choices
and have wasted a great amount of effort and capability on strategies that are
doomed to failure. The same effort and capability applied to good legal
strategies might have produced real achievement by now.

You provide a current example. If you had asked me, I could have recommended
legislative proposals which would be most effective in benefiting TI's. I did
not know what you were doing until I came across Derrick's website and read
that you were going to ask for repeal of federal laws that supposedly
authorize electronic tests on involuntary subjects. I then wrote to Gordon,
Derrick, and Ted on June 13:

I assure you that there are no laws authorizing such experiments on
involuntary subjects. The government criminals who do these experiments are
violating laws and the Constitution. They are not acting under authorization
of any law.

Do you have a written legislative proposal that I may see? It is very late to
suggest changes, but in case there is a major error of the kind that Derrick's
words suggest, you need to know about it before it is too late.

In the legislative proposal, which you sent to me after the lobbying was over,
you say that you are asking for repeal of Sec. (a) and (b) of 50 U.S.C. 32,
Sec. 1520a. You can't get repeal of part of a law and leave the rest of the
law standing senselessly by itself. Repealing Sec. (a) and (b) would require
repealing all of 50 U.S.C. 32, Sec. 1520a.

This is a protective law that we don't want repealed! It is the only federal
law that specifically prohibits tests on involuntary subjects. Asking for
repeal of this protective law is a major error in legal strategy.

The harm is not that you will get the law repealed. The harm is that it makes
TIs seem paranoid and crazy when they ask for repeal of a protective and
beneficial law. It gives our enemies good grounds to argue that if we find
false, negative meaning in a protective law that prohibits experiments on
involuntary subjects, we must also be finding false, negative meanings in all
the facts and experiences that we need to prove.

You say that people without a legal background could interpret this law as
making it “legal to experiment or test chemical agents, biological agents, or
electronic equipment on a civilian population.” This is like saying that a law
which permits driving 65 miles per hour on the freeway should be repealed
because someone without a legal background might misinterpret it as making it
legal to drive 65 miles per hour in a school zone. You don't want to repeal a
good law because of a fear that someone might make an absurd and irrational
misinterpretation of it.

If a beneficial law is unclear and open to misinterpretation, you should ask
to have it clarified, not repealed. There is no need for clarification of 50
U.S.C. 32, Sec. 1520a. It is not at all ambiguous nor is it open to
misinterpretation. It is as clear as any law can be in prohibiting tests on
involuntary subjects. This is a good law that we need to have expanded, not
repealed!

In your legislative proposal, you quote only Sec. (a) and (b) of this law. You
omit Sec (c). Any law can be misinterpreted by someone who reads only part of
it. This is not an excuse or justification for violating what the full law
says. Everyone is held responsible for knowing the full law. Ignorance of the
law is not an excuse.

Sec. (a) and (b) authorize certain forms of chemical and biological tests (but
not electronic tests). Sec. (c) requires advance, informed consent by all
subjects of the tests which are authorized in Sec. (a) and (b). The law thus
prohibits the specified tests on involuntary subjects.

Here are the three sections of the law together:

(a) Prohibited activities The Secretary of Defense may not conduct (directly
or by contract)â€” (1)any test or experiment involving the use of a chemical
agent or biological agent on a civilian population; or (2)any other testing of
a chemical agent or biological agent on human subjects.

(b) Exceptions Subject to subsections (c), (d), and (e) of this section, the
prohibition in subsection (a) of this section does not apply to a test or
experiment carried out for any of the following purposes: (1)Any peaceful
purpose that is related to a medical, therapeutic, pharmaceutical,
agricultural, industrial, or research activity. (2)Any purpose that is
directly related to protection against toxic chemicals or biological weapons
and agents. (3)Any law enforcement purpose, including any purpose related to
riot control.

(c) Informed consent required The Secretary of Defense may conduct a test or
experiment described in subsection (b) of this section only if informed
consent to the testing was obtained from each human subject in advance of the
testing on that subject. (Emphasis added.) This law applies only to the Dept.
of Defense. Sec. (a) prohibits DOD from conducting chemical or biological
testing on humans except for the three limited purposes specified in Sec. (b).
Sec. (c) permits DOD tests for the three limited purposes in Sec (b) only if
advance, informed consent is obtained from each subject of the tests.

Any lawyer or non-lawyer who reads the full law can see that:

It applies only to tests involving use of a chemical or biological agent.

It contains no authorization for electronic tests under any circumstances.

It gives no authorization for tests by any agency or organization other than
the Department of Defense.

It limits tests by the Department of Defense to the three specific purposes
in Sec. (b).

It permits tests for those three purposes only if informed consent to the
tests is obtained from subjects of the tests in advance of the testing.

In a single sentence: This law prohibits chemical or biological tests on human
subjects without obtaining advance, informed consent from each subject. There
is no possible justification or excuse for anyone to interpret this law as
authorizing tests on involuntary subjects.

Instead of asking for repeal of this law, you should be asking for expansion
of its coverage in these ways:

Include electronic tests as well as biological and chemical tests.

Make the requirement of advance, informed consent applicable to experiments
by all local or federal government entities and all private organizations
and individuals.

Add criminal penalties for violations.

With this expanded coverage, you will have the equivalent of the Glen
legislation. The Glen bill also permits experiments with advance, informed
consent. We can't prohibit all experiments nor do we need to. We only need to
prohibit experiments conducted without obtaining advance, informed consent.

I recommend seeking expansion of this law as a better strategy than seeking
enactment of the Glen bill because you have a much better chance of obtaining
legislation to expand coverage of an existing law than you have of
resurrecting and enacting a legislative package that was previously defeated.

The other law you cite applies only to electronic surveillance devices. You
can't get repeal of a law authorizing the testing of such devices. It would be
of no benefit to us if you could do so. Asking for repeal of this law confuses
the issue and wastes limited bargaining power on an impossible and useless
request.

The first rule of good lobbying is to ask for things that are feasible to
obtain and which will be most beneficial for your purpose. Repeal of the
surveillance law is impossible and would not be at all beneficial to us.

Seeking expansion of the protection in 50 U.S.C. 32, Sec. 1520a, is desirable,
but it is not the most important thing that we need to do. This alone will not
give us a realistic remedy. It fails to address our real problem.

Laws do not give us protection. Only enforcement of laws gives us protection.
Unenforced and unenforceable laws are of no benefit to us.

A common misconception among TIs is that if we get a law prohibiting misuse
of DEWs, this will put an end to the harm we suffer. This would be true if
criminals obeyed laws, but if they obeyed laws, we wouldn't need a new law. We
would have adequate protection under existing state laws; federal regulations;
and the U.S. Constitution.

State laws prohibit inflicting physical harm on any person. Federal
regulations prohibit federal agencies from conducting experiments on human
subjects without obtaining advance, informed consent. The Constitution
prohibits cruel and unusual punishment by the federal government and prohibits
it from imposing any form of punishment without due process of law.

How much more theoretical protection do we need? If you can obtain either
enactment of the Glen bill or the equivalent result by expanding coverage of
50 U.S.C. 32, Sec. 1520a, you will still have only unreal, theoretical, legal
protection for TIs. You will have added another law to the list of laws that
perp criminals are now violating. This will change nothing.

Since criminals don't obey the law or the Constitution, we can't solve our
problems by obtaining enactment of a new law or a dozen new laws prohibiting
acts that are already prohibited. Our most fundamental need is not for new
prohibitions but for an adequate and realistic means of enforcing our right to
protection under existing law.

If you and other TIs want to lobby for legislation that would enable TIs to
obtain a realistic means of enforcing our right to protection under existing
law or under any new law that you may be able to obtain, I can explain the
legislation that is needed to achieve this objective.

I can also explain what must be done to produce the possibility of obtaining
enactment of legislation that we need. Ordinary lobbying won't accomplish
anything. Much more is necessary.

I received the email about your new legislative proposals after writing the
above.

You have added additional proposals that won't benefit TIs. It's a shotgun
approach with none of the shots hitting the mark. Remedies based on false
answers or theories are a distraction and a waste of your effort and
bargaining power. With your present approach, congress might, at most, throw
you a bone in the form of a useless remedy. You should put all your muscle
behind real remedies and discard useless remedies.

Where do you think the harm is coming from? We have the knowledge and evidence
to answer this question and to prove the truth of the answer. The question
must be answered, and to be effective, a remedy must be based on the answer.
To get the remedy, we must prove the truth. We have available the evidence
that can prove this truth.

More later. Please forward this to other members of your team and to all
others who may be interested. If we can agree on legal strategies and
objectives, we will need much more help to do the work necessary to have hope
of achieving the objectives.

Exposing an Infiltrator - Part 7: World Day Debacle

Download World Day document.
World Day.pdf

Dear Derrick,

As coordinator of the International Coalition and World Day to End the Silent
Holocaust, I thank you again for sponsoring the first World Day
teleconference. It is important now to discuss and clarify some issues of
great importance to our global movement.

I have been working with international and national leaders committed to our
freedom and to developing the coalition on the most solid ground. Our second
Annual World Day to End the Silent Holocaust, 2007, is developing well with
new organizations, nations, and their victim leaders joining the coalition by
committing to participate in World Day 2007, each in their unique way.

Regrettably, because of FFCHS's public actions, contrary to what you and I had
verbally agreed on, Derrick, there is confusion among the TI community about
your organization's role within the international structure. FFCHS appears to
be attempting to take over and change the direction of the International
Coalition. There is very grave concern about actions by FFCHS which seem to be
directly contrary to the interests of all TIs.

The last thing TIs need is more chaos or ill feelings in their lives and more
disruption of their work. To avoid further damage to all TI's, I feel that it
is my responsibility to put these questions to you directly and ask you for
answers and explanations that may help to alleviate the deep concern that now
exists.

Earlier this year, I contacted various people about my plans to develop an
international coalition that would coordinate World Day each year and
strengthen the TI movement globally. You agreed that FFCHS would sponsor one
aspect of World Day: a teleconference.

Your sponsorship of the World Day teleconference for 2006 did not give you a
right to control or define or alter the purpose of World Day, but this is what
you proceeded to do. FFCHS began an attempt to take over World Day as its own
project and excluding me from planning. You suggested that I work directly
with your public relations person so that advertising would be correct, but
even my input for publicity was ignored.

FFCHS participants were told about World Day as if it were a creation of your
group. They were not told that World Day was the project of the International
Coalition and that FFCHS was a participating member of the International
Coalition. I was not included in or informed of this planning until Julianne
suggested that my name be added to mailings on this subject.

I learned only recently about a FFCHS telephone conference, which you held on
September 30, at which time your group discussed and decided upon your name
for the International Coalition, which I had founded and over which FFCHS had
no right to assert any such control.

Instead of working with me within the International Coalition for the purpose
of advancing the interests of TI's worldwide, FFCHS was attempting to take
control of the Coalition and of World Day, and it was trying to exercise
control in ways that were harmful to all TIs. I cannot permit this to
continue.

Let me review the ways in which FFCHS has been acting contrary to the
interests of the TIs that it is supposed to represent:

In early September, Aaron announced to persons active in FFCHS an advance
press release for World Day. Bob S protested strongly to the content of this
press release because it falsely attributed all the harm that we suffer to a
vast number of independent, local stalking groups instead of to government.
Examples of the FFCHS imaginary local stalking groups and their targets were:
“Whistleblowers targeted by corporations; activists targeted by opposing
groups; defendants targeted by plaintiffs; plaintiffs targeted by defendants;
children targeted by pedophiles; homosexuals targeted by religious groups.”

The FFCHS press release seemed to be designed to make our true experiences
seem like impossible paranoid delusions.

You rejected Bob's opinion, saying that the press release had been approved by
your core committee of members. You did not send me a copy of the press
release, but I later read Bob's objections to it, and I fully concur with
them. I would have so stated at the time if you had asked for my opinion.

Because of protests by other TI's who learned about your damaging press
release, you later relented and offered Bob an opportunity to edit the press
release to explain why persons who are knowledgeable about this subject place
responsibility for our persecution upon central governments. Bob wrote this
explanation into the press release and submitted it. A few days later, your
inner circle announced a final version of the press release with everything
that Bob had written about government responsibility removed and with the
impossible, paranoid delusions restored.

Aaron's excuse for removing the truth about government responsibity and
replacing it with paranoid delusions was that you "can't make everybody
happy.” By turning your press release into a presentation of paranoid
delusions instead of a presentation of truth, you were not making anyone happy
other than the inner circle of FFCHS. I and other TI's who wanted to
communicate truth to the public were outraged.

Bob again objected strongly but to no avail. Having subsequently read Bob's
objections, I can say that he was expressing the views of myself and of all
well-informed TIs. He was seeking to communicate to the public and to the
media an explanation of our situation, which would be understandable and
believable. Such communication of truth to the public and to the media was
supposed to be the primary purpose of World Day.

I find it puzzling and disturbing that a few unidentified people within FFCHS
would choose to censor from the World Day press release the most important
information that we need to communicate. The strange reason that you gave for
removing this vital explanation from the press release was that World Day was
an international event and that you thought it inappropriate to provide an
explanation supported only by historical documentation in the United States
and not in other countries.

Since I am the founder and organizer of the International Coalition and the
coordinator of World Day, why did you not ask me what I think is appropriate
for a press release designed to represent the international TI community? If
you had asked me, I would have said that the evidence of government
responsibility in the U.S. is of enormous value to people in other countries
in proving the probability of the same explanation being applicable to them
and to their own governments.

I wonder how you can think that no explanation for a strange mystery is better
that the fully documented explanation which Bob tried to put into the press
release? And I wonder why a few people within FFCHS, whom you don't identify,
took it upon themselves to dictate to the International Coalition this
important policy decision about World Day.

You rejected what Bob described as the present “golden opportunity” to
interest media in a story about major crime within U.S. government at a time
when media is again finding it fashionable to investigate wrongdoing within
the U.S. government.

Government responsibility for our torment was discussed throughout the
conference. No other explanation was suggested. Bob's press release accurately
reflected the World Day conference. Your press release served to make all TI's
seem irrational and delusional. It was contrary to the fundamental purpose of
World Day.

Because of the great disappointment, which I and others felt in the weak and
misleading press release which you issued, I decided to issue on behalf of the
International Coalition a post press release describing the discussion of
government responsibility during the conference.

I asked Bob to provide me with what he had written on this subject for the
advance press release, which you had cut out of the advance press release. I
incorporated this wording into the Coalition press release and sent it to
Julianne who had volunteered help in editing. When Julianne returned her
edited version to me, I was surprised to find that she had entirely removed
Bob's explanation of government responsibility.

Because of communications problems, Bob had been unable to reach me and to
participate in editing until after Julianne had signed off on it. I told Bob
that I wanted the explanation of government responsibility restored to the
press release. Bob rewrote this explanation. After working through five
drafts, we reached a final version with which we were both pleased.

Bob sent this final version to FFCHS participants on Sunday evening, October
22, with instructions on obtaining media fax numbers in each person's local
community and faxing to them. I sent the release to TIs in other countries
with the request that they add local contact information.

I was happy in the belief that we had finished a very good press release which
told the story that your advance press release had failed to tell. Because of
communications problems, I did not learn until two days later that on Monday
morning, John Allman began sending to everyone extremely negative email about
the press release. He denounced it as “rubbish” and as a “perp psyop.” He
harshly criticized Bob for no reason other than the coincidence of the
Coalition initials, ICESH, matching the initials of an existing environmental
organization. Such negative comments prevented anyone else from faxing the
release. To satisfy John, Bob promptly amended the release to use the full
name of the International Coalition without the initials, but this was not
enough for John. He falsely claimed that I had given him authority to amend
the release, and he proceeded to edit the wording to suit himself.

Bob later challenged John to produce this authorization from me. He could not
do so because I had given him no such authorization.

John announced that he would not fax the release until I approved his changes.
If I did not approve his changes by the end of the week, he said that he would
write his own press release to replace the one that I had sent him.

John had no right and certainly no authority from me to redo the press release
after Bob and I had put it in final form to our satisfaction. This press
release was a project of the International Coalition, not a project of FFCHS.
We only asked your people to help us do the faxing. We did not request or
authorize John or anyone in FFCHS to take over the project or to change the
content in any way.

Blockage of my email prevented me from learning about John's hijacking of the
Coalition's press release until Tuesday. I was appalled to learn that our
success had been turned into failure by the wrongful actions of one person.

I wrote to John about the necessity of meeting a time deadline for a press
release. I told him that he did not need to use the release if he chose not to
do so. I said that I took offense and deserved an apology for his accusation
that the press release was a “psyop” and a piece of “rubbish.” I received no
apology for these insults nor for the destruction of the press release by
delay and by unjustified attack on its content.

Derrick, you defended John's destruction of the Coalition press release by
your astonishing statement that important FFCHS documents cannot be perfect
and ready to go at the first draft and that they must go through a few
versions to get them right. What makes your statement so astonishing is that
you were treating a press release of the International Coalition as if it were
FFCHS property. You were asserting a right to control, to alter, and to
destroy the Coalition press release at your will, regardless of my objections
and regardless of objections by Bob, who spoke on my behalf.

It is wrong to try to seize control of another organization and its projects
even if you have good intentions. What concerns me even more than John's
wrongful seizure and your wrongful approval of it is that it was done for the
purpose of destroying the Coalition's project and thus harming all TIs.

You both know as well as I do that by delaying a press release, you are
destroying it. This is what John did under his false claim of authority from
me. You approved and supported this destruction under your false pretense that
the Coalition's press release was the property of FFCHS.

I can find no possible way to interpret John's actions and your approval
thereof other than as intentional destruction of a Coalition project which was
of great importance in trying to salvage the value of World Day as a means of
communicating truth to the public and to the media.

This was the sixth repetition of the same harmful pattern of concealing
government responsibility -- a pattern severely harmful to TI interests which
you and the rest of the FFCHS inner circle have shown your determination to
follow.

FIRST: You tried to force on everyone a final version of a press release that
concealed truth about government responsibility and presented the public would
interpret as wild paranoid delusions about a vast number of independent
stalking groups operating throughout the nation.

SECOND: You responded to TI objections to the first press release by letting
Bob write a press release which explained government responsibility, but you
then again cut his explanation of government responsibility out of the press
release and restored the paranoid, delusions which had produced the strong,
general TI protest to your first version of the press release.

THIRD: After I obtained Bob's wording about government responsibility to put
in the Coalition's post press release, Julianne volunteered to assist in
editing. Her editing consisted of cutting out the entire explanation of
government responsibility.

FOURTH: After Bob and I put government responsibility back into the release
and went through five more drafts to produce the best result we could manage
in time for faxes to go out on Monday morning, you told Bob, in effect, that
you and others in FFCHS were too exhausted to participate in faxing the press
release that he had sent you.

FIFTH: John seized control of the press release under the false claim that I
had authorized him to amend it. He prevented others from faxing by condemning
our work as “rubbish” and as a “perp psyop.” Under the false pretense of
making essential changes, John only degraded what we had written and delayed
it until the time value of the news had been destroyed.

SIXTH: You, Derrick, endorsed John's wrongful seizure of the Coalition's press
release by treating the Coalition and the Coalition's press release as the
property of FFCHS for you to destroy at will.

While you were following this policy of concealing government responsibility,
you knew about the dissatisfaction and concern that you were producing among
TI's who had learned of what you were doing. You knew that Aaron had received
emails with strong complaints about his removal of government responsibility
from Bob's revision of the press release, but you disregarded all criticism
and steadfastly maintained your determination to present to the public an
unbelievable, impossible, delusional story instead of the understandable,
believable, and provable truth.

This consistent, detrimental policy of FFCHS was a direct violation of the
intended purpose of World Day, which was to educate the public as to the truth
about government responsibility for secret DEW experiments on us. You did this
in spite of the total agreement by all participants in the conference that
government is the source of the persecution. The demonstrated purpose of you
and the other persons mentioned above not to educate the public but to deceive
the public. You and others in FFCHS were working to turn World Day into
Paranoia Day.

Your response to Bob's work in trying to make World Day what it was supposed
to be was to take him off your mailing list and to shut him out of further
discussions. You had previously demonstrated that you would not follow good
legal advice that Bob gave you. Now you were demonstrating that you did not
even want to hear good legal advice.

All these facts raise questions of grave concern to me and to all other TIs
whose lives are at stake. It is very clear that FFCHS has been consistently
acting contrary to the interests of all TIs. You owe them an explanation for
your concealment of government responsibility and for your rejection of all
legal recommendation that would benefit TIs.

In regard to your attempted takeover of the International Coalition and its
projects, I will tell you now that I do not accept and will not permit a
seizure by you of an international organization that represents TIs worldwide
nor of the World Day project which belongs to the Coalition. I am confident
that the worldwide TI community will join me in opposing any further takeover
attempts by you.

Not only are your takeover attempts improper and unethical, but they are
contrary to the interests of all TIs. The objectives of FFCHS, as manifested
by your actions, are directly contrary to the objectives of the International
Coalition. Our objective is to prove the truth about government violation of
our human rights. You have demonstrated in six ways that the FFCHS objective
is to conceal government responsibility.

Out objective is to follow the best legal advice we can find and to pursue the
best legal strategies available. Your demonstrated objective is to reject the
best legal advice available and to pursue ineffective strategies.

If FFCHS should change its objectives and begin to work for the advancement of
TI interests, the International Coalition will welcome your participation in
World Day 2007. Otherwise, the Coalition will welcome the participation of all
individual TIs or other TI organizations that want to pursue the objectives
of the Coalition instead of the present contrary objectives of FFCHS.

As sponsor of World Day 2006, you agreed to pay for the cost of the conference
call. I will forward this bill to you when I receive it. Do not think that
your payment for the conference call is a payment for World Day or a payment
for the International Coalition.

World Day and the International Coalition are not for sale. Not at any price!

World Day was and is the creation and the responsibility of the International
Coalition and not of FFCHS. The International Coalition and World Day belong
to all TIs. I am defending them on behalf of all TIs. I intend to see that
they will be managed for the true benefit of all TIs. I will not let them be
managed or controlled by FFCHS. I will not let you use them for purposes that
are contrary to the interests of TIs.

I regret that the actions of FFCHS have made it necessary for me to spell out
these subjects so strongly and emphatically. I hope that it will not be
necessary for me to do so again.

If you have any explanation for your six part program of concealing the truth
about government responsibility for DEW experiments on involuntary subjects, I
would like to hear it, and I am sure that the worldwide community of TIs
would like to hear it.

Attached are two letters containing more detailed information about the facts
discussed above.

If you have any questions or disagreement about any of the points I have made,
please let me know.

Deborah Dupre'
World Day to End the Silent Holocaust, Campaign Coordinator.

Exposing an Infiltrator - Part 8: Derrick Robinson Trapped At Last By His Own Words!

On 10/20/2013 6:31 AM, ______ wrote:

Let's rock the boat a little with some fucking truth;

More Evidence Derrick Robinson is part of our targeting. If it weren't for
whoever found this correspondence it would have remained buried. The person
who found it should be the President of FFCHS. How the hell would you not
remember Aaron Alexis emailing in about this? Because Robinson is part of
it!!!!!!

I strongly agree with you, Jeff. I've been waiting for someone to raise the
obvious question that you have asked.

It is not believable that Derrick forgot about receiving Aaron's letter.
Keeping quiet about the letter until someone else forced it into the open is
totally consistent with Derrick's past ten years of anti-TI policies. But
that's only one tiny item in ten years of evidence proving beyond any shadow
of a doubt that Derrick is an infiltrator.

As you know, I am a retired lawyer and a TI. Ten years ago, when Derrick was
starting his website and his false pretense of working to advance the
interests of TI's, I offered him the benefit of my legal knowledge and
experience in applying strategies that offered the best hope of achieving a TI
solution. Invariably, Derrick and his associates rejected and opposed
effective legal strategies that I recommended. He always insisted upon
following useless and harmful strategies. No amount of legal explanation and
legal advice from me could ever change this.

Derrick has no knowledge or understanding of the law and the legal system, but
he was always determined to reject advice from an experienced attorney who did
have such knowledge and understanding. Such understanding is necessary in
order to know what strategies can possibly work and what strategies cannot
possibly work. Rejection of such legal strategy advice would be incredibly
stupid behavior from an honest leader. It would utterly disqualify him from
being a leader.

Derrick is not that incredibly stupid. His behavior can only be explained as
the behavior of an infiltrator who is working to defeat the cause that he
pretends to be advancing.

For ten years now, Derrick has been 100% consistent in his policy of defeating
TI's by leading them to follow strategies that have no possible chance of
success and which have made them appear to the public as the delusional
"tin-foil hat" community. I have never been able to make TI's understand that
Derrick has been working always to harm them and never to help them.

Derrick has now clearly proved by his own words what he has been proving to me
over the past ten years by his consistant anti-TI choices. As soon as the
Aaron Alexis story hit the news, the first thing a legitimate TI leader would
do is to search through past correspondence to see if Aaron had ever written
to FFCHS. Derrick pretends that it didn't occur to him to do this obvious
thing, but it's much worse than this. Derrick pretends that he doesn't
remember that he personally had corresponded with Aaron several times
immediately prior to the shooting rampage.

Look again at Derrick's own words:

"It appears that Aaron Alexis had contacted our organization just prior to
the shooting spree that happened at the Washington Navy Yard. Several email
exchanges then ensued between Aaron Alexis and myself that clearly showed
that a) he had come under physical attack from microwaves and was
experiencing voice to skull technology, but was not able to process the
situation until he arrived at our site. b) he had come across some
information at the Washington Navy Yard that convinced him that someplace
inside there was a source of our ELF targeting - establishing a motive for
the attacks!!!" (Emphasis added. Full text is below.)

Source: http://www.mynewsletterbuilder.com/email/newsletter/1411883353

Derrick admits that he had personally engaged in "several email exchanges"
with Aaron "just prior to the shooting spree," but he claims to have forgotten
all about this correspondence when the shootings by the person with whom he
was corresponding hit the news immediately after this correspondence. Could
any attempted cover-up of the truth that we need to prove be more openly
evident? Derrick Robinson has finally trapped himself by his own words!

This exposal of Derrick's failed attempt to cover up major news of benefit to
TI's is perfectly consistent with his ten-year record of doing always what an
infiltrator would do and never doing what any legitimate TI leader would do. I
have been hearing very obvious lies from Derrick for ten years, but this lie
tops them all in its blatancy and outrageousness. Any TI who still believes
such lies from Derrick deserves to remain a TI forever.

Let's demand that Derrick publish all his correspondence with Aaron to see
what else Derrick claims to have "forgotten." As long as TI's continue to let
this infiltrator lead them constantly in the wrong direction, they will never
have any possibility whatsoever of achieving a solution.

Please feel free to forward this to your list. I urge anyone receiving a copy
to forward it to other TI's, particularly to those who have been deceived into
believing that Derrick is trying to help them.