PJ 91
CHAPTER 9
REC #2 HATONN
MON., APR. 4, 1994 11:28 A.M. YEAR 7, DAY 231
MON., APR. 4, 1994
CONTINUE AT SECOND PARAGRAPH UNDER
"PLACING A YOUNG LADY IN PRISON" OF PART 13.
Continuation: DEFRAUDING AMERICA, Part 14
by Rodney Stich
QUOTING:
The young woman suffered the indignities accompanying federal imprisonment, including frequent transportation with leg irons, handcuffs, and body cavity searches. Lisa Jones joined the many thousands of citizens who became victims of Justice Department and judicial corruption, and understandably, developed psychological problems.
After all this, Drexel's attorneys sued the young lady for payment of legal fees that Drexel had agreed to pay. In response to Drexel's claim that they would sue Ms. Jones for the amount of money that they had advanced, San Francisco attorney Daniel Bookin stated: "It is inconceivable to me that Drexel would sue Lisa after all that she's gone through, and in view of compassion and decency aside, however, one simple fact seems certain: Lisa has virtually no assets; she could never even begin to repay the cost of her legal representation."
SENDING SENIOR CITIZENS TO PRISON
Justice Department prosecutors charged Leona Helmsley with evading income taxes, and sentenced the 72-year-old woman to four years in federal prison, leaving behind her 81-year-old husband, who could be expected to be dead before she would be released. [H: On the other hand Clifford Clark was absolved of ALL possible charges against him in the BCCI scandal wherein these ones had criminally taken billions upon billions of dollars from YOU--because of his age!! A very interesting judicial system indeed!]
Helmsley's accountants had claimed as business expenses, charges that Justice Department attorneys considered personal items. [H: It seems they had claimed some of her underwear. I speak of this because didn't Bill Clinton overdeduct for charitable contribution, some of his underwear? Ah yes, indeed interesting...] Helmsley's income tax forms were made out by professional tax preparers, who determined that the deductions were business related. The accountants who made that determination were never charged with any wrongdoing. Helmsley paid over $4 million federal income taxes in the disputed tax year and the amount owed by the disputed charges was a very small percentage of that amount.
Seeking to show that the judge who sentenced Helmsley to prison did himself commit a serious federal crime, I mailed to the federal judge on April 25, 1992, a list of the criminal activities that my CIA informants and I were trying to report, and demanded that he receive our testimony and evidence. I reminded him of the mandatory requirement that we give our evidence to a federal court and that the court receives it. (Title 18 U.S.C. sub. 4) He refused to receive our evidence, making possible the continuation of the epidemic corruption that we discovered.
While aiding and abetting, and covering up for the serious crimes described within these pages, and sending informants to prison, Justice Department prosecutors found time on December 15, 1992, to indict [Bobby] Fisher for playing a chess game in Yugoslavia, charging him with violating the presidential order barring business relations with Communist countries. Fisher violated a June, 1992 executive order by President George Bush restricting commercial relations with Yugoslavia. The indictment subjected Fisher to ten years in prison and a fine of as much as $250,000. Is it any wonder the United States has the highest percentage of its citizens in prison?
TEN YEARS FOR A TELEPHONE
CONVERSATION
On December 7, 1990, Judge Samuel Conti sentenced a young black girl from Oakland, California, the mother of two infants, to ten years in prison on a conspiracy charge. The young girl had a telephone conversation with another person concerning the sale of drugs. The conversation never went any further but federal agents, monitoring the phone call, charged the girl with conspiracy. She was in tears when U.S. Marshals drove her back from the federal court house in San Francisco to the Dublin Federal Detention Center after Judge Samuel Conti sentenced her to ten years in a high security prison. This same judge played a major role in blocking my exposures of the criminal activities and in protecting the many people that were implicated in the attacks upon me. He, as with many other federal judges named in these pages, should be impeached and sentenced to a long prison term. But this will never happen because crooked federal judges and Justice Department attorneys have a strangle-hold on the justice system.
PRISON FOR REFUSING TO
COMMIT PERJURY
Justice Department prosecutors charged a Sacramento area real estate developer, Marcel Cordi, with a federal offense for refusing to testify falsely against a bank official whom Justice Department prosecutors wanted to convict. U.S. Attorney David Levi of Sacramento wanted Marcel to testify against a bank official and alter the facts in his testimony. Marcel was willing to testify, but would not commit perjury to enable Justice Department prosecutors to falsely convict the person. In retaliation for refusing to commit perjury, U.S. Attorney Levi charged Marcel with fraud, based upon an incorrect statement on a prior loan application relating to his length of employment.
Levi was the U.S. Attorney who charged me with criminal contempt of court when I filed federal actions reporting the criminal activities implicating federal officials, including his Justice Department employer. In retaliation for reporting the crimes, and for exercising federal defenses, Levi charged me with criminal contempt of court. Levi was appointed in 1992 to a federal judgeship in Sacramento. It is standard practice to appoint Justice Department officials to the federal bench. This plan insures that Justice Department prosecutors are successful in federal court.
Another example of how the public is victimized by the mindset in the Justice Department: a woman in Texas with five children drove her boyfriend's van into Mexico and was arrested at the border when she was returning home, having no idea cocaine had been hidden in her van. The jury, assuming that Justice Department officials would not prosecute an innocent woman, rendered a decision holding her guilty, causing her to receive a 10-year mandatory minimum sentence. She knew nothing about having been used as a "mule".
Making these outrages even worse is the fact that their sufferings are shared by thousands of others who become forgotten victims of corruption by Justice Department attorneys.
Cases have been cited, including a December 26, 1990 article by Harry Hellerstein, Assistant Federal Public Defender in San Francisco, in the Wall Street Journal, where major criminals are not charged by Justice Department prosecutors on the basis of information that they gave relating to other drug operations, often enabling Justice Department prosecutors to obtain many other convictions of lesser figures. There are hundreds of peripheral drug players in prison, facing long mandatory prison terms, while those guilty of far more serious drug offenses are free, primarily because they were able to snitch on others.
Long prison terms for drug offenses become even more preposterous when it is realized that the CIA and DEA have engaged in large-scale drug trafficking operations into the United States for decades.
MISPRISION OF FELONY
A frequent charge for sentencing innocent people to prison is charging them with the federal crime, misprision of felony. Anyone who knows of a federal crime and who does not promptly report it to a federal judge or other federal tribunal is guilty of this crime. This statute has no exclusions, and applies to members of Congress, White House officials, Justice Department personnel, the media, all of whom have committed this crime. In practice, punishment for this crime is limited to citizens, and not to those in government who hold a far greater responsibility to act on the crimes described within these pages.
An example of the misuse of this criminal statute occurred when a Memphis aircraft broker sold a used aircraft to a customer, who later used it in drug-related operations. The aircraft broker had no way of knowing how the plane was to be used, nor is he required to become an investigator. Later, when federal authorities were building a case against the suspects, they requested that the aircraft broker fabricate testimony in order to assist in obtaining convictions.
The broker was willing to testify, but refused to lie. Justice Department attorneys then retaliated against him, charging him with misprision of a felony on the basis that he failed to report to federal authorities that the aircraft was to be used in unlawful activities. The aircraft broker was subsequently put on trial with 32 other defendants, who apparently were guilty of drug-related offenses. Without competent legal counsel to protect his interests, the unsophisticated jury accepted the prosecutors' charges as true, and held that he was part of the drug trafficking operation. He was then sentenced to five years in federal prison, even though he never committed a single offense.
SUICIDE INDUCED BY
CORRUPT FEDERAL CORRUPTION
Another example of the harms inflicted upon innocent people was related to me by the aircraft broker in the preceding example. The broker was in a county jail near Memphis waiting for trail when he witnessed the fatal consequences of arrogance by federal agents. His cell mate, Mike Scarlett from Texas, had been enticed by federal agents into making the controlled substance "speed." (Speed had been prescribed for years by doctors for weight reduction, by decreasing a person's appetite. It is now a controlled substance for which prison terms are prescribed for its unlicensed manufacture or sale.) Knowing that Scarlett started to make it, these same federal agents arrested him, charging him with manufacturing amphetamines.
While in prison, Scarlett discovered that his wife was sleeping with one of the federal agents who had set him up. Al told me that his cell-mate, Scarlett, was very distraught-looking after phoning his wife. Al described to me how the inmate wrote what was later discovered to be a suicide note, and that Scarlett hung a bed sheet over the prison bars, as if he wanted privacy for sleeping, as is often done. Behind the sheet Scarlett stepped onto the rim of the toilet and tied a strip, torn from a bed sheet, to a grill near the ceiling. Scarlett then stepped off of the toilet and hanged himself.
PRISON FOR FILLING IN A
MOSOUITO-BREEDING MUD HOLE
Justice Department prosecutors sent Allen Kafkaesque to prison for filling in a mosquito-breeding low spot on his 103-acre ranch (Wall Street Journal, Nov. 18, 1992). He allowed two loads of dirt to be dumped in a low spot as a base for a shed. Federal officials then charged him with filling in "wetlands", which has been made a crime by Congressional legislation. Justice Department prosecutors sought to have him imprisoned for 27 to 33 months. When the judge reduced the sentence to six months in prison, Justice Department prosecutors appealed, seeking to have Kafkaesque imprisoned for almost three years, for filling in a low spot on his 103 acres! Simultaneously, Justice Department prosecutors, protecting CIA assets involved in drug trafficking and looting of financial institutions, were themselves involved in the Inslaw scandal, and looting of Chapter 11 assets, among other crimes.
OUTRAGEOUS PRISON SENTENCES
America reportedly has the greatest percentage of its population in prison of any country in the world. Outrageous prison sentences are imposed for often minor offenses, such as filling in swamps on one's own property, or being found with small quantities of drugs. Minor drug offenders are sentenced to twenty or more years in prison for a one-time offense, while vicious killers are often released in a fraction of the time. Often the drug offender is a person simply filling the demand created by a drug-crazed society that may share a greater blame than the person responding to the demand. A person charged with a hand-full of drugs receives a far longer prison sentence than a person who brutally kills another.
THREATENING AN AGED PARENT
OR WIFE TO GAIN A CONFESSION
A favorite stunt of Justice Department prosecutors is to charge the wife or an aged parent with a crime. They had no part in the offense charged, and an offense may not have even been committed. In this way the brave attorneys in the Justice Department coerce defendants to plead guilty (who may be innocent), or to plead guilty to charges greater than what were committed. Justice Department prosecutors threatened to charge Russbacher's wife with a crime if he did not plead guilty to mis-using government fuel and aircraft when he had the CIA Learjet fly him to Seattle and then to Reno in 1989. Numerous inmates described to me how they were forced to plead guilty to something they hadn't done, or to plead guilty to a greater offense than they were guilty of, after Justice Department prosecutors threatened to imprison their parents or wives.
BLACKMAILING MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
It is well known that FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover was skilled at obtaining incriminating and embarrassing information on political figures, and had a file on almost every member of Congress. In From the Secret Files of J. Edgar Hoover, by Athan Theoharis, the author describes Hoover's interest and ability in gathering scandalous information about prominent political figures. The book describes FBI reports on John F. Kennedy's affair with Inga Arvad, Robert Kennedy's affair with Marilyn Monroe, Eleanor Roosevelt's affair with Joseph Lash, homosexual activities, and other activities. The CIA does the same thing to exert control over members of Congress. The CIA reportedly threatened Senator Boren in 1981 with exposure of his alleged pedophile activities after Boren initially stated he would not vote for Robert Gates as CIA Director. The book shows that Hoover's activities did not die with him, but continue to this date. Other intelligence agencies have similar activities. The U.S. Army has a surveillance and blackmail program called Operation Orwell, which is described in earlier pages.
BUYING AND SELLING HUMAN LIVES
Judges, prosecutors and attorneys sometimes buy and sell cases and human lives as if they were commodities. Judges are paid off to rule favorably on particular cases. A clerk can lose a key file or piece of evidence. The court reporter can change the transcript to indicate the reverse of what is actually in the record.
Attorneys often sabotage their own clients, allowing them to be convicted, to satisfy a debt to his adversary's legal counsel, or to placate a judge who may want the other party to prevail. Trading of human life, in court, or in the air safety environment, is like kids trading marbles. Prosecutors will let a defendant go free, in exchange for the life of another man. Criminal attorneys will plead a man guilty just to pay back a prosecutor for not prosecuting another client. Prosecutors will lie to imprison an innocent person, or to cause his incarceration for years longer than the law provides for the offense that was actually committed. Cases are fixed by paying judges, prosecutors, police, and others.
Some Justice Department attorneys justify their lying, using the argument that the defendant lies, so why shouldn't they lie. But a defendant may lie to avoid prison. Prosecutors lie to imprison innocent persons, or to greatly increase the length of sentence for the purpose of making their record look good, regardless of the human tragedy it brings.
The public doesn't perceive this misconduct as a threat to themselves. When the Justice Department prosecutes a party for an alleged crime, the average person, including unsophisticated members of the grand jury, assumes that the party is guilty. Otherwise the accused would not be charged, or so they think. I fell into that trap in the past, until I learned that Justice Department attorneys lie and cheat as a standard tactic. Unfortunately for the victims of this prosecutorial misconduct, as a Wall Street Journal article once stated, the grand jury would indict a ham sandwich if the prosecutor told them to do so.
Justice Department attorneys win year-end bonuses and personal-recognition awards for putting people in prison, guilty or not.
DISMISSING INVESTIGATORS WHO
EXPOSE HIGH LEVEL CORRUPTION
A common method for covering up evidence of the ongoing criminal activities described in these pages is to dismiss investigators who report evidence of the crimes. For instance, when the investigative activities of the U.S. Attorney in Philadelphia threatened too many politicians involved in political corruption, President Carter reportedly pressured the Justice Department to remove U.S. Attorney Martson from office.
Speaking before the Washington National Press Club on January 25, 1978, Martson stated:
If a single Congressman can remove his home-town prosecutor who's actively investigating public officials, with a single call to the President--if that can happen, and that's what did happen--our federal criminal-justice system won't work. No amount of rhetoric will ever convince the bagmen and the fixers that they can't pull strings in Washington, because they're sure that strings got pulled in Washington.
The Justice Department--controlled by the United States Attorney General, who is appointed by the President of the United States--investigated President Carter and his political friend, Attorney General Griffin Bell, for possible obstruction of justice. Is it any wonder the Justice Department cleared their boss of any wrongdoing?
The same tactics were used by Justice Department officials against Assistant U.S. Trustee Gregg Eichler in the San Francisco area when his investigations exposed the part played by federal judges and Justice Department officials in the corrupt Chapter 11 courts. I had given Eichler information on the criminal activities I experienced in Chapter 11, implicating federal judges, federal trustees, and law firms. Eichler was dismissed from government service in late 1991 after he had exposed the corruption by CIA-related trustee Charles Duck, and as Eichler was going after the judges.
Justice Department officials fired one of their investigators in retaliation for testifying in the Inslaw affair. Justice Department officials arranged for the removal of Chapter 11 Judge George Bason from the District of Columbia bench after he ruled in favor of Inslaw, and then arranged for the Justice Department's attorney defending against the Inslaw charges to replace Judge Bason. By packing the courts in this manner, corrupt Justice Department officials gain control over the judicial process, wherein they protect themselves.
Investigator Lloyd Monroe quit the Justice Department after he discovered connections between the Savings and Loan scandal and the CIA-related Southmark Corporation in Dallas.
Justice Department officials reprimanded assistant U.S. Attorney Dave Howard in the San Francisco office after he filed a highly sensitive eleven-page report on July 11, 1990, describing the judicial corruption in Chapter 11. Howard recommended the appointment of a special counsel to investigate corruption by federal judges and trustees in Ninth Circuit Chapter 11 courts. Instead of acting on the report, Justice Department officials censored Howard for preparing the report.
Jack Blum, on Senator Terry Sanford's committee, was forced to resign when he pursued the investigation of BCCI corruption when the committee wanted to drop it. After Sanford's committee blocked the investigation into BCC, Blum went to Manhattan's District Attorney Robert Morgenthau with his evidence, resulting in criminal prosecution against powerful attorneys who sold their country down the river for financial wealth. Justice Department officials repeatedly blocked the exposure of BCCI corruption, just as they blocked the exposure of every other scandal described in these pages.
The FBI has its own way of dealing with whistleblowers. The former head of the Los Angeles FBI office, Ted Gunderson stated that he had been harassed by the FBI to suppress his reports of drugs smuggled into the United States in the bodies of dead GI's sent back from the Vietnam War (United Press, Feb. 22, 1986) [H: Still think the possibility of shipping in drugs in a cow's second stomach is far fetched?] Gunderson retired from the FBI in 1979, becoming a private investigator, during which time he obtained evidence of widespread drug dealings at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. Numerous CIA assets have given me data confirming this sordid practice. Gunderson told the United Press reporters that the FBI and Justice Department had tapped his business phone and smeared his name.
DEATHS OF THOSE EXPOSING
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT CORRUPTION
Mysterious deaths of people exposing Justice Department and CIA corruption have been repeatedly reported throughout these pages. One of the main murders, closely associated with the Justice Department's criminality in the Inslaw matter, was the widely publicized death of Danny Casolaro. The September 10, 1992, Congressional Inslaw report addressed this link, reporting that there was a need for a further investigation into Casolaro's death and the link to the Justice Department officials.
INTERNATIONAL ARROGANCE
The mindset rampant in the Justice Department has no bounds. Justice Department attorneys have sanctioned and ordered the seizure in foreign countries of foreign citizens, who had never been in die United States, for the Justice Department to have jurisdiction over them. In one instance involving a resident of Mexico, Dr. Humberto Machain, Justice Department personnel paid bounty hunters $50,000 to kidnap him and bring him into the United States to stand trial. He had allegedly assisted in torturing a U.S. DEA agent in Mexico. Civilized international law procedures require that extradition be requested of Mexican officials.
Applying this tactic to other nations, there is far more "justification" for other nations to kidnap American citizens, based upon the crimes inflicted in their country by the CIA and other U.S. dirty-trick squads. Using this reasoning, hundreds of federal officials, especially those in the CIA, could be seized for the crimes that they caused to be inflicted as they invaded the sovereignty of foreign countries.
Iranians could justifiably sneak into the United States and abduct American citizens to stand trial in Iran for having committed crimes under Iranian laws, including interference in Iranian governmental activities, or the shooting down of an Iranian airliner by a trigger-happy U.S. Navy crew that had invaded Iranian waters.
The Vietnamese government could sneak into the United States and abduct American officials for their part in causing the deaths of tens of thousands of Vietnamese in the Phoenix program. [H: That seems like a rather interesting idea to me....]
The U.S. invades Panama, killing hundreds of Panamanian citizens, to capture the head of a foreign country who has never committed a crime in the United States for having trafficked in drugs in Panama [H: WITH YOUR GOVERNMENT AND CIA.]. Making the seizure of Manuel Noriega more bizarre, he was formerly on the payroll of the same CIA, engaging in drug trafficking in partnership with the Central Intelligence Agency's sanctioned operations. [H: Now here is where you could REALLY get some inside information on the whole affair-- FROM ONE COLONEL JAMES "BO" GRITZ. This is not a slam of any kind (I like Bo Gritz more than you might realize) for HE WAS MORE INFORMED ABOUT THAT AND THE ORDER FOR NORIEGA'S ASSASSINATION AT ONE TIME--THAN ANY OTHER ONE PERSON IN SPECIAL FORCES!]
STOP PART 14
PJ 91
CHAPTER 10
REC #3 HATONN
MON., APR. 4, 1994 1:27 P.M. YEAR 7, DAY 231
MON., APR. 4, 1994
DEFRAUDING AMERICA Part 15
by Rodney Stich
SUPREME COURT APPROVAL OF
UNLAWFUL SEIZURE
(Book available: Diablo Western Press, Inc., P.O. Box 5, Alamo, California 94507 OR P.O. Box 10587, Reno, Nevada 89510)
A federal judge in Los Angeles threw out the indictment against Mexican physician, Dr. Humberto Machain. Entered into the court records were the declarations of a Mexican informant that another doctor, Fidel Kosonoy, was responsible for administering the drugs that kept an American DEA agent, Enrique Camarena, alive so that the agent could be tortured for obtaining additional information. Kosonoy was the personal physician of Rafael Caro Quintero, a Mexican drug trafficker. Justice Department prosecutors withheld this declaration that contradicted their charges against the Mexican doctor.
The Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the right of Justice Department officials to invade a foreign country and seize their citizens in this manner. This is the same group that upheld the right of Justice Department prosecutors to imprison me in retaliation for reporting federal crimes and in retaliation for exercising constitutional and statutory remedies. There was an exception: Justice John Paul Stevens called the decision "monstrous," which it was. The United States has given federal bounty hunters carte blanche to violate a widely held principle of interntional law, implying that foreign countries can do the same to U.S. citizens.
Chief Justice William Rehnquist upheld this shocking violation of international law on the basis that "the treaty says nothing about the obligations" of the two countries "to refrain from forcible abductions." Using this rationale, U.S. bounty hunters can kill foreign citizens in foreign countries if the extradition treaty says nothing about that issue.
The Supreme Court Justices held that it was legal for American bounty-hunters to invade the sovereignty of a foreign country, use force if necessary, including killing foreign citizens and police of such foreign country, and kidnap them, bringing them to the United States, before our biased and corrupt system, with Justice Department-appointed "defense" attorneys, to be held for trial. These are the same Justices who have obstructed justice when I repeatedly brought the corruption described within these pages to their attention via petitions, appeals, and letters.
Foreign nations and their media strongly criticized the United States Supreme Court for this position. Chile's most important newspaper, El Mercurio, reacted to the Supreme Court's ruling with the heading, "Caramba! they've legalized terrorism." the June 23, 1992, editorial summaraized the arrogance:
The decision promotes contempt for the rule of law and the right of due process, violates national sovereignty and opens the door to acts of reprisal among nations. And what happens if U.S. agents--or people cooperating with the U.S. --clash with police in Mexico, Colombia or some other country, with gunfire that may even injure or kill innocent bystanders?
Chilean Socialist leader Marcelo Schilling said of the Supreme court rule that it was "the law of the jungle in which the weaker countries will lose out." Guatemalan President Jorge Serrano called the Supreme Court's ruling an "unacceptable judicial monstrosity."
When asked what he thought of the kidnapping doctrine, legal adviser to the State Department, Judge Abraham Sofaer, testified before Congress in 1985:
How would we feel if some foreign nation ... came over here and seized some terrorist suspect in New York City, or Boston, or Philadelphia ... because we refused through the normal channels of interntional, legal communications to extradite that individual?
In 1989 the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Office of Legal Counsel, William P. Barr, held that the FBI could legally seize suspects in foreign countries, even though they had never been in the United States and had never committed any offense in the United States.
The heading in the Mexico City newspaper El Financiero read: "bush and the Culture of Terrorism." The article described the "new world disorder in which the United States ... can kidnap, torture and assassinate citizens from other nations."
On November 11, 1990, the United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs came into force, and passed a resolution stating in clear text that a treaty party "shall not undertake in the territory of another Party the exercise of jurisdiction and performance of functions which are exclusively reserved for the authorities of that other Party by its domestic laws."
It was the invasion of Mexico under orders of Justice Department officials that required this restatement of international law. The resolution was introduced by Canada and mexico and approved by the United Nations group. The United States ratified that convention agreement in 1990, and then promptly violated it by seizing a mexican citizen in Mexico in 1992.
In response to the U.S. kidnapping of a Mexican citizen and the U.S. Supreme Court upholding that act, the Mexican senate approved an amendment to the Mexican criminal code imposing a 40-year sentence on anyone who kidnaps Mexicans on behalf of the United States or any other foreign authority who may wish to duplicate America's invasion of a foreign country's sovereignty to kidnap foreign citizens. So intense was Mexican anger toward the United States that the bill was approved unanimously, and then approved by President Carlos Salinas de Gortari. This new law was Mexico's response to the U.S Supreme Court ruling in June 1992 that approved the 1990 kidnapping of the Mexican doctor from Mexico.
WEAVER FAMILY AGAINST THE
"BRAVE MEN" OF ATF AND JUSTICE
At an isolated mountain-top home in Idaho, five hundred heavily armed ATF and FBI agents, U. S. marshals, local law enforcement agencies, military vehicles and tanks, surrounded a small home owned by Randy Weaver, a former Green Beret. Weaver was on the Justice Department's hit list for refusing to cooperate in an undercover operation against a group of local skinheads. Weaver had been asked to infiltrate the group, and after attending a few meetings, Weaver didn't want anything more to do with the plan.
The chance came for ATF and FBI personnel to retaliate against Weaver when he sold a shotgun in which the barrel was allegedly a quarter inch shorter than the law allowed. Justice Department prosecutors charged Weaver with a federal offense and ordered him to appear in federal court at Boise, Idaho. When Weaver failed to appear, due to an error in the reporting date made by the court clerk, six U.S. marshals in camouflaged clothing sneaked onto Weaver's mountain-top property. Weaver's dog spotted the intruders and started barking, after which a family friend, Kevin Harris, and 14-year-old Samuel Weaver went to investigate.
As the dog approached the intruders they shot and killed the animal. The young boy cried out, "You've killed my dog," and then ran back toward the house, at which time one of the U.S. marshals shot him in the back, killing him. Harris, who had gone with the young boy to investigate, witnessed the killings and shot back at the strangers, killing one of the marshals. [H: Actually this is not so--one of the marshal's own comrades killed him.] Back at the house, Randy Weaver, who heard the shooting and seeing his son lying on the ground, and not knowing the trespassers were federal agents (and surely not caring at this stage), shot at the intruders.
The remaining U.S. marshals then retreated, returning with a force of over 500 heavily armed, battle-ready, FBI and other federal personnel, bravely massed to do battle against the father, the mother, a daughter, and a friend. Included in this armada against the family under siege were tands and other weapons of war.
During this siege, the father crept to a storage building adjacent to the house to view the body of his slain son. Huddled in their cabin, frightened by the massive force surrounding their humble home, the mother opened the door and stood in the doorway, holding her infant daughter in her arms. A federal agent shot her with a large caliber rifle, splitting her head apart. Blood spurting from her head, Weaver pulled his wife inside and laid her down on the kitchen floor, as blood drained from the lifeless body. Frightened, Weaver and his children lay on the blood-spattered floor, expecting to die at any moment. Outraged neighbors and people from all over the country converged on the site, protesting the slaughter.
Several members from a concerned citizens group in Hawaii arrived, as did people from throughout the state, including Lt. Col. James "Bo" Gritz, a candidate for the 1992 presidential election. Their presence may have saved the remaining hostages from annihilation. Gritz arranged for the wounded Weaver to surrender to the federal marshals.
Justice Department prosecutors obtained an indictment against the remaining Weaver family from a rubber-stamp federal grand jury in Boise (September 16, 1992), charging the victims with federal crimes. The indictment against the father, whose son and wife had been killed by federal marshals read in part:
Vicki Weaver and other members of the family did unlawfully, willfully, deliberately ... shoot, kill and murder one William F. Degan.
That indictment, as worded, included the infant whose mother had been killed.
A jury eventually cleared Weaver of the murder charge, but held him guilty of the gun charge.
KILLING A NEARLY BLIND RANCHER
Another example of the vicious mindset of ATF and Justice Department agents was the shooting death of a wealthy and nearly blind rancher, Donald Scott, near Malibu, California (October 2, 1992). Federal personnel had tried to buy the ranch to expand the adjacent Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area. But Scott, a recluse, partially blinded by recent cataract surgery, didn't want to sell.
A multi-agency drug task force of over two dozen heavily armed California and federal agents mounted a military-type assault upon Scott's home. The invaders were from the Los Angeles County sheriff's department, the Los Angeles Police Department, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, the National Park Service and the California National Guard. They were allegedly looking for a field of marijuana they claimed that a federal agent had spotted from a plane flying a thousand feet over the 200-acre property in the hills above Malibu, called Trail's End.
Instead of going to the ranch in a peaceful manner with a search warrant, they conducted a commando-type raid, breaking into Scott's home while he was sleeping, killing him as he came out of his bedroom. No marijuana plants or drugs were found on his property.
There was no reason for this commando-type raid, as there was no need for the element of surprise. If Scott had actually been growing fields of marijuana, he could not suddenly dispose of it down the toilet, and the peaceful serving of a search warrant was all that was necessary.
Investigation showed that the real motive was not a search for drugs, but a desire to seize Scott's ranch under federal forfeiture laws. Scott's wife had been a former user of drugs and if the slightest traces of drugs could have been found on the property, the five million dollar ranch could be seized under the draconian federal forfeiture laws.
Subsequent investigation revealed that federal agents had obtained a property appraisal before invading Scott's home, showing the value of adjoining property, and indicating the desire to seize the property. Federal personnel in charge of the raid advised the attacking agents to look for evidence of drugs so as to justify seizing the property.
ENLARGEMENT OF THE WEAVER TRAGEDY
The Weaver tragedy received very little press coverage, even though it indicated a very dangerous mindset by ATF and Justice Department officials. By ignoring it, as in every other form of corruption implicating federal officials, the pattern continued and worsened. On Sunday morning, February 28, 1993, about one hundred heavily armed Alcohol, tobacco and Firearms agents (ATF) invaded the residence of a religious group in Waco, Texas, attacking the building with loud shouts as if they were attacking a drug cartel. There were about a hundred people inside the residence, primarily women and children.
The religious group resided in a large building on property known as Mount Carmel, by a religious group known as Branch Davidians. They were a relatively peaceful group, harming no one, wanting to be left alone. As is common in Texas, and to earn extra money, the group frequented gun sales, and had accumulated a large cache of various types of weapons. They also knew about the Weaver tragedy and others, and didn't want the same to happen to them. They were more aware of the government arrogance than most Americans.
Upon hearing the shouting horde of heavily armed para-military group descending upon them, the religious group locked the doors and braced for an attack. ATF agents broke windows and shot into the residence, killing eight people inside, including a two-year-old girl. As agents started entering the building, the people started defending their home by fighting back, killing four of the assaulting ATF agents. Firing stopped, and the para-military force retreated, followed by a nearly two-month stand-off.
The residents placed bales of hay against the gaping holes in the walls and where the windows were knocked out. Federal agents ordered electricity cut off to the compound, forcing the residents to use kerosene lanterns for illumination, creating a high fire risk. Government agents blasted the occupants twenty-four hours a day with loud noised, and shook the building with the movement of huge military tanks. Several of the besieged residents gave up and left the building, at which time they were immediately arrested and charged with conspiracy and murder of the four ATF agents who had invaded their residence.
The ATF agents were joined by FBI agents and National Guard troops, equipped with heavy attack vehicles and tanks, surely the envy of many third-world military leaders. They were brave men, ready to do battle with the frightened little religious group consisting mostly of women and children.
If the besieged residents had any hope that public pressure would bring a halt to the siege, they were sadly mistaken. The government's Wurlitzer-like manipulation of the media sought to make the besieged victims the culprits.
The large building in which the occupants were trapped was an old wooden building and highly inflammable. A fire starting inside the structure could be expected to spread rapidly, especially if the winds were blowing hard, as they often do on the Texas prairie. Once fire started inside, escape would be very difficult, In the MGM Hotel fire in Las Vegas many years earlier, the fire in the football-field-size main casino spread so rapidly that people on the far side of the casino from where the fire started were engulfed in flames before they could make their escape.
APOCALYPTIC ASSAULT
Early in the morning on April 19, 1993, while the lanterns burned inside the building, the war-ready heavily-armed military force commenced an attack, using armored vehicles and tanks, knocking down walls that fell inward upon the residents. Inside the building, sections of sheetrock and wood rained upon the frightened occupants, knocking burning lamps onto the piles of hay, causing them to ignite. As if this weren't enough, over 200 tear gas canisters were thrown into the building.
[H: Yes, we DO ALL KNOW that this is but a brief summary of Hell. We are not here to detail incidents of this sort--for the facts are now "out there" for all of you to see. Stich is using this and other instances for your consideration regarding the subject in point--the federal government as a criminal enterprise. We could talk about the stand-in at Red Beckman's TODAY and the fact that "that" was to be a cover for harassment of the Clare Prophet Germain group nearby. Its called diversion tactics and/or distracters. But THAT IS WHY we are bringing as much more publicity to any given incident as possible--THEY HAVE TO RECONSIDER THEIR ACTIONS IN THE FACE OF PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE. EVIL HAS TO PULL ITS DIRTY WORK IN SECRET AND THEN PAY OFF WITNESSES TO LIE OR THEY CANNOT CONTINUE THIS NIGHTMARE OF DARK OPERTIONS. We aren't offering all this because Dharma likes to type. She has been in the middle of the ATF through the RTC come to call with their big guns--secreted around the hillsides behind and around her home. It is amazing that in that instance Gritz said he would be here to stand with her and E.J. But, as it turns out Green told him that the house instance was a lie and they had actually stolen the property from the Savings and Loan. WORSE-- GRITZ NOW TELLS THE SAME LIE ON HIS RADIO SHOW AND TELL.
Remember, dear friends, when the shake-out comes--you will find that ones you thought to be your blood-brother will have been among the ones set forth to destroy you for their own greed and avarice or whatever else they can claim. George claims he was just working to get out the WORD OF GOD!(???) So far, he like Gritz now, everything they have claimed against Ekkers, in this example, they are guilty of in all respects!! Is this ignorance on the part of some of the players? Perhaps but in these examples THAT IS NO EXCUSE. ALL THESE PLAYERS HAVE ACCESS TO TRUTH IF THEY BUT LOOK AND HEAR. INDEED, IT IS NO EXCUSE!
I think you readers would like to hear the "latest" prattle about Ekkers. This comes now that even Russbacher was told and actually thought, that they and the Institute were deep-cover "Agency" proprietaries. As a matter of fact it was to the extent that thousands of dollars of travel expense were stacked against the Ekkers through a travel agency which was also claimed as a "proprietary" company. IS THERE NO END TO THE INCREDIBLE GARBAGE? However, local worn out players, it may well be WHY Green and et al continue the assault--they may actually believe that there is a bundle of money--simply belonging to the CIA or something bigger. Well, there IS something bigger--but it isn't MONEY!
* * *
Even our beloved John Schroepfer has been kidnapped from his place of institutional incarceration and spirited away to unknown OTHER imprisonment--so he can't see anyone, get attorney advise or "talk". Why? Well, it is now more serious than prior for Eleanor and her son Rod because they appear to have had a joint venture going to bring debilitation to John, steal away his assets, and literally "bump him off'. This is a scenario now brought to the surface for legal consideration as more and more evidence flows to the surface and documents are revealed regarding "plans" laid long ago. John said she hit him on the day of his "accident" and was poisoning him for a very long time. Is this so? My friends, anything is possible and thus you have to consider WHY they continue to do these blatant actions concerning this man. The investigation will not move right on into conspiracy, of the "hospital", the institution, the physicians obviously acting in the conspiracy and apparently the legal personages who were supposed to "represent" him. As nearly as is being admitted, he was spirited away under cloak and demand for secrecy to somewhere in Northern California on Thursday night. This story is too long for this writing and of course at this time it is without documented PROOF as to some of the charges. It does not look good for Eleanor, however, and for her son to place his mother in such circumstances for his own purposes of gaining both estates of John AND Eleanor is unconscionable--it might remind you of ARSNIC AND OLD LACE! It moves into the category of being even worse than Luke Perry in his attempt to simply steal his step-mother's retirement funds.
Yes indeed, the ones here want to just "give up"--but who will be there to help them (OR YOU) when the criminal actions come against YOU? No, this will have to be pursued. For one thing, it is rapidly moving from a civil action of mishandling of conservatorship to criminal assault and conspiracy to deprive a person of his rights and property, including his LIFE. Now, as to the punch-line--THEY ARE IMPLICATING GEORGE GREEN IN THE FOUNDATION OF THE PLANNING. HE ASKED TO BE REMOVED AS GUARANTOR ON ANY OF THEIR NOTES OR TRANSACTIONS (EVEN WITH HIM PRIVATELY) AND HE WAS THEIR ACTING TRUSTEE FOR ELEANOR. However, the notes in point were "stolen" from John (he thought). HE IS ALSO THE ONE WHO ASKED THEM TO DEMAND GOLD FROM THE INSTITUTE AND THUS AND SO. IS THIS SIMPLY CIRCUMSTANTIAL? EVIDENCE OF ACTIONS AND DOCUMENTATION OF INTERACTIONS POINT OTHERWISE. It is using Eleanor and Rod along with Leon Fort that George and attorneys continue to push at the Institute for receivership. Interesting.....!]
The leader of the religious group rushed through the building handing out gas masks, and instructing the people to put them on immediately. The wind was blowing at over thirty miles an hour, roaring through the holes ripped in the building by the tanks, fanning the flames. Inside the resident were trapped and scared, and unable to escape. The blackness of the early morning hours, the heavy smoke, the eye irritation caused by the tear gas, and the piles of debris in the hallways, made escape impossible for most of the resident. Eight managed to flee the searing heat, some of them with their clothes on fire.
Once the fires took hold, they spread in firestorm fashion, insuring the fiery death of everyone inside. Many of the frightened women and children huddled in fear, feeling the effects of the searing heat. Suddenly, as the flames reached the butane fuel escaping from a ruptured tank, and explosion sent flames hundreds of feet into the air, an event seen throughout the world on television screens. Possibly never in the history of the civilized world had such an arrogant attack upon a group of people occurred, the horrible consequences watched throughout the world. [H: Still want to argue over "holocausts"?]
OILING UP THE MISINFORMATION MACHINERY
The Waco tragedy had the potential for waking up the American public to the mindset of their leaders. This possibility required oiling up the nationwide misinformation network controlled by various federal agencies. it appeared to work. While the residence was still burning, President Bill Clinton appeared on TV, stating the residents committed suicide and they were to blame for the horrible outcome. Clinton stated government agents and officials were not responsible because "a group of fanatics tried to kill themselves." U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno echoed his words. Clinton and Reno had other reasons for blaming the victims. The two of them had approved the attack upon the residents BEFORE THE ATTACK STARTED.
The same federal agents who inflicted this terrible tragedy upon the religious group stated they saw the residents starting the fire, basing that statement upon seeing someone bending over. It is very possible that the person bending over was trying to put out the many fires already started. [H: The facts remain that the public, even the news crews were KEPT WELL OVER TWO MILES AWAY--SO THEY COULDN'T WITNESS!]
Federal officials stated many of the bodies had bullet holes in them, implying they were shot by the leader of the religious group to prevent them from escaping the flames. Texas coroner Dr. Nizam Peerwani, heading the Tarrant County Coroner's office in Fort Worth, stated: "There is absolutely no evidence of that, as far as we are concerned at this stage." Interviewed on Good Morning America on April 23, 1993, the coroner stated that because of the condition of the bodies it would be difficult to determine bullet wounds and that the immense fire left very little of the bodies to examine. He added, "When a corpse is exposed to such intensive heat, the head will often explode."
The bullet theory was important, to shift blame to the victims. Later reports stated that there were bullet holes in many of the bodies. Anything stated by government personnel must be considered suspect in light of the long history of disinformation and outright lies.
The establishment media, which had kept the news of the Weaver tragedy from the American people, couldn't hide the Waco tragedy as they did the Idaho assault. But they did repeat as fact, over and over again, that the group had committed suicide; that the blame for the holocaust was upon them and not upon the attacking military force.
Nine members of the religious group escaped the inferno and were immediately arrested and kept separate from each other. When questioned separately by their attorneys, each of them described what happened inside the building and stated the same facts. The survivors described the chaos in the building as the tanks inflicted heavy damage. They described the knocking over of the kerosene lamps by the tanks and resulting fires, the difficulty of moving about the building because of debris from the collapse of the second-story walls and due to the heavy smoke and tear gas. The smoke caused total darkness inside the building. "You couldn't see your hand in front of your face," stated attorney Dick Kettler, speaking of one of the religious group members, Remos Avraam.
Attorney Dick De Guerin stated that his client told him "there was pandemonium, they knew they were trapped. It was difficult to move around even before the fire started because the tank battering had damaged the inside of the compound."
After hearing the facts stated by the survivors, Clinton repeated during an April 23, 1993 press conference what he had stated several days earlier, that the victims were responsible for their deaths. "I do not think the United States government is responsible for the fact that a bunch of fanatics decided to kill themselves." [H: Well, perhaps those Jews in the WW II holocaust were just committing suicide???] Clinton used the disinformation given by Justice Department agents to support his statements, even though they were contradicted by the independent statements of the survivors, and common sense. [H: Now we all know that since the release of this book--the railroading continued right up to trial of these victims who managed an escape and some were actually convicted of various "crimes". However, it is important to note that most were found innocent of any wrongdoing--A YEAR IN INCARCERATION AFTER THE FACT!]
END OF PART 15.
Please bear with me, Dharma, for one more sitting for I think we can finish this chapter for the paper if we stay right with it. Thank you.
