PJ 67
CHAPTER 9

REC #1 CERES 'ATONN

WED., APRIL 7, 1993 10:35 A.M. YEAR 6, DAY 234

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 7, 1993

MISERABLE TASK
FROM: GYEORGOS CERES HATONN (Ceres 'Atonn), IGFF-PSC, Commander, Phoenix Project

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
As we effort to get critical information to you-the-people we are constantly assaulted with wearisome tasks involved with legal altercations. Now it comes down to having to do "DECLARATIONS" of WHO I am, who is Dharma, who is Doris, who is E.J., who is Germain, WHO ACTUALLY WAS AND IS WALTER RUSSELL, and on and on and on.

I believe it is time to put a stop to all this nonsense and simply take control of this infinite game of politics and legal manipula­tions. So, Mr. Green, Mr. Horton and all other "interested" parties. I, Gyeorgos Ceres Hatonn, demand HEARING in your
so-called court of "LAW".

There are two cases at point here, one with George Green and the University of Science and Philosophy over BOOKS. The other is with George Green over GOLD SECRETING AND ILLEGALLY TAKING POSSESSION, MOVING ACROSS STATE LINES AND CAUSING CONSPIRACY TO DE­STROY THE PHOENIX INSTITUTE.

TODAY
The reason, TO LAWYERS AND READERS, that this must be handled in this manner is that this morning we were informed that Mr. Horton (Mr. Green's attorney, who is also a radio per­sonality who has spoken (on the radio) with Mr. Green many times, presenting to the public--OUR MATERIAL AT WHICH TIME HE SEEMED TO HAVE NO DIFFICULTY WITH "MY IDENTITY"), had stated that there would "probably" be defamation charges presented against the LIBERATOR and CONTACT staff for printing these "defamatory" "falsehoods" about Mr. Green.

Well, Mr. Green, I, Hatonn, have put up with enough of this bombardment and time-wasting. You had best start praying you can come up with enough corrupt attorneys to protect your as­sets because I remain EXACTLY WHO YOU KNOW THAT I AM!
I DEMAND THAT YOU AND YOUR "HATONN" PRESENT YOURSELVES IN THAT COURT OF LAW IN OPEN HEARING.

NOTHING has been presented in the paper which is not sub­stantiated by full documentation--THAT constitutes TRUTH and right of PRESS.

MR. GREEN HAS BEEN GIVEN EQUAL FRONT PAGE COVERAGE FOR ANYTHING HE WISHES TO PRINT AND WE HAVE, IN FACT, PRESENTED HIS OWN MATERIAL IN THE PAPER. THIS STAFF HAS ALSO TOLD HIM ANY REBUTTAL WOULD BE GIVEN FRONT PAGE COVER­AGE--WHICH HE MIGHT WISH TO HAVE DISTRIBUTED TO READERS. THIS WOULD SAVE TIME AND POSTAGE AS WELL AS HANDLE THE INFORMATION "TIMELY".

I am equally annoyed that Mr. Green continues to present him­self as MY SPEAKER "NOW". He presents himself as a UFO "contactee" in MY NAME. This is false. He has been heard on radio--specifically from a Pennsylvania station--that he now speaks for Hatonn, has had direct contact for his information, AND, has OWNED a bank and has still, over a million dollars. This was a direct quote from one who called stating that this was heard directly "first person".

I do not take exception that Mr. Green might well be "hearing things" from "someone" "out there somewhere". It is NOT FROM ANY OF THE HOSTS COME PRESENTLY. It may well be from the nearest microwave booster tower--IT IS NOT FROM EXTRATERRESTRIAL SOURCE!

I would, however, like to make it quite clear that anyone or anything OFF TERRA EARTH--IS EXTRATERRESTRIAL. So, IF INDEED, you ever got a vehicle or satellite OFF EARTH and INTO OUTER SPACE--that would ALSO BE CONSIDERED EXTRATERRESTRIAL COMMUNICATION. I am, further, weary of chortling and insulting laughter about "E.T.s" as thrust by the US&P attorney against my receiver.

Walter Russell (the opposition "claim" in point) by HIS OWN DECLARATION AND THAT OF HIS WIFE LAO AND YOUR UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY--RECEIVED HIS INFORMATION FROM HIGHER DIMEN­SIONAL RESOURCES--THAT, SIRS, IS BY ANY DEFINI­TION: EXTRATERRESTRIAL!

We have NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER.with the Philosophy of the US&P or any of their seminar presentations. We have only ONE interest and that is the TRUTHFUL representation of Walter Russell's GIFTED-FROM-HIGHER-RESOURCE, SCIENTIFIC, MATHEMATICAL AND PERIODIC INFORMA­TION ON "LIGHT" ENERGY.

To continue to state that somehow we are damaging their pock­etbooks is the most absurd statement of all--99.99% of the pop­ulation of this world has NEVER HEARD OF WALTER RUS­SELL OR THAT INSTITUTE. Further, we have NO SEMI­NARS, and GEORGE GREEN TELLS US THAT ALMOST NO BOOKS THAT WE HAVE WRITTEN SELL ANYWAY.

Therefore, we accept that as valid. So, either pay the Institute the $150,000 plus the interest owing--and keep the books--or, we will take the "worthless" inventory and call it "even". Ob­viously, if the inventory is false and worthless as to selling abil­ity--to relinquish the inventory as collateralized against the note to the Institute--is far more in his own best interest. YOU CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS. WHY WOULD ANYONE WISH TO HAVE FALSE AND LITIGIOUS BOOKS IF ALL THAT IS EXPECTED IS "LITIGATION OVER LI­BELOUS" information, as he told two different phone call re­cipients--when he also suggested that he thought he "would just burn them all". I shall not waste more time with these "Declarations" and "depositions"--we shall present IN COURT in the same manner we do through our receiver, AND HAVE DONE CONTINUALLY THROUGH THIS WRITING, presented our work in point since beginning any of this work in this location.

If, in fact, I am NOT who I say that I am--THEN WHY DOES MR. GREEN CONTINUE TO PRESENT MY BOOKS AS VALID TRUTH IN ANY MEASURE WHATSOEVER--IS THAT NOT FRAUD ON THE PUBLIC? IF I BE TRUTH--THEN I CERTAINLY DID NOT SOMEHOW FLIT OVER TO NEVADA "WITH" MR. GREEN "AS MY SPOKESMAN" UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES!
I WEARY OF THE EN­TIRE SUBJECT AS THE NATION BELOVED IS TORN ASUNDER AND YOUR WORLD FALLS INTO COLLAPSE UNDER THE NEW WORLD ORDER, AND OUR PEOPLE WITH IT.

Somehow it seems only appropriate to present under right of ca­pability to speak for self IN THE COURTROOM, FROM THE WITNESS STAND. We can call it a "telephone appearance". My radio channels are quite clear and sufficient to the needs of this day or ANY day.

The same holds true for Violini "St." Germain as is involved in the Walter Russell material in question. For that matter in men­tion--so, too, is Walter Russell capable of presenting his own testimony in the same manner--only his BODY is dead--his mind is quite alive and intact.

If you want TRUTH--go to the speakers--WE KNOW THE FACTS AND IT IS TIME YOU ONES STOP PLAYING GAMES WITH HIGHER INTELLIGENCE AND GO WHERE THE TRUTH IS!

"Dharma" (as you ones wish to call her, Doris Ekker), we shall allow it to pass. However, you will find that "Doris" often even forgets her phone number--
(in depositions, yet). She has "written" the words for SEVENTY-ONE (71) JOURNALS, a WEEKLY NEWS-PAPER NOW SOME 70+ PAGES IN CONTENT (8/10THS BY HER OWN FINGERS) AND CAN PRESENT INTO THE THOUSANDS OF OTHER WRITINGS NOT PRESENTED IN PUBLICATION ALONG WITH MUL­TIPLE THOUSANDS OF HOURS OF AUDIO TAPED IN­FORMATION AND COMMUNICATION. I believe that you can present to me NO OTHER HUMAN BEING WITH SUCH CAPABILITY--FOR THIS HAS ALL BEEN DONE IN SOME 45 MONTHS!! The Journals average over 200 pages in length and COVER EVERY SUBJECT YOU CAN IMAGINE FROM THE LIFE OF CHRIST TO THE CONSPIRACY WITHIN YOUR GOVERNMENT. FROM THE BREAKDOWN OF CELLULAR LIFE TO AIDS AND LIFE IN THE STAR-SYSTEM PLEIADES.

The information has thus far been thoroughly RESEARCHED and in no instance has it been found to be other than TRUTH. There is a full-time writer who researches right down to our very NAMES and finds us valid. In most instances we do share that which is given and presented FOR CONFIRMATION AND PROTECTION OF THE ORIGINAL WRITERS, SOME OF WHOM ARE ROTTING IN PRISONS AT THE HANDS OF THE SECRET GOVERNMENT.

Mr. Green was the instigator of the Institute PLAN and regard­less of his claims to have been no part of the operation--does in fact prove by signature and title in his own writing--that he most certainly WAS!

As to the gold in point--there is no misinterpretation: the original owner of the gold stated in legal deposition that the gold was intended for the use of the Institute and NOT FOR MR. GREEN'S PERSONAL FILCHING, MUCH LESS, THE USE BY MR. GREEN (IN SECRET, WHILE STILL AN OFFICER AND DIRECTOR OF THE INSTITUTE) AS COLLATERAL FOR THE BORROWING OF MONEY AND FORMATION OF OTHER PROJECTS WITH USE OF THOSE FUNDS AND FINALLY BRINGING PARTICIPANTS OF THE INSTI­TUTE, IN CONSPIRACY, TO HIS NEVADA LOCATION AND PLANNING A WAY TO "BLOW UP AND BRING DOWN" THE PEOPLE IN TEHACHAPI AND THE INSTI­TUTE.

Now perhaps I, Hatonn, have been an observer too long to un­derstand how there is QUESTION here! I further do not under­stand HOW IT TAKES THREE MONTHS TO GET ANY KIND OF A HEARING OR DISPOSITION--OR IS EARTH­MAN MORE INSIGHTFUL?

How is it that ones keep demanding "gold" instead of funds at the command of
Mr. Green? He knew and KNOWS that HE IS THE ONLY ONE WITH "GOLD". How is it that Mr. Green continues to call and demand that ones (from whom he secretly borrowed great sums of money) call their notes and make trou­ble to bring loss to the participants in the Institute--with Securi­ties exchanges, etc.? Does he not realize that CORPORATE REGULATIONS prevent a "run" and collapse of the Institute? The Institute is a full fledged CORPORATION with a full-member Board of Directors and Board of Advisors. He seems to FORGET to tell those telephone contacts that IF THEY PULL DOWN THE INSTITUTE--THEY LOSE EVERY­THING! GOLD IS UTILIZED AS COLLATERAL FOR NOTES MADE TO FUND PUBLISHING AND PROJECTS UNDER WAY OF WHICH HE HIMSELF WAS A RECIPI­ENT OF FUNDING. Does this action seem to be even "intelligent", much less, wise?

We shall provide ALL INFORMATION, ALL COPIES OF THE PAPER AND ANY OTHER DOCUMENTATION DE­SIRED IN THESE MATTERS.

I, further, find it interesting that Green presses on these people to "call their 'gold" on those "demand notes" when HE REFUSES TO DO OTHER THAN TAKE COUNTER LEGAL ACTION ON HIS OWN RATHER THAN HONOR IT.
I REPEAT--YOU CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS, FRIENDS.

Now as to the US&P claims and hogwash regarding use of Dr. Russell's scientific presentations. Number one: That informa­tion is public domain because it is simply mathematical, sci­entific presentation. It was public domain when Dr. Russell wrote it
--somehow it became a copyrighted "commodity" to be hidden under meditation New Age concepts AFTER Lao (his wife) and others forming the original Foundation and subsequent "University" decided to call Dr. Russell a HUMANIST. HE IS NOT NOR EVER WAS A HUMANIST. HE WAS ONE OF THE MOST SPIRITUALLY ORIENTED (GOD ORIENTED) PEOPLE EVER TO WALK YOUR PLANET. To say the sci­entific tables and work cannot be used by people is the same as saying a physicist cannot use "numbers", (i.e., 1,2,3- - -) because someone before, used them.

I have other observations: It is NOT breach of copyright if TRUTH is presented--as truth. We gave Dr. Russell full honor--but, if we had chosen to copy the ENTIRE work and NOT MENTIONED AUTHOR AND PRESENTED THE WORK AS NON-FICTION--IT WOULD STAND (AND HAS DONE SO IN THE SUPREME COURT!) "IF" we drew other conclusions than presented in the works in point. The ONLY conclusion possibly conceived as being the same is in the realm of actual scientific cosmic and physics-oriented presentation. WE DIS­AGREE WITH ALMOST ALL OF THE CONCLUSIONS DRAWN AS TO ALL OTHER INFORMATION IN ANY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY PRE­SENTMENTS. Therefore, you can easily say that we draw OPPOSITE CONCLUSIONS FROM ANY OF THOSE PHILOSOPHICAL PRESENTMENTS OF THE US&P.

Further, since no compensation at all has been drawn by the Ekkers and any sales made of "impounded books" by a totally separate entity, Tehachapi Distributing, and any advertising done in any paper, specifically named: LIBERATOR, (also a Corporation with which there is no connection to my scribe (the Ekkers), I take exception to the defaming nature of the accu­sations against these people. The books in point were GIVEN to Mr. Martin of Tehachapi Distributing PRIOR TO ANY COURT INJUNCTION OF ANY KIND--AT THE SAME GENERAL TIME AS THE GREENS MOVED, WITH AMERICA WEST (BOTH ENTITIES) TO NEVADA. Yes indeed, there appear to have been sales following that "move" and the impounding of the books. I TOLD ONES TO GET COPIES WHEREVER THEY MIGHT FIND THEM FOR I FEEL THE SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION IN THEM IS WITHOUT EQUAL. BUT NO BOOKS WERE EVER OFFERED BY ANYONE IN THIS LOCATION IN CALIFORNIA IN ANY MANNER EITHER UNETHICAL OR ILLEGAL. THE LIBERATOR RAN "ADVERTISING" (at no charge) FOR THEIR PRODUCT--LEGALLY HELD AND LEGALLY OFFERED--BECAUSE THE EDITOR, A SCIENTIST HIMSELF, FELT THE MA­TERIAL CORRECT AND WORTHY OF PRESENTATION FOR THAT SCIENTIFIC MERIT. Five of the JOURNALS in point were not even blasted on the content of the material--only the assumed "use" of Dr. Russell's name. This is like saying you may not use Einstein's or Tesla's name relating to their own work.

It is, therefore, that the same party in point, DID continue to keep funds which should have flowed to Tehachapi Distributing--but that is not my attention. There were many other dis­tributors who held those books from onset to which readers of the LIBERATOR could go to gain access--and did so until sup­plies were exhausted in many instances. When there was trouble over these "sales" and surveillance people were following our people in Tehachapi (by their own statements) and legal pa­pers brought forth from US&P substantiating "sales", Mr. Mar­tin, to avoid any reflection on the Ekkers--efforted to return all his inventory to America West wherein it was refused accep­tance and then, took it directly to the Federal Court in Fresno! Mr. Martin "bellied up" over the transactions, and totally lost his business in the process.

Through this harassment, the LIBERATOR had to close and some three weeks ago issued ITS LAST EDITION. This massively impacts many ones who were, in fact, prior employee-­volunteer--workers OF GREENS AND AMERICA WEST. Be­cause of damage and cause to hold all transactions in the Insti­tute--there were not funds to continue the LIBERATOR. These damages shall be taken up, as well as conspiracy charges, against the perpetrators of these actions.

The original agreements with all JOURNALS was that 50% of the net profit on all JOURNAL sales would be returned to the Institute. The writer (Ekker(s)) had that agreement with the In­stitute and America West (both entities). Actually, there was never a formal agreement with the America West Distributors as that was run by and arranged by Mr. Green and Mrs. Desired Green as through America West Publishers. Regardless of claims, Mr. Green said he controlled both! Now, if this be un­true, then Mr. Green did in fact, use collateral which WAS NOT HIS in making the "notes (loans)" with the Institute--THAT IS FRAUD. If, in fact, he does control BOTH, he de­nied it in a court of law and that is both perjury and fraud. There were no "exclusive" rights (but exclusivity was honored) with America West Publishers
(Mr. Green) and, actually, no ef­fort was made to use Distribution resources other than America West Distributors (Mrs. Green). We assume that one, George, and one, Desiree, are as presented, married and cohabitating.

I again demand that I HAVE CONFRONTATION HEARING AND CONFRONTATION WITH BOTH GEORGE AND DE­SIREE GREEN (assumed as valid identification) and all or any other parties involved in any litigation including my work or va­lidity.

I, further, am called upon to remove all protection from these parties in point as we have now been placed in the position of direct affront and confrontation.

Everything in the Ekkers' life is impacted by this assault on the credibility of their work as is the credibility and standing of all presentations, in all work related public/work and private honor of ALL participants in any publications, business, and/or par­ticipation in the Institute. All of the staff of the publishing branches ARE PARTICIPANTS IN THE INSTITUTE--AND STAND TO LOSE THEIR FULL INVESTMENT THROUGH MR. GREEN'S CONSPIRACY TO DESTROY SAME.

Any, and all, of these participants beg participation and hearing in the Court of Law
--as do some who were blindly USED in Mr. Green's conspiratorial intentions and activated contact as­sault AND STAND TO LOSE THEIR ASSETS AS WELL.

Now, as to my validity? I SUGGEST YOU ONES ANNOY MR. GREEN, INSTEAD
--AND GET HIS UNDER OATH (OR WILL HE INVOKE THE KOL NEDRE?)
I, SO FAR, FIND VERY LITTLE TRUTH IN THE MAN. WE DID NOT COME AGAINST MR. GREEN IN FACT, HAD HE NOT PROCEEDED TO DEMAND THAT WHICH WAS NOT HIS, AND DID IN FACT CONTINUE TO SELL BOOKS WHEN ORDERED NOT TO, BY A FEDERAL COURT--AND DID IN FACT ACCEPT/OR MAKE "SOME" DEAL WITH THE US&P WITHOUT CONSULTATION WITH THE EKKERS (WHO WERE THE ATTENDING PARTIES AT THE COURT APPEARANCES [2 OF THEM])--ALL OF THIS WOULD NOT HAVE COME TO LIGHT--(POSSIBLY)?!?

If bringing on the war-lords in the first place, publicly contact­ing all participants in the Institute to whom he had access through listings (also taken illegally, apparently) and conspiring to "blow-out and pull down the Institute", secreting away assets in the form of stolen property, refusing to send the "writer" any of our own books, threatening to burn the inventory and a dozen other horrendously damaging activities is somehow construed as being "unfair" to Mr. Green--SO BE IT!

Further, as to Dave Horton--It would appear to me that if he so represents the "fraudulent party" in this confrontation and con­tinues to utilize information as presented--to a radio audience, he is also going to lose reputation standing as even worthy of hearing. That, of course, is to EACH his OWN.

Please do not accept this correspondence as some funny "threat" or cute document of fun and games. I MEAN EXACTLY THAT WHICH I SAY
--I DEMAND FULL HEAR­ING AND CONFRONTATION WITH OUR ACCUSERS--IN THE APPROPRIATE COURT OF LAW UNDER PROTECTION OF THE FULL USE AND COVERAGE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMER­ICA. THIS IS ANOTHER SUBJECT ON WHICH SIR GERMAIN AND MYSELF HAVE WRITTEN EXTENSIVELY!
Is it not time that there be a HEARING and the GUILTY parties caused to present presence?

If this is not brought to conclusion in timely manner--this shall be taken out of civil dispute--and INTO CRIMINAL ACTION. THAT CHOICE IS SOLELY WITH
MR. GREEN.

MR. GREEN WILL BE GIVEN FULL AND EQUAL COV­ERAGE IN THE CONTACT AND IN THE NEXT PRESENT­ING JOURNAL. The Editorial staff still has discretion as to much of the content of the paper now being shared and utilized so I am quite sure we can make such an offer and honor it.

The foregoing statements are true and presented under penalty of perjury, with witness to my own signature.


GYEORGOS CERES HATONN, aka "Ceres 'Atonn", IGFF-­PSC,
Commander, Phoenix Project

cc: To anyone and everyone who might have interest.











PJ 67
CHAPTER 10

REC #3 CERES 'ATONN

WED., APRIL 7, 1993 4:47 P.M. YEAR 6, DAY 234

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 7, 1993
THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE:
AFTER IT MAKES YOU MAD!

I have been promising you this writing for days now and other things seem to get in the way each time of writing at the key­board. A good reminder however is that
"Life is that which happens while you are making other plans".

The "author" of the following needs no introduction to our own readers but for you "catch-ups" and as a reminding to readers, this is by Jack McLamb, a Navy veteran who began his law en­forcement career in Phoenix, AZ, in 1976. He was the Republican candidate for Maricopa County (AZ) Sheriff in 1984.

In 1986 McLamb was forced to take medical retirement after being injured during an arrest. He is president of Intel-Intercept Group, founder/director of American Citizens and Lawmen As­sociation and active in various community service organizations. He was present and accompanied Col. James "Bo" Gritz to Idaho and continued through the incident at Ruby Creek (Weaver). He sends forth a Law Enforcement Officers bulletin regularly, called Aid and Abet. I personally honor this man as one of the most highly respected fighters for American Consti­tutional Rights. I salute you, Sir.

QUOTING:

U.S. JUDGES ACCUSED OF JURY TAMPERING
By: Officer Jack McLamb (Ret.)

In all 50 states it is a felony to influence, threaten, or intimi­date a juror, or jury, in an attempt to alter the outcome of a trial. In most states it is a class 4 felony.

Officer R. Stevens of New York State says, "...not a day goes by that we (police officers) don't bear witness to the ma­nipulation of juries, and their decisions, by members of the Judi­ciary".

I know that already some of my police colleagues are stunned by the contents of these first few lines--and well you should be!

I read such a statement, since we lawmen have never in the past been allowed to openly utter any statements which might in some manner cast aspersions on, or de-glorify, members of the Judiciary.

The topic, JURY TAMPERING BY THE JUDGE, is far overdue for discussion and ACTION by concerned Americans, including those in enforcement.

(For those who are more educated and understand Common Law Courts I have chosen, for simplicity, to not address Article 3/Admiralty Courts. "...One must learn to walk before at­tempting to run").

JURY CONTROL A CRIMINAL ACT
It seems that many police officers strongly consider a judge's secret control of the jury as a serious crime against the People. I say this because the most consistent question that comes up on this issue, from our brother and sister lawmen across the U.S. is, "Why should we law enforcers be sworn to arrest all those we see committing such infractions as 'misdemeanors' and then be restrained from taking action against a judge for committing felonies regularly in our presences"? (Jury tampering equals "felony" to a police officer")!

In the judgment of many U.S. police officers, when a judge covertly controls the decision of a jury without the jury members having knowledge of such manipulation, this is a CRIMINAL ACT.

Such harsh words! Personally, this editor is proud to know that so many of you lawmen agree that it is past the time for SPEAKING OUT about this and other very important issues.

Yes, your oath of offices does say, "I promise to protect the Constitution from all enemies both foreign and domestic", and the right to a "fair and impartial trial by a jury of our peers" is a most essential part of that document.

In addition, what you officers are also reaffirming is one of the oldest, most essential pillars of our justice system, namely: "In America no one should be above the law".

SILENCING POLICE OFFICERS
Before we continue pursuing this subject, let me digress...

One very effective tactic police department superiors com­monly use to dissuade and silence"forbidden" inquiries or discussions is to tell you: "You police officers, as sworn officers of the law are not citizens; you therefore have no constitutional protections regarding such things as the right to privacy or free speech".

Be assured--this is a now-proven prevarication (lie) perpe­trated by some government officials to keep police officers in line, and prevent their protesting (or even discussing) any dis­honesties, inequities or corruption in the present governmental system. It is especially designed to stop "Officers of the Law" from expressing their true feelings to those for whom they work and have sworn an oath to serve and protect, namely the PUB­LIC.

Perhaps surprisingly, the Courts have held that officers are indeed citizens with all the same inalienable rights as any other citizen. As such, we too are duty-bound to express our feelings giving input, and generally exercise justice concerning problems we may see within any facet of government.

And who I might ask you is in a more perfect position than police officers across the U.S. (through Aid and Abet newsletter) we understand that there are other methods being used to dis­courage police officers from speaking about and concerning themselves with serious problems in government.

JUDGES ARE GOVERNIYMNT AGENTS
Police officers who witness judicial activities in courtrooms today, can attest to the fact that a judge can, at will, decide the outcome of any jury trial that comes before him in which he or his special benefactors have a special interest.

Many police officers understand that today it is a fact--un­spoken and unholy as it is! that generally speaking, "his Honor's" first duty, as a purely political appointee and govern­ment agent, is to protect the government's philosophies and po­litical agenda from the Public.

And yet the poor misled Public is kept uninformed and for­ever fed the lie that: "Judges are there to protect the Citizen's right to a fair trial". Give us a break!

POLICE OFFICERS WITNESSES
Police officers have witnessed this behavior in the courts reg­ularly for decades. Some years ago one concerned and rather outspoken officer put it this way:

"Under present judicial rules and customs the social or political aims of any particular sitting judge (or those of his overseers) can, at the judge's discretion, overpower the free will of the jury. Due to its illicit nature, this usurpation of power, the actual control sequence, is always accomplished without the jury being made aware of its application". Officer Jack McLamb (June 1985)

Although not so labeled, these are "high crimes" and viola­tions of the very foundation of Constitutional mandates cov­ering the American jury system. The Public is never to know this because it is believed that they would not tolerate such sub­versive totalitarian activities.

Another police officer from Texas (a 14-year veteran) in his July 1989 letter shared with me his own and others' con­cerns in this fashion:
"Some of us (officers) have quietly discussed this activity on several occasions, but must confess that we have never understood why a judge is allowed to jury tamper. It is a unanimous conscience here that, regardless of how right and legal our protests might be, any officers involved in bringing public attention to such powerful, clandestine, political con­trols, would probably be the only ones punished. What we need is mass support for such changes." Sgt. M. T. of Texas, July 19, 1989

It is not difficult to relate to the frustration of our fellow offi­cer as he and others at his department struggle to resolve this dilemma. It is hard to regularly witness such systemic illegal activity, and at the same time endure a sense of helplessness, for knowing there is probably not the sufficient support needed to bring corrective enforcement action.

Sgt. M.T. is probably absolutely right. Can't we just see one of the totally political yes men that are appointed today as Police Chiefs standing up and taking on this one! Some of the good 'ole Sheriffs who are elected by the People and feel answerable to the People might take a stand, but not most of today's Police Chiefs.

After many years as a Cop, and having witnessed once again this nefarious usurpation of power by a member of the Judiciary at a murder trial, in Superior Court of Maricopa County, AZ, in October of this past year--believe me, your editor, too, knows first hand whereof he speaks!

OUR SYSTEM REPLACED
"Before one can evaluate what is wrong, he must first know what is right". (Sound logic from your editor!)

For those of us who may have forgotten some of what we learned in "Government 101" (and today supposed to work) it might be well to review for a moment the constitutional system we were given, and then notice how that system has been sup­planted (uprooted) and been replaced by the corruption that is in operation today.

America's system of justice was built upon some very sound, basic principles, several of which are these:
1). The sixth and seventh Amendments of the Bill of Rights guarantee us a trial by jury. (A jury of our peers.)
2). The Jury is to judge the LAW as well as the facts in the cases brought before them.
3). The Jury is to hear all witnesses and examine all the evi­dence of the case. How else can informed decision be reached?
4). The Jury is to determine the penalty (sentence) of the guilty party.
5). The judge is to serve as an unbiased resource for the jury, to answer questions on the law, and as unbiased referee on points of contention.

Although there are more, these five basic parameters are viewed as vital for a fair and just system of dispensing justice. If observed they would effectively prevent any and all despots from ever gaining dictatorial control over America!

Our forefathers knew the importance of the above controls on government. They had just come out from under a system where the King, through his agent/judges, would get rid of dis­senters by holding phony trials and then simply eliminating the 'guilty' dissenter.

It was no accident, therefore, that our nation's founders built safeguards into our system of government in hopes of preventing this from ever occurring in the new law.

THE KING'S MEN ARE BACK
In the main today's American public still believes, however naively, that these Constitutional safeguards are still in place and presently functioning.

Most do not know (what ALL judges, attorneys and some of their local police officers do) that very gradually, behind their backs, their LAWFUL right to a fair trial, as well as their pow­ers as Jurors have been secretly removed.

Those "in the know" understand clearly that we once again have the "King's Agent/Judges" back in control of our courts.

And currently, as some like to joke, it's not King George the 3rd but "King George the Bush" now on the throne. [At the time of this original writing].

Let's contrast the five basic judicial parameters identified above--and which were to have guaranteed a just and honest system in America--with the manner in which today's secret in­justice system works.

"SECRET" SYSTEM ALLOWS JUDGES TO
CONTROL JURY
Under rules that the American Aristocracy has set up for it­self Government Agent/Judges are politically appointed.

Under this set-up, private political dynasties are protected, and lifelong immunity from prosecution is virtually guaranteed them, as is also the security of perpetual wealth and power.

Listen: here are but a few of the changes that have been im­plemented which allow these elitist to control the outcome of any jury trial they wish.

1). Denying a selected defendant the right to a trial by a jury of his peers.
2). Selectively withholding evidence and testimony from the jury.
3). Hiding from the jury their lawful right and duty to decide if a law is fair and just as it applies to each specific case.
4). The judge wrongly deciding the punishment of the guilty party.
5). Using despotic "contempt" charges to silence or intimi­date any who challenge these and other autocratic, corrupt and illicit practices.

Several other of the judge/agents' "favorite" oppressive courtroom tactics which often heavily influence the outcome of jury trials are listed:

The ability of a biased and corrupt judge to overrule the ob­jections of the defendants' counsel and sustain the objection of his government teammate. the Prosecutor.

In other words, the judge will stop opposing counsel from presenting to the jury all the facts, (some of which may even be crucial factors in a fair evaluation of the case).

Then he will allow his secret "partner"--the government prosecutor, to tell the jury almost anything he wants.

In this manner, we see the government agent/judge controls the information going to the jury and therefore controls the out­come of the trial.

The subtle and deliberate destruction of the Defense counsel's credibility before the jury by the Judge's use of "prejudicial treatment and statements" (i.e., snide remarks, belittling and de­meaning remarks and voice inflection leveled at opposing coun­sel solely for the benefit of the jury) thereby instills prejudice in their minds throughout the trial.

Think about it. With the use of these and other slick covert manipulations, who really decides the outcome of the trial?

We (police officers) see this Jury Tampering all the time and are amazed that it is done so expertly that the Jury never sus­pects a thing.

Americans have always taken great pride in proclaiming that ours is a "government of law and not men". But is it?

From even the sketchy glimpse given here in what transpires in U.S. courts today, can any thinking person say that LAW and JUSTICE reigns there today?

We can certainly see, we no longer have the justice system that our forefathers set in place.

Now under "King George the Bush" there is the same sham system that King George III and other totalitarians throughout the ages set in place so they could selectively weed out any dis­senters, or those not politically aligned, from among the masses, and still fool the people into thinking, "they had their day in court"!

THE GOOD, BAD AND UGLY
Far beyond the obvious unlawfulness, there are real problems with such a biased system that allows governments agent/judges to give "selected" defendants (perhaps a friend or colleague of the judge) a particular style of "justice" and then someone that the agent/judge or his Controllers label "BAD GUYS" get the certain extra amount of injustice.

The most important issue when using such an unfair system is WHO is it that is put in charge of doing the "choosing and la­beling" of who are the Good, the Bad and the Ugly in our soci­ety today.

Are we sure that it is the JUDGES (LAWYERS)--(OR THOSE WHO CONTROL THEM) that we want to put in charge of picking those among us that are to be consider the "BAD GUYS"?

The "LAWYERS"? "God in heaven protect us"!

Do we see the inherent problem in such a system? Oh yes, it would be wonderful if we could always be assured that the right people, THE REAL BAD GUYS, would be the ones to receive this extra special "injustice".

However, as you have surmised by now, the big problem with the system is, one week the person or group that is doing the "choosing and labeling" may be someone who agrees with us as to who the BAD GUYS are. But, what about next week?

Suppose these all-wise chooser/judges decide for example, that all police officers who speak out against abusive govern­ment tactics, a corrupt judicial system, etc., are from now on criminals and must go to jail?

Or next week, maybe all people who "drink beer" or who make "ball games" their god, or who "chase women" after their shift, or believe in giving out necessary "Attitude Adjustments" are now criminals?? Let your imagination run for a moment.

We can see that under this unfair, unconstitutional system, even police officers, with their own set of quirks, might have trouble with this imaginary new CHOOSER, and might con­ceivably end up in jail, or worse!

JUSTICE DEMANDS SAME JUSTICE FOR ALL
The above scenario is why our founding fathers decided it was better to have the same equitable justice system for EV­ERYONE. One that a power hungry judiciary, or anyone else, could not tamper with. And this is why our present system is absolutely wrong! And why it is a complete fraud and decep­tion, for such an "activist judge" to tell the jury that they (the Jury) will ultimately decide the outcome of the trial.

As we officers have seen over and over again, in monitoring courtroom performances that not in all cases do judges feel the need to wield their secret controls.

If the defendant is a good old-fashion murder, rapist, child molester, etc., the judge will many times just sit back and let the chips fall where they may. In such cases the jury is allowed to decide the outcome! Then again, judges with particular political and social bias have been known to use their secret controls to set free "poor misunderstood victims of society" (hardened criminals) who are a serious threat to society and belong on the gallows or in jail. Officers know this happens far too often.

PUBLIC ENEMY NUMBER 1
Some of you who have closely monitored these activities re­alize that there are certain type Americans that come before a state or federal court that almost guarantees his or her "HONOR" becoming an active part of the GOVERNMENT prosecution/ defense and invoking these aforementioned, illicit Judicial controls.

This person is "any citizen who might give 'BIG BROTHER' a bad time such as by bringing suit against the Government or any of its agents for any number of present-day unlawful and/or tyrannical government actions"

This person may also be on the opposing side of the present government administration's Humanist/Socialists "New World Order" political goals; or he may be one of those radicals our department warns us about. I'm speaking about anyone labeled as an outspoken true "Conservative", a "Constitutionalist", or "God fearing Christian" that is--"demanding that the government power be returned to the American People".

Officers know that if any of these type individuals come be­fore the court, it is assured, with few exceptions, that the Jury decision in those select cases will be expertly, precisely, and se­cretly controlled (and decided) by the government agent/judge.

TYRANNY IN THE HIGHEST
It is important that we understand with total clarity that these "Activist Judges", through the use of onerous, unlawful powers, are committing serious FELONIES on a consistent basis, and therefore are in violation of their oath of office, which is to uphold the People's rights and the natural and Supreme laws of our nation.

BEWARE OF MAKING EXCUSES FOR JUDGES. I un­derstand that some of our judges are our personal friends. I have several that I like on a personal basis also.

However, let me see if I can put this into a clear and simple perspective:

We all understand that persons' right to "a fair and impartial hearing by a jury of their peers" is one of the most important of all the personal safeguards of our Constitutional Republic. If we lawmen know this, could anyone believe that highly educated individuals, such as professional judges and lawyers, who have made the study and application of laws of this Republic their lifelong profession WOULD NOT KNOW IT?

Do I hear any disagreement?

A fine attorney friend of this writer, by the name of Michael Minns, has written an excellent and important work entitled "The Underground Lawyer". (Every officer should read this book.) Anyway, in this book he details the history of our jury system. I will paraphrase a bit of this history.

Some 200 years before the Magna Carta was signed in Eng­land, Emperor Conrad of Germany established the guarantee of "trial by jury". This first system allowed for the JURY, not the government, to determine all civil justice and fairness, in other words--"due process"!

Notice, if you will, even back then it was the belief that the "people" had the best basic perception of what was good and what was evil, and an understanding of property rights, that laid the groundwork for the "viability" of such a jury system.

This system was so fair and equitable that a Nineteenth cen­tury scholar by the name of Lysander Spooner wrote extolling the great virtue of this system in these terms:

"If the Jury does not judge the law, the facts, and all of the evidence, then they are merely the tools, rather than a barrier against the tyranny and oppression of the government".

Can you believe our present government Aristocracy today trusting the American people that much? NOT ON YOUR TIN BADGE!

We have discussed this before--that if any of your "Johnny Laws" have ever dreamed of being a part of a martial Law ac­tion, just wait a short while till these same power crazed Elitist trick the rest of our fellow foolish Americans into turning in their guns for a more "KINDER AND GENTLER NATION"!

However, keeping on point, the above writings of the Honorable
Mr. Spooner is the way it used to be in our na­tion before the Elitists decided that they themselves were far more wise and could better decide who would go free and who should be convicted of crimes against "society" ("the State" or more correctly the "ARISTOCRACY").
STOP QUOTING. To be Continued.

* * *
Further discussion at this time would be superfluous so we will simply leave off at this point until we have opportunity to finish the subject article. IF YOU HAVE NOT YET BEEN THE "VICTIM" OF ONE OF THE FARCES IN COURT--HOLD YOUR BREATH BECAUSE BEFORE IT'S OVER--YOU WILL BE. SALU.
Ceres to clear.