PJ 82
CHAPTER 7

REC #2 HATONN

THU., NOV. 11, 1993 11:51 A.M. YEAR 7, DAY 087

THU., NOVEMBER 11. 1993
CONTINUATION: CONCENTRATION CAMP PLANS FOR U.S. CITIZENS.

THE PEOPLE vs. THE CONSPIRATORS
The federal government answered my (researcher, William Pabst) suit in June (1976) by filing an unsworn general denial of everything that I had alleged. I spoke with the assistant U.S. Attorney in charge of the case and asked him if he had gone to the trouble to call any of the parties mentioned in the suits--since I had provided not only the addresses, but their telephone num­bers to provide a faster means of investigation. He said he had not. He had not even done a minimal amount of investigation of the case, yet he filed a denial of my allegations.

I filed a motion in the meanwhile to take the deposition of the person who writes the training programs for the concentration camp guards, Mr. Richard Burraga
--the 75th Maneuver Air Command at Army Reserve Center at Houston, Texas--stating that in light of all the recent activity of government agents, one of the agencies involved might attempt to murder this key wit­ness, the author of the training camp program. The federal judge denied my motion, stating that I had not quoted enough cases to him justifying my request. However, he was also aware that there were no cases existing on this set of facts, but as you will see as I go along with this report, he chose to ignore
it.

I then made an agreement with the assistant U.S. Attorney to take the deposition to Mr. Burraga. After I'd made the ar­rangements, the U.S. Attorney refused to voluntarily go along with taking the deposition. It is very difficult to find justice in our system of courts. Law is usually practiced by the "buddy system", hence the court rules are overlooked or not followed.

On July 20, 1976 a hearing was held at the magistrate of Norman Black, U.S. District Court in Houston. The courtroom was completely filled with spectators. And although the news media had been contacted, no representatives of the press were there. There is a news media blackout on this matter.

Brief oral arguments were presented. The U.S. Attorney ex­plained that I was not the proper person to bring the suit be­cause, although the free exercise of my constitutional rights were threatened by the concentration camp program alleged,
it did not constitute any injury. The magistrate was impressed with the information I had thus far collected and stated that he would bring it to the attention of the federal judge. The U.S. Attorney tried to have my investigation of the case halted, but the magistrate would not go along that far with a prearranged decision.

As an additional indication of what I was up against, the original hearing was scheduled for 10:30 in the morning. How­ever, the U.S. Attorney had secretly had the time changed to 2:30 in the afternoon. The magistrate gave the U.S. Attorney permission to file for motion to dismiss because he felt that the concentration camp program--to be used for persons who exer­cise their freedom of speech--did not present any injury.

Now, on July 23 I had placed in the Houston Post and in the Houston Chronicle newspapers the following advertisement in the legal section. Quote: "Solicitation for witnesses in Civil Action 78-H-667, Federal District Court of Houston, People extemporal William Pabst vs. Gerald Ford et al. The action titled: Complaint Against the Concentration Camp Program of the Dept. of Defense. Attention: If you have participated in Opera­tion Garden Plot, Operation Cable Splicer, the 300th Military Police Prisoner of War Command, or the Army Reserve Civil Affairs group, you may be involved in a program that needs to be disclosed for this suit. To give your testimony call or write: (and here I place my name, address and telephone number).

As I previously mentioned, there is a news media blackout on the story . Both newspapers refused to carry the ad. First, at the Houston Post, I had to threaten them with a law-suit to carry out the ad, even though I was paying for it. And then at the Chronicle I had to meet with the president and various vice presidents because a refusal from that paper had come up from their own lawyers. Both newspapers finally carried it, but only after two days of complaining. The initial response of both pa­pers was: "We don't carry stories like that" and: "Don't you think that the people planning the concentration camps have our best interests in mind"? As you will hear for yourselves, the policies definitely do NOT reflect our best interests.

The next event that occurred was that the U.S. Attorney filed a "Statements of Authority", showing the reasons that he could find why I should not be allowed to take depositions to get more information from the person who was writing the concentration camp guard training program. However, his brief was com­pletely filled with misquotes of the law from many cases. He'd mention the case and then invent whatever the case should say. In my brief to the court at this point, I notified the judge of the violation of the law requiring honesty in such matters. But the notification was ignored by the judge, who apparently sanc­tioned this most dishonest of acts commonly known as "quoting out of context".

THE GENEVA CONVENTION
My brief was filed on August 27, 1976. On August 31, for­mal arguments were set. The new courtroom of the magistrate was almost filled again. However, no one from the news media showed up for this hearing either. The few who were con­tacted had been told not to go; they would lose their jobs.

At the hearing I introduced evidence that heretofore had never been introduced in any court of law in the U.S. The U.S. Attorney had denied, you will remember, everything in my suit without so much as even a tiny investigation. So I introduced him to evidence the following letter from the Dept. of the Army, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff of Personnel, signed by: 1B Sergeant, Colonel G.S., Acting Director of Human Resources Development.

Quoting: "On behalf of President Ford, I am replying to your letter 27 May, 1976, regarding a news article in the Dallas Morning News. As much as he would like to, the president can­not reply personally to every communication he receives. Therefore, he has asked the departments and agencies of the federal government in those instances where they have special knowledge or special authority underlogued.

"For this reason your communication was forwarded to offi­cials of the Dept. of Defense. Within the Dept. of Defense, the Army is responsible for custody and treatment of enemy prison­ers of war and civilian internees as defined under terms of the Geneva Convention of 1949. Therefore, the Army is prepared to detain prisoners of war and detainees as defined in Article IV of the 1949 Geneva Convention relative to the treatment of pris­oners of war and protection of civilian persons.

"It is U.S. policy that its Armed Forces adhere to the provi­sions of international law to set the example for other countries of the world to follow and respecting the rights and dignity of those who become victim of international conflict. It should be noted that the Army program is designed for implementation during conditions of war between the U.S. and one or more foreign countries. The Army had no plans nor does it maintain detention camps to imprison American citizens during domestic crises".

The problem with this letter is that it's not true, and that's what I'm going to discuss at this point. First of all, in verifying the authenticity of the claims in the letter, I checked the Geneva text. There is no article in the Geneva Convention entitled as the letter states. There is, however, on each of the classifica­tions: "Protection of War Victims/Civilian Persons" and a separate article on "Prisoners of War". That was the FIRST dis­crepancy.

The next problem with the letter from President Ford's repre­sentative is that it states that the prisoner of war guard program is set up for the implementation for "conditions of war between the U.S. and one or more (foreign) countries". However, Arti­cle III of the Geneva Convention reads that the treaty applies to (and I am quoting):, In case of an armed conflict, not of an international character, occurring within the territory of one of the high contracting parties". Obviously an armed conflict occur­ring with one's own territory did not mean between one or more of the parties to the treaty, especially if only one is involved. Now, the examples of this type of conflict in the U.S. involving only the U.S. this convention or treaty can go into opera­tion--which includes the procedures for setting up the concentration camps.

Article LXVIII of the Convention states (and I paraphrase): If you commit an offense that is solely intended to harm the oc­cupying power, not harming the life or limb of members of the occupying power, but merely talking against such a force--such as the Martial Law situation--you can be imprisoned provided that the duration of such imprisonment is proportionate to the of­fense committed. Well, President Dwight Eisenhower didn't feel that provision was strong enough. So he had the follow­ing additions placed in the treaty, which states: "The U.S. re­serves the right to impose the death penalty in accordance with the provisions of Article LXVIII without regard to whether the offenses referred to therein are punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory at the time the occupation begins".

So not only can you be imprisoned for having exercised free­dom of speech, YOU CAN BE PUT TO DEATH UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE GENEVA CONVENTION IN 1949 FOR HAVING EXERCISED, OR ATTEMPTING TO EXERCISE FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

The next item that I introduced into evidence was a field manual; FM 41-10, "Civil Affairs Operation". You will re­member at the outset that I mentioned Civil Affairs groups. Let me quote to you from that manual what one of the functions of the Civil Affairs activities includes: "Item 4. Assumption of full or partial executive, legislative and judicial authority over a country or area". So let's see what a "country or area" is de­fined as in the same manual. It includes: "small towns and rural areas, municipalities of various population sizes, districts, coun­ties, provinces or states, regions of national government".

Nowhere in the manual does it exclude this program from being put into effect right here in the United States. As a matter of fact, in Kearny, New Jersey, the Civil Affairs group went into that area and practiced taking over that governmental unit. And yet the Army--in its letter of June 16--states that these pro­grams are not for us. Yet they are practiced here in the United States under conditions that can only occur here at home.

The study outline of field manual, FM 41-10 on page j-24 under "Penal Institutions 1-B", you see there is a program on concentration camps and labor camps
--number, location and ca­pacity. It is important to note that a concentration camp and a labor camp ARE ALWAYS LOCATED NEAR EACH OTHER FOR OBVIOUS REASONS.

Again on page d-4 of the same manual you'll find a sample receipt for seized property; a sample receipt written in English and containing terminology applicable to only U.S. territory.

On page 8-2 of the same manual, under the heading "Tables of Organization and Equipment", we find that there are 3 other organizations that would be working along with the Civil Affairs operation: the Chemical Service Organization, the Composite Service Organization, and the Psychological Operations Organi­zation, along with the various Civil Affairs organizations.

In July of that year (1976), the following Civil Affairs groups met with the following airborne groups at a staging area in Fort Chaffee, Arkansas. A staging area is where military units meet before they go into action. They met with the 82nd Airborne and part of the 101st Airborne; the 321st Civil Affairs group of San Antonio, Texas headquarters; the 362nd Civil Affairs brigade from Dallas, Texas; the 431st Civil Affairs company from Little Rock, Arkansas headquarters; the 306th Civil Affairs group, U.S. Army Reserves, Fayetteville, Arkansas com­manded by Lt. Colonel N. McQuire (phonetic spelling) and William Highland. The 486th Civil Affairs company from Tulsa, Oklahoma; the 418th Civil Affairs company from Kansas City, Mo.; the 307th civil Affairs group from St. Louis, Mo.; the 490th Civil Affairs group from Abilene, Tex.; the 413th company from Hanlin, La.; the 12th S.S. group, 2nd Battalion (headquarters unknown).

They're ready to go into action. The problem is that it ap­pears they were ready to take over the entire government of the United States as their mission sets out. One man who attended this staging area talked to a Civil Affairs sergeant and asked him what his job was. The sergeant explained that the civilians of this country will really be surprised some day when the Civil Affairs groups begin to operate the government.

Now, the Dept. of the Army still maintains that all this is not for the United States--yet this training continues here for us. The evidence is overwhelming; the plan exists for the impris­onment of millions of U.S. citizens. And even though all this information was presented to the federal magistrate, he still felt that no one was injured by such a plot.

On the 2nd day of Sept. 1976, the magistrate recommended to the federal judge that the case be dismissed. And the sole ba­sis for this reasoning to dismiss was that we have to actually be physically injured before we can maintain a lawsuit of this type. He did not feel that, although all this active planning, prepara­tion and training was going on, that any U.S. citizen had been injured--even though the citizen may fear exercising his (or her) freedom for fear of being detained and imprisoned in a concen­tration camp at a later date.

IGNORING THE CONSTITUTION
The case of Tatum B. Laird, heard before the Supreme Court in 1974, is a case in point. It involved the Army intelligence collecting apparatus, which was developing a list of names of persons who the Army felt were troublesome. The Supreme Court held that the making of lists of this type did not of and by itself present any injuries. The minority opinion in that case was that the injury in the case with a program such as this made people afraid to use their freedom of speech for fear of being sent to jail for it. But the majority did not buy that argument.

The difference between that case and this case--although we also have the computer program--is that we have something much further past that point: the concentration camp guard program and the Civil Affairs program for the taking over of all functions of our government. In light of that the federal judge said that this is not an injury. As a matter of fact, the U.S. At­torney alleged that even if people were placed in concentration camps, if they were all treated the same they would still not have the right to go to federal court.

On the 20th day of September, I filed a memorandum to no­tify the magistrate and the federal judge that I had discovered that the federal government had a program for a number of years TO SUSPEND OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS. This information substan­tiated the complaint. Habeas corpus is the name of that legal in­strument utilized to bring someone before a judge when that per­son is being illegally imprisoned or detained so that he (or she) may obtain his (or her) freedom. THE CONSTITUTION STATES THAT THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS SHALL NEVER BE SUSPENDED.

I found the disturbing information in a report; 94-755, 94th Congress, 2nd Session, April 26th, 1976, entitled "Intelligence Activities and the Rights of Americans, Book II". On page 17­d, entitled "First Amendment Rights", the report states that more importantly "The government surveillance activities in the aggregate, whether expressly intended to do so, do deter the exercise of First Amendment rights by American citizens who be­come aware of the government's domestic intelligence pro­gram".

Beginning on page 54 it is stated that, beginning in 1946--four years before the Emergency Detention Act of 1950 was passed--the FBI advised the Attorney General that it had secretly compiled a secret index of potentially dangerous persons. The Justice Dept. then made tentative plans for emergency detention based on suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas cor­pus. Department officials deliberately avoided going to Congress. When the Emergency Detention Act of 1950 was passed, it did not authorize the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. But shortly AFTER PASSAGE of that act, accord­ing to a bureau document, Attorney General J.R. McGraft told the FBI to disregard it and to proceed with the program as previously outlined.

A few sentences later on page 55 it states, "With the security index, use broader standards to determine potential danger­ousness than those described in the statute". And unlike the act, Dept. plans provided for issuing a master search warrant and a master arrest warrant. This is the center importance; it is the same thing that I am alleging in federal court. And yet the magistrate chose to ignore those facts ALSO.

We have government officials not only ignoring the will of Congress, but doing the opposite of what the Constitution pro­vides by planning illegally for the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. In addition, as mentioned before, the master search warrant and the master arrest warrant are forms fed into the computer, which print the names and addresses on them from the TAPES PREVIOUSLY PREPARED BY THE INTELLIGENCE-GATHERING PROGRAM.

As you are arrested, your home will be searched and any­thing found there may be confiscated. This program has existed since 1946 up to and including 1973, and without proper access to judicial discovery techniques, it can't be determined whether the same plan now exists under the same name or under another name RIGHT NOW.

This memorandum was filed on Sept. 28, 1976 to make this court aware of the danger that our rights of freedom of speech and lawful assembly are in. But the court, on Sept. 30-after this notification was received--dismissed the case. However, in keeping with the practice of federal courts in Houston of actively participating in the obstruction of justice, I was not noti­fied of the dismissal until the 6th day of October
--which gave me just 2 working days to submit any further motion in a 10-day period before time starts running for the appeal.

What I have just said regarding the federal courts in Houston is not only my opinion; the Houston Chronicle, surprisingly, published an extensive document severely criticizing the federal courts in Houston for making up their own rules as they go along with the proceedings, as well as commenting on the Communist-like Supreme Court attitude of the judges and the court personnel. My experience here has been that the court has returned to me almost every document that I have filed. Then, after a big argument, they accept the document, stating that they just made a mistake. In reality, the power structure doesn't want these types of cases in ANY federal court.

SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE
On the 8th of Oct. I had submitted a request for finding the
facts in the filing which had been established by the evidence presented:

1. The 300th Military Police POW Command is located at Livonia, Mich.
2. The Dept. of the Army has stated that said Command exists per se the Geneva Convention of 1949, a treaty of the U.S., Article IV thereof under the title relative to the treatment of prisoners of war and protection of civilian persons.
3. However, no such title exists in the Geneva Conventions per se.
4. Nevertheless, there are separate titles, one of which is: a. Multilateral Protection of War Victims/Prisoners of War; b. Multilateral Protection of War Victims/Civilian Per­sons.
5. Nevertheless, Article IV of both titles does not provide for the creation of any military programs for concentration camps.
6. Whether Mr. Fenren of the 300th Military Police POW Command has stated that the purpose of the Command is for the detention of foreign prisoners of war and enemies of the United States.

7. Further, Article III, concerning civilian persons, makes the treaty applicable to conflicts occurring solely within the territory of the United States that are not of an interna­tional character, which is capable of including any type of conflict in its description whether it be civil war or guer­rilla activity or anything else. The text states: "In case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the high contracting parties, each party to a conflict shall be bound to apply to the minimum of the following provisions".
8. Dept of the Army field manual FM 41-10, Civil Affairs Op­erations of Civil Affairs Organization, lists as one of its functions the assumption of full or partial executive, legislative and judicial authority over a country or an area and there is no specific exclusion of the United States as such a country or area.
9. Said manual defines country along certain geographical pop­ulation basis, county, state regions and national govern­ment.
10. Said organization has in fact conducted practiced takeovers of local and state governments in the continental United States, including but not limited to, the state of New Jer­sey.
11. Said organization includes in its study outline on page j-24 a section on concentration camps and labor camps.
12. Said organization includes in it composite service operations and psychological operations organizations.
13. Said psychological operation is working with the U.S. Pub­lic Health Service, are prepared to operate any and/or all mental health facilities in the United States as tools of repression against outspoken but nonviolent political con­duct of the United States citizens in conjunction with all the above, which is to be used for the same purpose.
14. Further, the Dept. of Justice, in conjunction with this pro­gram, has had plans for the suspension of writ of habeas corpus since the year of 1946; has planned depriving per­sons being detained under this total program any means for protection against tyrannical political repression.

The plaintiff requested that the court make findings of fact and draw conclusions of law, consistent therewith as shown by the evidence on record before the court. The effect of this re­quest is that the case must go back to the district judge for fur­ther consideration. I mentioned that it appeared that all this planning for concentration camps was to be directed against anyone regardless of his political persuasion or his ideology who exercised freedom of speech against the established power structure of international bankers and multinational corporations. But with Proposition B-type movements threatening to re­duce taxes throughout our nation, I foresee an activation of emergency programs so that the parasites on the federal take will continue to receive their checks.

TO BE CONTINUED.
PJ 82
CHAPTER 8
REC #3 HATONN

THU., NOV. 11, 1993 4:19 P.M. YEAR 7, DAY 087

THU., NOVEMBER 11. 1993
CONTINUATION: CONCENTRATION CAMP PLANS FOR U.S. CITIZENS.

PRICE OF PATRIOTISM
In the same Senate document, on intelligence activities on the rights of Americans referred to on pages 166 and 167, you will find that the federal government has targeted its intelligence ac­tivities against one group of Americans. On page 166 the first classification listed it rightists and anti-communist groups. And the first group on page 167 on Army surveillance lists the John Birch Society as number 1 and the Young Americans for Free­dom as the number 2 target. Therefore, the groups of U.S. American citizens considered to be the highest enemy of the United States by the federal government at this time is the CONSERVATIVE PATRIOT.

Although this information has been available since April of this year (1979), no one has mentioned this incredible discovery that the federal government considers the patriotic conservative as its greatest enemy. I have received all kinds of information regarding this case from all across the United States.

PRICE OF APATHY
I obtained the 1945 report of the OSS (Office of Strategic Services)--the precursor of the CIA--7th Army, William W. Quinn, Colonel GFCAC of the G2, on the liberation of Dachau, a concentration camp during the liberation in Germany. It con­tains many groups of information, but the relevant portion of the report concerns itself with the section on the townspeople. Quoting from this report, on why the people of this little town didn't complain or didn't overthrow oppressors but just contin­ued to go along and get along even though they lost their free­dom in the process. And I quote:

"These words crop up and up again. They are the rational­ization of a man who admits that he was a member of the Nazi Party. 'I was forced to do so by business reasons,' they state. We were lied to in every respect but they admit they knew the camp existed. But they saw the work detail to the inmates passing through the streets under guard, and in some instances the S.S. behaved brutally even towards the townspeople.

"When asked if they realized that within the last 3 months be­fore the liberation 13,000 men lost their lives within stone's throw of where the people lived, they claimed they were shocked and surprised.

"When asked if they never saw transports of dead and dying pass through the streets along the railway, they referred only to the last one. They insist that most of the trains came in at night and that they were sealed cars.

"Did they never ask what was in the endless procession of cars that came in full and always went out empty? A typical re­ply was, 'We were told it was all army material and booty from France'.

"It is established that anyone who stated that he saw only one train come in in the daytime was telling a flat lie. There are quite a few such people in Dachau".

The analysis of the anti-Nazi element of the town: 1) The people knew what was going on in the camp, even ten years prior to liberation; 2) the town did a thriving business from the concentration camp guard; 3) Ninety percent are guilty and have dabbed themselves with the blood of innocent human beings; 4) The people are to blame for their cowardice--they were all too cowardly. They didn't want to risk anything. And that was the way it was in all of Germany.

The conclusion of this report written on Dachau in 1945 on the liberation of the concentration camp applies today. The conclusion is as follows: If one is to attempt tremendous tasks and accept the terrible responsibility of judging a whole town, assessing it in mass as to collect a guilt of innocence of all its inhabitants for their complicity in committing this most heinous of crimes, one would do well to remember the fearsome shadow that hands over everything in THIS state in which crime has been incorporated and called THE GOVERNMENT.

So you can see how the whole program is related here. My lawsuit was against one single aspect of the total program: The enforcement arm of the conspiracy. The people who make up the cadre that is going to occupy the concentration camps where enemies of the United States will be placed. Remember Solzhenitsyn's words in the Gulag Archipelago: "Resistance should have began right there but it did not begin. You aren't gagged, you really can--you really ought to cry out that arrests are being made on the strength of false accusations. If many such outcries had been heard all over the city arrests would have no longer have been so easy".

They, the tyrants, can't work in the public eye. Those peo­ple who were so apathetic, hoping that nothing was really wrong, that nothing would happen to their persons and property, sat back and watched. The anarchists, financed by multinational interests, looted and pillaged their country.

If you think that all (that) is necessary is to pay your house notes, to pay your TV notes, to go vote when there is an elec­tion, and to stand back during the rest of the year and watch as your country and way of life are replaced by a system in which you will be a slave in a concentration camp, you--not the conspirators--are guilty because you, by silent acquiescence, invite tyranny and oppression.

And when you have to steal food to eat because our produc­tion is for foreign use because the Dept. of Commerce--through Executive Order 11490 and its predecessors--is responsible for international distribution of our commodities, don't sit in the culvert hiding and eating and wondering what happened because you made it all possible.

When your family is split up and spread across the United States to do slave labor and you never see your loved ones again, it will be your fault because you did nothing to prevent it. And once we lose our freedom we are never going to regain it. That is why we must stand together to prevent the loss of our freedom as citizens of the United States.

Thank you very much.

(Conclusion of the transcript of this taped report).

BACK TO RUSSBACHER
Editor's note: At the time of compiling this JOURNAL Russbacher has had his heart surgery but has not been released from the jail in Missouri.
OK, readers, the first of the wondrous letters are pouring in--PLEASE, continue.

I want to thank my most special friend, Suzy W. for offering us a copy of a letter to the SHERIFF of St. Charles County Jail. We offer it here so that you have guidelines if you would ap­proach this person. Suzy has researched this situation and you will be in good hands with the information.

November 5, 1993

Sheriff Raymond Runyon
St. Charles County Jail
301 N. Second Street
St. Charles, MO 63301

Dear Sheriff Runyon:

Naval Captain Gunther Russbacher (Office of Naval Intelligence), ex-POW, has been held on an outrageously high cashonly bail in St. Charles County Jail since being moved there about two weeks after Judge Michael Brown, on August 30, 1993, ordered his sentence vacated and the St. Charles County prosecutor's office did not file an appeal.

Although I find this almost impossible to believe, I have been told it is fact: In Missouri, the county government is au­tonomous, and county sheriffs are accountable to NO ONE, not the state attorney general, not even the governor, for all activi­ties within the jail. There is no state review board to monitor the administration's treatment of prisoners, what happens among the jail population, or investigate any of their complaints, re­gardless how serious they may be. And you, as Sheriff of St. Charles County, by Missouri state law, are King of the Jail there, so to speak. Of course, this autonomy also applies to the county prosecutor and the presiding commissioner, collectively making a triune-led totalitarian system more usually associated with the oppressive, tyrannical regimes our national government has been battling for 80 years.

And this is what Gunther Russbacher is now up against. Surely you are aware that Captain Russbacher's real identity has been obscured and lied about, and ALL charges ever lodged against him by the State of Missouri have been totally fabricated to cover the CIA's funding of covert activities not authorized by Congress. But, are you aware that there is PROOF of his real identity and PROOF that the current alleged charges on which he is being held on a cash-only $450,000 bail--"bad checks" to­talling about $8,000--are FALSE charges, Sheriff Runyon, and the proof will be shown in court. If you examine all of the legal proceedings in this case, you will clearly see there are no grounds on which to base his conviction and incarceration; you will see that you have been put in the position of holding Cap­tain Russbacher ILLEGALLY.

I know the flagrant miscarriage of justice in his case was not initiated by you and I realize that you are not one of the perpe­trators of the vicious web of lies and deceit that has kept him a prisoner of the Missouri State government for over four years. However, what the absolute authoritarian structure of county government does is put you squarely as the ONLY person to be held accountable for Captain Russbacher's life, because you are the only one who can insure that he is given optimum medical care immediately and for as long as he is incarcerated in your jail.

The current situation demands not only your urgent attention, but ACTION. Just a few days ago Captain Russbacher was given a confirmed diagnosis of infectious hepatitis B and sen­tenced to 60 more days in an isolation cell, where he already had been held for almost two weeks. This is a most suspicious development at this time, don't you think so? Since I speak with Captain Russbacher almost daily, I hear that he does not have the jaundiced complexion and eyes of a hepatitis victim, nor does he have the liver distension and pain associated with the disease. It's especially curious that just a few months ago, dur­ing his imprisonment at MECC and in response to the protests that he was assigned kitchen duty despite his medical conditions, that institution's medical personnel stated that he did NOT have a history of hepatitis (which he does--history, not active ill­ness!).

The manipulative aspect of this current convenient diagnosis and 60-day isolation is that it would prevent his appearing in court next month to PROVE his identity and his innocence of the false charges. In a concern just as critical to his very life, 60 days without the essential treatment--one doctor prescribed quadruple bypass surgery, another, angioplasty--for his critical heart problems could prove to be fatal.

If Captain Russbacher does have infectious hepatitis B, which is indeed a serious illness, the standard jail fare and environment are NOT proper diet or rest therapy for this disease. Nor are they anything other than crucially detrimental to his serious heart problems. And having him admitted to the jail's choice of hospital, where recently he was taken and manacled to the bed like a maniacal killer, is NOT an acceptable solution; it is per­petuation of the unconscionable treatment of a man who has been unjustly and illegally kept behind bars for four years in your state.

Gunther Russbacher's continued confinement in your jail is nothing short of a death sentence--with you, as Absolute Au­thority for his care, his executioner. Those whose lies and cor­rupt, illegal actions led to Captain Russbacher's incarceration in your facility are strategically removed from the scene; and you, as the person ultimately responsible for his proper medical care and treatment--indeed, his very life while a prisoner--are right there on the firing line. And I can assure you: Not only to the Austrian government, but to thousands of individuals and groups committed to protecting and preserving Gunther Russbacher's life and obtaining his freedom, his death in St. Charles County Jail would make him a universal martyr. And what will that make you, Sheriff Runyon? This is not a matter to be taken lightly, is it?

Yours truly,

Suzanne Ward

cc:
National POW Strike Force
American Legion
Veterans of Foreign Wars
The Americans Bulletin
Missouri Committee to Free Gunther Russbacher
Gunther Russbacher Release Committee
U..S. Attorney General Janet Reno
Robert Fleming, Missouri State Public Defender System
Missouri Attorney General Jay Nixon
St. Charles County Assistant Prosecutor Phil Groenweghe
Eugene Schwendemann, Presiding Commissioner, County of St. Charles
John G. Healy, Director, Amnesty International
Gary Stern, Director, ACLU Center for National Security
Studies
Missouri Governor Mel Carnahan
Jack McLamb, Police Against the New World Order Dr. Ben White
Dr. Pierre Cloutier and Associates
Dr. Stan Montieth
Dr. Ede Koenig
Dr. Lorraine Day
Dr. Paul Kenyon
* * *
Citizens, it is up to you how you go from this day forward. It is not EASY but no longer can you allow the serpent to wag the course of freedom--freedom will lose. It takes "little" in actual­ity to make a mammoth difference--here you have opportunity, along with some other instances, to not only make "a differ­ence" but set new standards for soon it will be realized that to act so unlawfully will place the spotlight upon self and the ac­tions will be revealed. You as a nation of individual citizens can make that difference--one by one until the flow is so great that the adversary criminal cannot longer function. For instance, some day if you can buy enough time, you can DEMAND no computerized election booths--no allowance given for "fixed" counters and you can bring back your nation. It is all but too late--IF YOU DO NOT ACT NOW AND HERE IS A PLACE TO BEGIN.
Before we close I want to also share Suzy's letter to Governor Mel Carnahan because it is difficult to know what to write--here is a good example.

TO: GOVERNOR MEL CARNAHAN
FROM: SUZANNE WARD

Governor Carnahan, I cannot understand how anyone with a conscience--a soul!--can continue to ignore the unjust and illegal incarceration of Naval Captain Gunther Russbacher (ONI), cur­rently held on the outrageous cash-only bail of $450,000 on alleged charges of writing "bad checks" whose total is only around $8,000. Furthermore, the PROOF that these are manufactured charges is available in the cancelled checks IN QUESTION and the statements of the bank managers whose records confirm there have NEVER been complainants re­garding these or ANY OTHER CHECKS AGAINST CAP­TAIN RUSSBACHER.

How can you KNOW of this unconscionable situation--which you DO--and not act to free this man--which you have NOT.
After having been in isolation for almost two weeks, he has just been diagnosed as definitely having infectious hepatitis B and sentenced to 60 more days in a solitary cell. This is most suspi­cious, as it would preclude his appearing in court in December, when all the evidence proving his identity and his innocence of the current blatantly false charges would be shown. It also will prevent his having the prescribed treatment
--one physician said quadruple bypass surgery, another said angioplasty--for his critical heart problems.

WHAT is keeping you from discharging your official responsi­bility to govern honorably, justly, and morally--and FREEING Gunther Russbacher--while he is still alive? If you have no fear of ever being held accountable for permitting such a blatant in­justice as his incarceration to continue, then you are limiting re­tribution to humankind. Governor Carnahan, that would be a mistake of the gravest consequence, as God cannot be fooled or ignored.

Signature.
* * * * * *
November 4, 1993

TO: U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno
FAX: (202) 514-4371

FROM: SUZANNE WARD

You have been notified about the blatant corruption of Missouri State and local officials, and it is my understanding that a grand jury investigation is underway.

Something that must be included in such an investigation is the complete autonomy of Missouri counties in their handling of law enforcement, legal and judicial matters. Even in the face of pervasive corruption and criminal activities at county level, there are no higher authorities who can hold the offending county officials accountable for their actions. I am faxing you a letter from Rayelan Russbacher (Rayelan is the wife of Naval Captain (ONI) Gunther Russbacher, incarcerated in St. Charles County Jail; details are in her letter) to Missouri Attorney Gen­eral Jay Nixon and the response from John Morris. Also, Mrs. Russbacher has been told by Missouri Governor Mel Carnahan's private secretary that even the governor has no authority over county officials.

There is no state medical examining board which can monitor the treatment of prisoners in Missouri's county jails or investi­gate their complaints, regardless of how serious; there is no agency or office in the State that has jurisdiction to hold the pertinent county sheriff accountable.

What kind of tyranny is this, where valid complaints on legal and medical bases can be stonewalled because there is no higher authority to whom an appeal can be filed? Why can a Missouri county operate as a totalitarian regime; why are there no safe­guard systems such as we have on a national basis, crucial to a just and sound government?

Surely YOUR office IS a higher authority than the offices of the St. Charles County prosecuting attorney, the presiding commis­sioner and the sheriff, as well as the Attorney General of Mis­souri.

[H: Suggestion: Remind Ms. Reno that she HAD THE AU­THORITY TO HAVE FINAL ACTION in both the Idaho/Weaver incident AND, not less, the WACO incident in which all law enforcement matters were handled by her office which overrode all local, county and state authority. If it was suitable in a dastardly situation as massive as Waco, is there no way to interject "reason" into a county prison-system in Missouri?]

In the case of Captain Russbacher, outrageous prosecution-‑which is in actuality, persecution--has marked the entire legal proceedings against him. The treatment he has received in Mis­souri state jail and prison facilities has been unconscionable, in some respects, akin to the treatment he received as a POW in Southeast Asia. The latest development is that just a few days ago, after having spent almost two weeks in isolation, he was diagnosed as definitely having infectious hepatitis B and sen­tenced to 60 more days in isolation.

That would preclude his appearing at a hearing in December, when his true identity and his innocence of the alleged--and false--charges could be proven. Does this not seem disgustingly suspicious to you? It certainly does to those of us who are working diligently to free him from his unjust and illegal incar­ceration. This manipulative isolation also delays Captain Russbacher's prescribed medical care--either quadruple bypass surgery or angioplasty--to correct his critical heart problems, which, if they continue very long untreated, will be fatal.

Please give this matter your urgent attention so that Captain Russbacher can be released BEFORE the State of Missouri manages to accomplish what they obviously want, his death in prison. Thank you.

cc:
St. Charles County Sheriff Raymond Runyon
St. Charles County Assistant Prosecutor Phil Groenweghe
St. Charles County Presiding Commissioner Eugene Schwen­demann
Missouri State Attorney General Jay Nixon
Mel Carnahan, Governor, State of Missouri

* * * * * * * *
God bless you, precious people of Truth and justice, for as the Master said: "As ye have done to the least of these--so too have ye done it unto me".

Salu.

Editor's note: Russbacher was released from the hospital after quintuple bypass heart surgery on Nov. 22, 1993. He was returned to the jail in Missouri. See Vol. 3, #9, Nov. 23, 1993 and following CONTACTS for further information.