Corporations Masquerading as Government in Australia and World Wide

Corporations Masquerading as Government in Australia and World Wide

 

By Andy Whiteley

   

The Great Seal of the United Kingdom, atop the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 - and
The Great Seal of Australia, a trademark registered with United States Patent and Trademark Office.

Which represents real (de jure) government in Australia?

Which is seen on “government” literature ?

 

Would you be surprised to find a company with the same name as your country registered with the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) in Washington DC? Well, guess what?! Among those listed as corporate entities by the United States SEC are Israel, Turkey, Italy, Hungary, Sweden, Finland, Argentina, Colombia, Brazil, The Philippines, South Korea, Japan, Jamaica, South Africa, Canada, Australia… and my personal favourite (and I quote) “Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of Alberta as represented by Alberta Investment Management Corp.”

Interesting! So what could all this mean? For the purpose of this article we will follow the example of Australia.

Australia…. the lucky country?

• SEC Entity Name: COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
• SEC Central Index Key (CIK): 0000805157
• SEC Standard Industrial Code (SIC): 8880 (UNKNOWN)
• SEC Business Address: 1601 MASSACHUSETTS AVE NW WASHINGTON DC 20036
• Fiscal Year End: 0630

Well, that certainly raises some questions!

Why is a company called ‘COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA’ registered in Washington DC? What reason could there be for a country to be registered as a company?

By definition, aren’t corporate and government entities mutually exclusive? And doesn’t government regulate companies?

Why would Australia be registered with the SEC in the United States? And why would it provide a ‘Prospectus’ and annual ‘Economic and Fiscal Outlook’ documents to the SEC? And be subject to SEC regulation?

Why is the Great Seal of Australia a trademark registered with United States Patent and Trademark Office?

Could the ‘Australian Government’ be a corporate entity masquerading as real government, for profit, and not for the purpose of governance? Does the ‘Australian Government’ truly represent “the people” and not shareholders in another country?

Why do today’s government departments have corporate mission statements like “we provide services on BEHALF of government” and “our CLIENTS include government…”?

What happened to “we ARE government”?? Does this suggest they are NOT true government, but a company masquerading as government?

If a company registered in Washington DC is falsely claiming government status in Australia, what happened to the real (de jure) government with a similar name? And when?

And are the laws in Australia therefore just rules for employees and contractors of the corporation?

Interesting. Let’s look a little closer…

Perhaps it is a requirement that the Commonwealth of Australia registers as a company entity in order to trade with the United States of America. Are all the other countries who trade with the United States also registered on the American SEC? Is ‘the United States of America’ also registered with ASIC, the Australian Securities & Investments Commission? And is Australia similarly registered with the corresponding trade regulators in other countries?

The answer appears to be NO.

International trade implies mutual agreement; reciprocity; a common method of exchange. But the reality is that the ‘COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA’ is registered as a corporate entity with the United States SEC, but not the other way around. There appear to be no comparable corporate entities registered in other countries with which Australia trades. And nations ranking among the United States’ biggest trading partners do NOT have corporate avatars registered with the American SEC. Perhaps registration in Washington DC is for the purpose of trading Government Bonds. Interesting…

… But this strange corporate entity is only half the story. Before government bonds can even exist, surely there must first be a legitimate government.

Government and the role of Governor-General in Australia

In Australia, the Governor-Generalis the representative of the Monarch (currently Queen Elizabeth II) and the Administrator of Government. Given that the Governor-General administers government in Australia, government can only exist in Australia with a valid Governor-General. The Governor-General is reliant upon the existence of the ‘Office of Governor-General’, which was originally constituted by the late Queen Victoria in Letters Patent dated 29th October 1900, passed under the Monarch’s seal – the Great Seal Of The United Kingdom (view Letters Patent 1900).

The power and authority to revoke, alter or amend those Letters Patent was reserved by the late Queen Victoria to her heirs and successors. Given those Letters Patent were issued under the ‘Great Seal of the United Kingdom’, surely any revocation, alteration or amendment must be issued by an heir and successor under the same Seal.

So what’s the problem?

In 1984, Letters Patent supposedly revoked the original Letters Patent of 1900 and provided new provisions for the Office of Governor-General (view Letters Patent 1984). This happened under the ‘Great Seal of Australia’, which we already know is a corporate trademark registered with the United States Patent & Trademark Office in the U.S. (view registration)

Surely such an attempt at revocation cannot therefore be lawful? And if not, what Office is the Governor-General in Australia presently occupying? Is the person we call “Governor-General” truly a representative of an “heir and successor” to the late Queen Victoria?

The answer appears to be NO.

Given that the Governor-General appoints Ministers, Judges, Commissioners and Justices of the Peace, and ascribes Royal Assent as the Monarch’s representative in Australia – using the Monarch’s Seal – in the absence of a valid Governor-General, are there any legitimate government offices in Australia?

Again… the answer appears to be NO.

So let’s test the theory…

A case study

Wake Up World friend and colleague Scott Bartle documented his recent dealings with ‘Australian Customs & Border Protection Service’ in his self-funded documentary “What The FUQ? – Frequently Unanswered Questions of the Australian Government”.

This simple, concise and sometimes hilarious case-study follows Scott’s ongoing interactions with a supposed “government” entity that simply does not behave as a genuine government agency should.

And all he did was ask them to demonstrate their validity!

Documentary Trailer – What The FUQ Trailer (2:47 mins)

See this documentary in full:. I highly recommended it -

So… IS the “Australian Government” the same government the original Office of Governor-General was intended to Administer?

It’s a question that officials at all levels of “Australian Government” have seem unwilling or unable to answer. Some readers may think I’m a crack-pot for even asking the question. “Break out the tin-foil hats!” they’ll cry! But please… Before you form an opinion or post a comment on this article, ask the Australian Government the same question yourself:

Can you please demonstrate that today’s Office of Governor-General is the same Office that was constituted by the late Queen Victoria in Letters Patent of 1900?

It is your right, after all. And there are certainly some details that don’t add up. But it gets better….

That’s odd, they certainly don’t ACT like a true government.

At first “Government” may just ignore you. But since anyone claiming government status has a responsibility to prove it, their silence is very indicative, don’t you think? So push your Government a little further, and see what happens when you really start to question who’s who. Taxes & fines are suddenly waived, and miraculously, licenses & permits are no longer required! And it doesn’t stop there.

Does this sound like the behaviour of legitimate government? NO, it does not. If challenged, does a legitimate government not simply demonstrate its validity and continue to act within its lawful authority? Or does legitimate government exempt that person’s responsibilities and wave them through the gates, quickly, quietly and with a minimum of fuss? “Nothing to see here!”

Is this situation unique to Australia?

Let’s find out!

To our friends and readers from the Commonwealth of Australia, we recommend you contact your local Members and Senators and ask them one simple question:

Can you please demonstrate that today’s Office of Governor-General is the same Office that was constituted by the late Queen Victoria in Letters Patent of 1900?

To our friends and readers outside Australia, we recommend you identify the documents that established the original offices of government in your country, then ask one simple question of your government representatives:

Can you please demonstrate that today’s government is the same one as established at the inception of this country?

Demonstrating its own legitimacy is a very simple thing that every government agency should be able to do. And in a true democracy, silence is an unacceptable response of government to questions of its very legitimacy. But today the “Australian Government” appears unwilling or unable to prove its legitimacy.

Is yours?

It only takes a few minutes to write to your local member’s office. Please come back to Wake Up World and tell our readers how your enquiry was met. Silence? Jargon? Or a simple demonstration of your government’s legitimacy?

We’d love to hear your stories, so please leave a comment or send us an email

So what the FUQ do we do next?

Written enquiries made to Ministers and Government agencies, to the Office of the Prime Minister and to the Office of Governor General remain unanswered. So in the absence of a response from Government, Wake Up World supports respectfully escalating this matter to the current Monarch, ‘Her Majesty’, The Queen.

Surely ‘Her Majesty’ must know the answer; why a corporation in the United States bears the name ‘COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA’; why in 1984 her authority to amend the provisions for the Office of Governor-General was granted on a company letterhead; why those claiming to represent true government in Australia have been unable to prove that status; and why some, when challenged, may suddenly overlook one’s obligations and run silently in the other direction.

SIGN THE PETITION

…and ask ‘Her Majesty’ for the truth.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE

…we all have a right to know.

HOLD YOUR GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE

…it is just one simple question.

In a true democracy, silence is an unacceptable answer of government to questions of its legitimacy.

Which “Government” Can We Trust?

 

By Scott Bartle

It appears that Corporations are masquerading as government in countries around the world – for profit and not for the purpose of governance. We know the role of true government is to act as trustees for the people… to provide services to the community, to represent its interests. But do those claiming government status today truly act as our trustees? Does real government still exist? What the FUQ is going on in government today????

Let’s go right back to the beginning… before there was Government.

Natural Trust

When each of us is born, our parents take on the role of Executor of a trust. They appoint Trustees like nannies, school teachers, dentists etc. to return benefits to you as the Beneficiary. Your parents may make the determinations about your care, but they do so on your behalf until we reach maturity.

When we become of age (whatever age that is) we take on the role of Executor, and continue to appoint Trustees to return benefits to us as Beneficiaries. This is a global human phenomenon; even the most isolated tribes in the deepest jungles appear to behave in the same way. Let’s call this a Natural Trust.

How Does This Relate To Government?

In the same way we appoint nannies and dentists, we also appoint Government as a Trustee. They perform an administrative service and return benefits to us as Beneficiaries. We enjoy the benefits of roads, schools, public health services etc… or at least that’s how it should work. Most people, I believe, would be comfortable appointing Government as a Trustee – provided Government functions according to this Natural Trust, and more importantly that Government actually serves the people.

But what if somewhere, something went wrong..?

What if the Government, appointed as Trustee, started serving another master? What if the actions of Government were benefiting others – like shareholders? Would you trust them enough to appoint them your Trustee?

Inconsistencies in the Representation of “Government”

Let’s first look to the United States. The original Constitution reads “The Constitution for the United States”. As of 1871, a Constitution was substituted and reads “The CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA”.

So which is it? Which one is legitimate? How many constitutions are there?

A similar scenario appears to be taking place in Australia. The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) tells us that Government is named “Government of the Commonwealth”.… yet occupying the country’s capital is the “Australian Government”.

Further inconsistency manifests in the name of the Parliament holding office in Australia. The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) defines Parliament as “The Parliament” or “The Parliament of the Commonwealth”. This is in direct contrast to the entity called “Parliament of Australia” which is currently occupying the country’s capital.

Surely the Constitutions in both America and Australia aren’t so weak that legal entity names can so easily be substituted? It doesn’t take a constitutional lawyer to tell you there are strict rules for altering constitutions; that’s why we have referenda. But does anyone remember the referenda that enabled these changes to be made?

And is it just the name that’s different..?

Frequently Unanswered Questions.

When such questions are put to “Government”, answers are scarce – if not completely absent. In a recent case study involving the importation of a 1959 Chevrolet Corvette into Australia, “Australian Customs & Border Protection Service” were challenged to provide evidence they were in fact a legitimate Department of the de jure Government of the Commonwealth of Australia. After twelve months of questioning at all levels of Government, no answers have been forthcoming. “Ministers”, “Judges”, “Commissioners”, “Departments”, “Governors”, and even the Prime Minister – all remain silent.

So who are they? Are they really Government? So far, no “Government” official has been willing to attempt an explanation; to demonstrate their legitimacy as representatives of true government.

But is a government’s refusal to provide evidence of its legitimacy really good enough? Is that what you expect of a Government that is supposed to act as your trustee? What happened to accountability in Government? Should 12 months without answers be taken AS the answer…??

Accountability in Government… in the Words of JFK

So what happened to accountability in government? Surely questions related to the lawful validity of Government are not simply vexatious? Rather, isn’t a “Government” official who declines scrutiny into the lawful validity of their office claiming to be above the law?

In 1961 US President John F Kennedy made a speech to the American Newspaper Publishers Association that everyone in Government – and those who believe Government do not have to answer to the people – should listen to.

He stated: “Government at all levels must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information, outside the narrowest limits of national security…. We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors, and we expect you to point them out when we miss them” said Kennedy. Those are powerful words.

So if this is the case, does real government simply shut up when its validity is challenged? Or does it attempt to address the concerns of those it is supposed to serve, especially as public pressure to do so continues to mount? And if they don’t serve us…. who ARE they serving?? What would happen if the “Government” started to act as the Executor of a trust – dictating rules, codes and statutes to you? What happens if “Government” started demanding that benefits be returned to them..?

How could this happen..?

Corporate “Government” Trust

Let’s consider for a minute the scenario of a Corporate Government Trust, in which the “government” plays the role of Executor. Would a “government” acting as Executor take questions from it’s Trustee? Would the “Government” create a legal entity to which you act as Trustee? Perhaps upon the registration of your birth? Do governments address you … or a LEGAL ENTITY? More importantly, does the silence of government on these questions provide the “fullest possible information” that President Kennedy spoke about??

What can we do about this..?

The first action appears to be to determine the capacity in which “Government” acts. Who are they actually serving..? This question is critical. But I don’t expect this information to be any more forthcoming of government than the answer of their legitimacy. So in the meantime, there are other things we can do in our interactions with Corporate Government.

• Some offer to accept the role of Trustee to their Corporate Government on the condition that they be paid an annual fee to be the Trustee… say $1,000,000 p.a.

• Others provide terms and conditions to their Corporate Government, which set out fees and charges applicable for acts of the pretence to real government.

Either of these two approaches would collapse if those claiming government status were able to demonstrate their legitimacy. But these actions have been shown to stop Corporate Government agencies in their tracks. Does this sound like the actions of a Trustee of the people? Or an Executor and Beneficiary of a corrupted system?

More importantly, how many challenges to the lawful validity of government have been met with the proof demanded by its people?

So what the FUQ do we do next?

• In dealings with any government representative, ask them ONE SIMPLE QUESTION: Can you please demonstrate that today’s government (the one you represent) is the same one as established at the inception of this country? It is the onus of any person or entity claiming government status to prove they act on behalf of legitimate government. Until they can demonstrate this, don’t deal with them.

• Sign the petition to ask Her Majesty, The Queen for the truth about the “Australian Government”; something all levels of the “Australian Government” have been unwilling or unable to provide.

• Share this article. The Corporate Government phenomenon is not limited just to the United States, the UK, or Australia. Increasingly, Governments around the world are behaving as Executors and Beneficiaries, not as Trustees of their people. We all have a right to know… which “Government” can we trust?

Visit truth-now.net for more information.

From Wake Up World @ http://wakeup-world.com/2012/11/09/are-corporations-masquerading-as-government-in-australia-and-world-wide/ and http://wakeup-world.com/2012/12/17/corporations-masquerading-as-government-part-ii-which-government-can-we-trust/

For more information about ‘real’ law see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/common%20law

- Scroll down through ‘Older Posts’ at the end of each section

Hope you like this not for profit site -

It takes hours of work every day by a genuinely incapacitated invalid to maintain, write, edit, research, illustrate and publish this website from a tiny cabin in a remote forest

Like what we do? Please give anything you can -  

Contribute any amount and receive at least one New Illuminati eBook!

(You can use a card securely if you don’t use Paypal)

Please click below -

Spare Bitcoin change?

Videos -  https://youtu.be/EeYQNq7znH4

https://youtu.be/umVj5XQYAi8

https://youtu.be/lVsMUpPgdT0

For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the random synchronistic search box @ the top left of http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

And see

 New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

 New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati

New Illuminati Youtube Channel -  https://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/playlists

New Illuminati’s OWN Youtube Videos -  

https://www.youtube.com/user/new1lluminati/videos

New Illuminati on Google+ @ For New Illuminati posts - https://plus.google.com/u/0/+RamAyana0/posts

and see https://plus.google.com/115562482213600937809/posts

and google.com/+newilluminati-channel

New Illuminati on Twitter @ www.twitter.com/new_illuminati

New Illuminati on Google Follow - http://www.google.com/friendconnect/settings/edit?smpl=true&st=e%3DAOG8GaCFDeBRZ1yDY2DjCaq61tFDiwO07s%252Fwv3x8%252B%252FJgZJTLx5igbMomJIu3796Ja6n05WaS8qnJ0DLyeGk1q49tLD8m%252FhV1K%252Bq%252BQIOGOwLeWznnm5IGhzjfWzVnq5I4UJr3fw8yk%252B8W2OqwlCbL7BNsW32uouSc79Br%252BkOZQ1Fpzg6J3KMIZkzmg0%252FcPHsWUPqZv845VKS31S%252FbCm8NpINhlK1kDxUdRmcCkT37dIc4RB6PNurjCcd2%252BVkNBveCm4kAgeb8A3Q5hNj6%252FHplvQxKFI%252BW1TYBJVYqHHTKsnBPGcL6wlZdxTUwtfxWU2ZvANJQ%252F%252FUrolBwP7ovb92SZqSWMFJRnN2rsQ%253D%253D%26c%3Dpeoplesense

New Illuminations –Art(icles) by R. Ayana @ http://newilluminations.blogspot.com

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com

DISGRUNTLED SITE ADMINS PLEASE NOTE –

We provide a live link to your original material on your site (and links via social networking services) - which raises your ranking on search engines and helps spread your info further!

This site is published under Creative Commons (Attribution) CopyRIGHT (unless an individual article or other item is declared otherwise by the copyright holder). Reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged - if you give attribution to the work & author and include all links in the original (along with this or a similar notice).

Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution!

If you like what you see, please send a donation (no amount is too small or too large) or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

Live long and prosper! Together we can create the best of all possible worlds…

From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

Targeted  Individuals Microwaved with Directed Energy Weapon Attacks

Bush and Obama administration's widespread human rights abuses includes assaulting targeted Individuals with directed energy Weapons says famous author Dr. Kevin Barrett

by Deborah Dupre

Direct Energy Weapons (DEWs) used on dissident targeted individuals

Photo credit:

Defense Update

The U.S. murdering, disappearing, torturing, terrorizing and assaulting with Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs) innocent targeted individuals, its own citizens, has no business criticizing other nations and needs to clean up its own act to have any credibility on human rights, according to controversial author Dr. Kevin Barrett on Thursday afternoon, also asserting that the U.S. needs to heed former President Jimmy Carter’s call to obey its own Constitution.

Advertisement

“A government that extra-judicially murders, disappears, and tortures its own citizens should clean up its own act before it criticizes other nations," blasted Dr. Barrett Thursday, joining many other rights defenders hailing Jimmy Carter's written recent statement since he released it in the New York Times.

"The US should heed former President Carter and start obeying its own Constitution if it wants to have any credibility on human rights,” human rights defender Dr. Barrett asserted in a written statement released by Press TV titled, 'Disable the purveyors': Is US secretly liquidating dissidents?

President Carter has accused the current president of “widespread abuse of human rights.”

As other American rights defenders also wonder under today’s administration, Barrett asks, “Will writing this article put me on a US government hit list? “Twenty years ago, such a question would have sounded absurd. Today, with the USA becoming more of a banana republic every day, it sounds increasingly realistic.”

Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist, is one of America's best-known critics of the War on Terror. He has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS and other broadcast outlets, and has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications.

Dr. Barrett has taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin, where he ran for Congress in 2008. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, author, and talk radio host. He's co-founder of the Muslim-Christian-Jewish Alliance, and author of the books Truth Jihad: My Epic Struggle Against the 9/11 Big Lie (2007) and Questioning the War on Terror: A Primer for Obama Voters (2009). His website is www.truthjihad.com.Are there are worse places to be a dissident than the U.S.?

Barrett asserts that until recently, if American dissidents wanted to cross the line to get arrested, they’d have to actually threaten to physically harm the President or another high official.

“But the post-9/11 USA is no longer a beacon of human rights. As former President Jimmy Carter recently wrote in the New York Times, ‘The United States is abandoning its role as the global champion of human rights.

"In his article, Carter points out that top US officials are now openly targeting US citizens for political assassination, ‘disappearance,’ unlimited surveillance, and other forms of gross human rights abuse.’”

ABC News reported, "Carter criticized the current president for keeping the Guantanamo Bay detention center open, where prisoners 'have been tortured by waterboarding more than 100 times or intimidated with semiautomatic weapons, power drills or threats to sexually assault their mothers.

"The former president blasted the government for allowing 'unprecedented violations of our rights to privacy through warrantless wiretapping and government mining of our electronic communications.'"

Barrett, however, takes the covert abuse to a new level, that of Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs), one in which thousands of targeted individuals have alleged for years, many taking their claims of abuse to the president's Bio-ethics Commission in 2011.

Defense Update, the international online defense magazine reports that lasers, high power electro-magnetic pulse and directional acoustic weapons are part of the so-called "non-lethal weapon" arsenal.

“Since we now know that a secret National Security committee is ordering the murder of American citizens, and since we know the CIA has the power to easily simulate deaths from illness and accident, we might as well assume that every time a dissident dies unexpectedly, he or she has been murdered by the US government," Barrett asserts, as targeted individuals have been trying to tell the public for over a decade, especially since September, 2001, well before such orders and technology became more mainstream.

Microwave weapon assaults and death threats against innocent people seeking truth and exposing about high-level crime

President Obama's information czar Cass Sunstein has openly advocated in his article, “Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures,” that the US government should “disable the purveyors of conspiracy theories.”

“Sunstein's article “Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures” argues that “conspiracy theories” (by which he means the 9/11 truth movement) are so dangerous that the government should ‘cognitively infiltrate” 9/11 truth groups, ‘disable’ those who spread these ideas, and possibly even make the ideas illegal,” explains Barrett.

“One way to ‘disable the purveyors of conspiracy theories’ is to terrorize them with death threats. This is precisely what happened recently in Seattle, Washington and Vancouver, British Columbia.”

On June 13, Dr. James Fetzer, founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, was scheduled to speak at the University Heights Community Center in Seattle. Shortly before the event, the Community Center received a letter that read:

“Community Center, the 9/11 truth event on June 13th is going to be attacked to Kill Jim Fetzer because he says 'Space Beams' brought down the Twin Towers. The attack may be a bomb or fire bomb or maybe just gun fire. The Bombing may come at a future date to pay you back for supporting the 9/11 truth movement. Kill Jim Fetzer and the 9/11 truth movement. Kill Jim Fetzer (repeated 6 times).

Kill University Heights Community Center (repeated twice)

Kill you now.”

Detective Kerry Hays of the Seattle Police Department is investigating the case, according to Barrett who says that the Community Center hastily canceled Dr. Fetzer's talk. Another venue was found at the last minute.

“Then a few days later, a similar death threat was emailed to the owner of the Denman Theater in Vancouver, British Columbia, where Dr. Fetzer was organizing the Vancouver 9/11 Hearings.

That time, the threat named Barrett, Press TV Canadian correspondent Joshua Blakeney as well as Dr. Fetzer.

"Fortunately, the theater owner was too busy hosting the event to read his email, so he did not become aware of the threat until the hearings were over," Barrett reports, saying, "Death threats are one way to “disable the purveyors of conspiracy theories.” Actual assassinations are another.

A long list of targeted individuals trying to expose the truth of 9/11 met untimely, suspicious deaths. Many have experienced and reported being assaulted with DEWs.

(Watch embedded YouTube video on this page with Barrie Towers explaining the DEW assaults burns and other injuries, physical and mental, that targeted individuals are experiencing and consistently reporting.)

Barrett reminds the reader about Barry Jennings, Dr. David Graham, Mike Ruppert, Byron Belitsos, Justin Raymondos, David Ray Griffith, Bob Bowman, Lyn Margulis and many others :

“Barry Jennings, the deputy director of Emergency Services Department for the New York City Housing Authority on 9/11, appears to have been murdered after speaking publicly about explosions he witnessed that partly demolished World Trade Center Building 7 on the morning of 9/11. (The demolition of WTC-7, begun in the morning, was completed shortly after 5:20 that afternoon, after WTC owner Larry Silverstein and colleagues 'made the decision to pull' the building according to Silverstein's own statement.)

“Dr. David Graham of Shreveport, Louisiana, was murdered - apparently by the FBI - for writing a book about two of the alleged 9/11 hijackers, who were obvious intelligence assets controlled by people at Barksdale Air Force Base. Graham was poisoned with ethelene glycol (antifreeze). The case is discussed in Sander Hicks' new book Slingshot to the Juggernaut.

"It might be objected that Jennings and Graham were murdered because they were eyewitnesses to a State Crime Against Democracy, or SCAD, not because they were dissidents. Is there any evidence that the US government (or a rogue network infiltrating it) is “disabling the purveyors” of dangerous ideas by killing or otherwise physically harming them, even if they are not eyewitnesses?

“Mike Ruppert, the original leader of the 9/11 truth movement, writes that his office was attacked by microwave and/or EMF weapons after he began publishing critiques of the official story of 9/11. The attacks may have contributed to Ruppert's poor health and distraught frame of mind, which led him to quit the 9/11 truth movement and temporarily flee the USA in 2006.

"Publisher Byron Belitsos, told Barrett that he and many other 9/11 truth organizers in California were targeted by EMF or microwave weapons during the first years after 9/11.

“Belitsos says the weapons were wielded by men in plain white vans that would park in front of the victim's house, and that victims suffered immediate and sometimes extreme health effects including headaches, ringing in the ears, nausea, vomiting, severe depression, dizziness, and loss of consciousness.

"Justin Raimondo, the pioneer investigator of Israeli complicity in 9/11, was warned away from the subject - and after he disregarded the warning, he suffered a severe heart attack, despite his relative youth and excellent physical condition. Since his mysterious heart attack, Raimondo has stayed away from the subject of 9/11, and has remained in good health.

"David Ray Griffin, the world's leading voice of 9/11 truth, suffered a partially-disabling stroke in the summer of 2010. While he has recovered sufficiently to continue to write and research, the stroke left him with a slight aphasia that has ended his career as a prolific public speaker.

"Dr. Bob Bowman, the former head of Star Wars under two US presidents, has had his 9/11 truth efforts slowed by his struggle with cancer.

"Even more tragically, the most prestigious scientist ever to take up the cause of 9/11 truth, Lynn Margulis, died of a stroke November 22, 2011. When I last spoke to Lynn, less than a year before her death, she told me she did not want to speak publicly about 9/11 any more, because “politics is too dangerous.” She sounded scared - like someone had warned or threatened her.

"Steven Jones, the physics professor who was forced out of Brigham Young University for researching the demolition of the World Trade Center, was warned to stop by a “connected” colleague. Jones did the right thing: he immediately went public about the apparent threat.

Barrett says that Richard Gage, founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, might have also "been attacked by the type of EMF or microwave weapon described by Ruppert and Belitsos."

"In the summer of 2009, in Washington, DC, Gage suddenly suffered vertigo and hearing loss. Activist colleagues who were present suspect some kind of covert attack. Today, Gage still suffers from the after-effects: partial loss of hearing in one ear.

Thousands of targeted individuals who have tried to raise awareness about their plight to survive being attacked by EMF weapons would find comfort in Barrett's following words: "Though some consider microwave and EMF weapons the stuff of science fiction, Maj. Doug Rokke, Ph.D., the former head of the US Army's depleted uranium cleanup project after Gulf War I, says these weapons are very real, and commonly used in military circles."

Rokke described to Barrett he personally used such weapons on a regular basis while training with Special Forces at US Army facilities:

“'We had them van-mounted, truck-mounted, plane-mounted, and hand-carried. We would go around zapping each other for fun. This was during exercises, or sometimes just as a practical joke.' Rokke assured me that, based on his firsthand knowledge of US military mind-set and capabilities, 9/11 truth activists have undoubtedly been targeted by exotic non-lethal (and lethal) weapons.

"Will writing this article put me on a US government hit list?" Barrett again asks.

"Twenty years ago, such a question would have sounded absurd. Today, with the USA becoming more of a banana republic every day, it sounds increasingly realistic."


From http://www.examiner.com/article/microwaving-targeted-individuals-end-rights-abuses-barrett-tells-government

Wonder Weapons

The Pentagon's quest for nonlethal arms is amazing. But is it smart?

by DOUGLAS PASTERNAK

Tucked away in the corner of a drab industrial park in Huntington Beach, Calif., is a windowless, nondescript building. Inside, under extremely tight security, engineers and scientists are working on devices whose ordinary appearance masks the oddity of their function. One is cone shaped, about the size of a fire hydrant. Another is a 3-foot-long metal tube, mounted on a tripod, with some black boxes at the operator's end. These are the newest weapons of war.

For hundreds of years, sci-fi writers have imagined weapons that might use energy waves or pulses to knock out, knock down, or otherwise disable enemies--without necessarily killing them. And for a good 40 years the U.S. military has quietly been pursuing weapons of this sort. Much of this work is still secret, and it has yet to produce a usable "nonlethal" weapon. But now that the cold war has ended and the United States is engaged in more humanitarian and peacekeeping missions, the search for weapons that could incapacitate people without inflicting lethal injuries has intensified. Police, too, are keenly interested. Scores of new contracts have been let, and scientists, aided by government research on the "bioeffects" of beamed energy, are searching the electromagnetic and sonic spectrums for wavelengths that can affect human behavior. Recent advancements in miniaturized electronics, power generation, and beam aiming may finally have put such pulse and beam weapons on the cusp of practicality, some experts say.

Weapons already exist that use lasers, which can temporarily or permanently blind enemy soldiers. So-called acoustic or sonic weapons, like the ones in the aforementioned lab, can vibrate the insides of humans to stun them, nauseate them, or even "liquefy their bowels and reduce them to quivering diarrheic messes," according to a Pentagon briefing. Prototypes of such weapons were recently considered for tryout when U.S. troops intervened in Somalia. Other, stranger effects also have been explored, such as using electromagnetic waves to put human targets to sleep or to heat them up, on the microwave-oven principle. Scientists are also trying to make a sonic cannon that throws a shock wave with enough force to knock down a man.

While this and similar weapons may seem far-fetched, scientists say they are natural successors to projects already underway--beams that disable the electronic systems of aircraft, computers, or missiles, for instance. "Once you are into these antimateriel weapons, it is a short jump to antipersonnel weapons," says Louis Slesin, editor of the trade journal Microwave News. That's because the human body is essentially an electrochemical system, and devices that disrupt the electrical impulses of the nervous system can affect behavior and body functions. But these programs--particularly those involving antipersonnel research--are so well guarded that details are scarce. "People [in the military] go silent on this issue," says Slesin, "more than any other issue. People just do not want to talk about this."

Projects underway

To learn what the Pentagon has been doing, U.S. News talked to more than 70 experts and scoured biomedical and engineering journals, contracts, budgets, and research proposals. The effort to develop exotic weapons is surprising in its range. Scores of projects are underway, most with funding of several hundred thousand dollars each. One Air Force lab plans to spend more than $100 million by 2003 to research the "bioeffects" of such weaponry.

The benefits of bloodless battles for soldiers and law enforcement are obvious. But the search for new weapons--cloaked as they are in secrecy--faces hurdles. One is the acute skepticism of many conventional-weapons experts. "It is interesting technology but it won't end bloodshed and wars," says Harvey Sapolsky, director of the Security Studies Program at MIT. Says Charles Bernard, a former Navy weapons-research director: "I have yet to see one of these ray gun things that actually works." And if they do work, other problems arise: Some so-called nonlethal weapons could end up killing rather than just disabling victims if used at the wrong range. Others may easily be thwarted by shielding.

Sterner warnings come from ethicists. Years ago the world drafted conventions and treaties to attempt to set rules for the use of bullets and bombs in war. But no treaties govern the use of unconventional weapons. And no one knows what will happen to people exposed to them over the long term.

Moreover, medical researchers worry that their work on such things as the use of electromagnetic waves to stimulate hearing in the deaf or to halt seizures in epileptics might be used to develop weaponry. In fact, the military routinely has approached the National Institutes of Health for research information. "DARPA [Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency] has come to us every few years to see if there are ways to incapacitate the central nervous system remotely," Dr. F. Terry Hambrecht, head of the Neural Prosthesis Program at NIH, told U.S. News. "But nothing has ever come of it," he said. "That is too science fiction and far-fetched." Still, the Pentagon plans to conduct human testing with lasers and acoustics in the future, says Charles Swett, an assistant for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict. Swett insists that the testing will be constrained and highly ethical. It may not be far off. The U.S. Air Force expects to have microwave weapons by the year 2015 and other nonlethal weaponry sooner. "When that does happen," warns Steven Metz, professor of national security affairs at the U.S. Army War College, "I think there will be a public uproar. We need an open debate on them now."

Laser ethics

What happened with U.S. forces in Somalia foreshadows the impending ethical dilemmas. In early 1995, some U.S. marines were supplied with so-called dazzling lasers. The idea was to inflict as little harm as possible if Somalis turned hostile. But the marines' commander then decided that the lasers should be "de-tuned" to prevent the chance of their blinding citizens. With their intensity thus diminished, they could be used only for designating or illuminating targets.

On March 1, 1995, commandos of U.S. Navy SEAL Team 5 were positioned at the south end of Mogadishu airport. At 7 a.m., a technician from the Air Force's Phillips Laboratory, developer of the lasers, used one to illuminate a Somali man armed with a rocket-propelled grenade. A SEAL sniper shot and killed the Somali. There was no question the Somali was aiming at the SEALs. But the decision not to use the laser to dazzle or temporarily blind the man irks some of the nonlethal-team members. "We were not allowed to disable these guys because that was considered inhumane," said one. "Putting a bullet in their head is somehow more humane?"

Despite such arguments, the International Red Cross and Human Rights Watch have since led a fight against antipersonnel lasers. In the fall of 1995, the United States signed a treaty that prohibits the development of lasers designed "to cause permanent blindness." Still, laser weapons are known to have been developed by the Russians, and proliferation is a big concern. Also, the treaty does not forbid dazzling or "glare" lasers, whose effects are temporary. U.S. military labs are continuing work in this area, and commercial contractors are marketing such lasers to police.

Acoustic pain

The next debate may well focus on acoustic or sonic weapons. Benign sonic effects are certainly familiar, ranging from the sonic boom from an airplane to the ultrasound instrument that "sees" a baby in the uterus. The military is looking for something less benign--an acoustic weapon with frequencies tunable all the way up to lethal. Indeed, Huntington Beach-based Scientific Applications & Research Associates Inc. (SARA) has built a device that will make internal organs resonate: The effects can run from discomfort to damage or death. If used to protect an area, its beams would make intruders increasingly uncomfortable the closer they get. "We have built several prototypes," says Parviz Parhami, SARA's CEO. Such acoustic fences, he says, could be deployed today. He estimates that five to 10 years will be needed to develop acoustic rifles and other more exotic weapons, but adds, "I have heard people as optimistic as one to two years." The military also envisions acoustic fields being used to control riots or to clear paths for convoys.

SARA's acoustic devices have already been tested at the Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base, near the company's Huntington Beach office. And they were considered for Somalia. "We asked for acoustics," says one nonlethal weapons expert who was there. But the Department of Defense said, "No," since they were still untested. The Pentagon feared they could have caused permanent injury to pregnant women, the old, or the sick. Parhami sees acoustics "as just one more tool" for the military and law enforcement. "Like any tool, I suppose this can be abused," he says. "But like any tool, it can be used in a humane and ethical way."

Toward the end of World War II, the Germans were reported to have made a different type of acoustic device. It looked like a large cannon and sent out a sonic boomlike shock wave that in theory could have felled a B-17 bomber. In the mid-1940s, the U.S. Navy created a program called Project Squid to study the German vortex technology. The results are unknown. But Guy Obolensky, an American inventor, says he replicated the Nazi device in his laboratory in 1949. Against hard objects the effect was astounding, he says: It could snap a board like a twig. Against soft targets like people, it had a different effect. "I felt like I had been hit by a thick rubber blanket," says Obolensky, who once stood in its path. The idea seemed to founder for years until recently, when the military was intrigued by its nonlethal possibilities. The Army and Navy now have vortex projects underway. The SARA lab has tested its prototype device at Camp Pendleton, one source says.

Electromagnetic heat

The Soviets were known to have potent blinding lasers. They were also feared to have developed acoustic and radio-wave weapons. The 1987 issue of Soviet Military Power, a cold war Pentagon publication, warned that the Soviets might be close to "a prototype short-range tactical RF [radio frequency] weapon." The Washington Post reported that year that the Soviets had used such weapons to kill goats at 1 kilometer's range. The Pentagon, it turns out, has been pursuing similar devices since the 1960s.

Typical of some of the more exotic proposals are those from Clay Easterly. Last December, Easterly--who works at the Health Sciences Research Division of Oak Ridge National Laboratory--briefed the Marine Corps on work he had conducted for the National Institute of Justice, which does research on crime control. One of the projects he suggested was an electromagnetic gun that would "induce epilepticlike seizures." Another was a "thermal gun [that] would have the operational effect of heating the body to 105 to 107" degrees Fahrenheit. Such effects would bring on discomfort, fevers, or even death.

But, unlike the work on blinding lasers and acoustic weapons, progress here has been slow. The biggest problem is power. High-powered microwaves intended to heat someone standing 200 yards away to 105 degrees Fahrenheit may kill someone standing 10 yards away. On the other hand, electromagnetic fields weaken quickly with distance from the source. And beams of such energy are difficult to direct to their target. Mission Research Corp. of Albuquerque, N.M., has used a computer model to study the ability of microwaves to stimulate the body's peripheral nervous system. "If sufficient peripheral nerves fire, then the body shuts down to further stimulus, producing the so-called stun effect," an abstract states. But, it concludes, "the ranges at which this can be done are only a few meters."

Nonetheless, government laboratories and private contractors are pursuing numerous similar programs. A 1996 Air Force Scientific Advisory Board report on future weapons, for instance, includes a classified section on a radio frequency or "RF Gunship." Other military documents confirm that radio-frequency antipersonnel weapons programs are underway. And the Air Force's Armstrong Laboratory at Brooks Air Force Base in Texas is heavily engaged in such research. According to budget documents, the lab intends to spend more than $110 million over the next six years "to exploit less-than-lethal biological effects of electromagnetic radiation for Air Force security, peacekeeping, and war-fighting operations."

Low-frequency sleep

From 1980 to 1983, a man named Eldon Byrd ran the Marine Corps Nonlethal Electromagnetic Weapons project. He conducted most of his research at the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute in Bethesda, Md. "We were looking at electrical activity in the brain and how to influence it," he says. Byrd, a specialist in medical engineering and bioeffects, funded small research projects, including a paper on vortex weapons by Obolensky. He conducted experiments on animals--and even on himself--to see if brain waves would move into sync with waves impinging on them from the outside. (He found that they would, but the effect was short lived.)

By using very low frequency electromagnetic radiation--the waves way below radio frequencies on the electromagnetic spectrum--he found he could induce the brain to release behavior-regulating chemicals. "We could put animals into a stupor," he says, by hitting them with these frequencies. "We got chick brains--in vitro--to dump 80 percent of the natural opioids in their brains," Byrd says. He even ran a small project that used magnetic fields to cause certain brain cells in rats to release histamine. In humans, this would cause instant flulike symptoms and produce nausea. "These fields were extremely weak. They were undetectable," says Byrd. "The effects were nonlethal and reversible. You could disable a person temporarily," Byrd hypothesizes. "It [would have been] like a stun gun."

Byrd never tested any of his hardware in the field, and his program, scheduled for four years, apparently was closed down after two, he says. "The work was really outstanding," he grumbles. "We would have had a weapon in one year." Byrd says he was told his work would be unclassified, "unless it works." Because it worked, he suspects that the program "went black." Other scientists tell similar tales of research on electromagnetic radiation turning top secret once successful results were achieved. There are clues that such work is continuing. In 1995, the annual meeting of four-star U.S. Air Force generals--called CORONA--reviewed more than 1,000 potential projects. One was called "Put the Enemy to Sleep/Keep the Enemy From Sleeping." It called for exploring "acoustics," "microwaves," and "brain-wave manipulation" to alter sleep patterns. It was one of only three projects approved for initial investigation.

Direct contact

As the military continues its search for nonlethal weapons, one device that works on contact has already hit the streets. It is called the "Pulse Wave Myotron." A sales video shows it in action. A big, thuggish-looking "criminal" approaches a well-dressed woman. As he tries to choke her, she touches him with a white device about the size of a pack of cigarettes. He falls to the floor in a fetal position, seemingly paralyzed but with eyes open, and he does not recover for minutes.

"Contact with the Myotron," says the narrator, "feels like millions of tiny needles are sent racing through the body. This is a result of scrambling the signals from the motor cortex region of the brain," he says. "It is horrible," says William Gunby, CEO of the company that developed the Myotron. "It is no toy." The Myotron overrides voluntary--but not involuntary--muscle movements, so the victim's vital functions are maintained. Sales are targeted at women, but law enforcement officers and agencies--including the Arizona state police and bailiffs with the New York Supreme Court--have purchased the device, Gunby says. A special model built for law enforcement, called the Black Widow, is being tested by the FBI, he says. "I hope they don't order a lot soon," he adds. "The Russian government just ordered 100,000 of them, and I need to replenish my stock."

The U.S. military also has shown interest in the Myotron. "About the time of the gulf war, I got calls from people in the military," recalls Gunby. "They asked me about bonding the Myotron's pulse wave to a laser beam so that everyone in the path of the laser would collapse." While it could not be done, Gunby says, he nonetheless was warned to keep quiet. "I was told that these calls were totally confidential," he says, "and that they would completely deny it if I ever mentioned it."

Some say such secrecy is necessary in new-weapons development. But others think it is a mistake. "Because the programs are secret, the sponsorship is low level, and the technology is unconventional," says William Arkin of Human Rights Watch Arms Project, "the military has not done any of the things to determine if the money is being well spent or the programs are a good idea." It should not be long before the evidence is in.

From http://web.archive.org/web/20000818061145/http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/970707/7weir.htm

Please Note: This information was made available in 1997
 

For more information on directed energy weapons see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com.au/search/label/microwave%20weapons

Help This Unique Independent Site Survive

Donate any amount and receive at least one New Illuminati eBook!

Just press the button -

Xtra Images – http://targetedindividualscanada.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/weapon_effects.jpg
http://bloggerpakistani.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/active-denial-system.jpg

For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the search box @  New Illuminati or click on any label/tag at the bottom of the page @  http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

And see

 New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

 New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati

New Illuminati Youtube Channel - http://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/feed

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com

The Prince of Centraxis - http://centraxis.blogspot.com (Be Aware! This link leads to implicate & xplicit concepts & images!)

This site is published under Creative Commons Fair Use Copyright (unless an individual item is declared otherwise by copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original along with this notice. Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a small but heartfelt donation or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

Live long and prosper!

From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com