Technologies SurveillanceRelated WebsitesCase Study References Links


Using Surveillance Results

USING SURVEILLANCE RESULTS - THE MEDIA

What happens?

  Money is paid to (or by) corrupt agency officials or criminals in exchange for the surveillance material. Sometimes favours / goods are exchanged instead

  The recipients are usually media (mafia) executives, corporate criminals or political players. Also, direct monitoring of surveillance frequencies is arranged whereby corrupt media personnel monitor the audio (sometimes visual) frequencies of surveillance operations set up by the CIA, Office of Homeland Security etc.

  The results are used to arrange "coincidences" for the target to see or hear; ie to oppress them. Alternatively, theft of intellectual property can be the motive.

  With reference to innocent surveillance targets (and with full knowledge of the truth) the media can also be responsible for spreading false rumours and/or lodging false complaints with corrupt police. This helps them to avoid enquiries by honest law enforcers who are often monitored themselves. In any event, investigating "protected" public figures is almost impossible. Remember, large sections of the media / entertainment industry are controlled by organised crime (esp. in the US). All they have to do is deny it or make themselves "unavailable" to any would be investigator (with lawyers at the ready).

  Two thirds of what is gathered by the media is never presented, much being used only to blackmail / oppress political targets. In this manner the political process is warped beyond the mere agency vetting of those entering politics in the first place; taking it towards a situation where transient political figures are tightly "controlled" by the media which can destroy them just as quickly as it builds them up. In turn, large sections of the mainstream media are controlled by criminals with vested interests (eg the drug syndicates).

 

NB: The links between organised crime, the covert government agencies and the media (mainly at the executive level). Little wonder they say "control the media and you control the world".


Who?

Notably, anyone from researchers to writers, from story editors to floor managers, from producers (and other executives) to presenters can be involved in what is broadcast or printed. It is only necessary for a few in each media outlet to be corruptible for damage to be done through MANY articles, items, etc. Most would not know the origins of the "inserted" material but many are aware they are party to a corrupt, oppressive practice.


How?

The feedback procedures include the "spiking" of articles, program promos, advertisements, news and current affairs items with comments, phrases and events which make it clear to the target that they have no privacy. Specifically, what you say or write (or do) is "used" on a timely basis again and again and again in print or on air (with no reference to the source, of course). Public figures are also monitored closely (in private) but the results are not often fed back. Only the disempowered get surveillance feedback.

 

 

When and where?

Also the media mafia can arrange for the harassment of non public figures to come from different sources. By asking leading questions of interviewees, timing when certain stories or shows run, carefully editing and taking matters out of proper context they can paint a deceptive picture, and a very familiar/annoying one for their targets. And they do something similar with photos/video. For example if a target mentions a public figure (in private) that celebrity's picture (etc) will soon appear somewhere the victim is likely to see it. It will "appear" that the celebrity has been told what the target said (a positive comment drawing a happy response and so on). Constant repetition of this transparent means of harassment is very annoying.

Other media tricks involve presenting half truths, misquotes and deliberate mistakes (using names, dates, statistics, no's etc). Even song/music selections for background can be "familiar" or coincidental to monitored targets. On top of this they can prioritise stories on news & current affairs programs, often using stories filed for another occasion or over emphasizing the importance of relatively insignificant news.

A simple example of prioritizing: A target could spend their day as follows:- *Visiting a heart specialist, *paying utilities bills, *talking golf and, perhaps *mentioning obscure or long since retired celebrities at some stage. When viewing a current affairs program that night there may well be items touching on each of these topics (to varying degrees). Bizarre coincidences? Not when you throw in actual phrases used by the target, and this happens night after night. It's clear that such people are targeted by the media mafia. Allowing them to "agenda set" is just one of the lures/traps.

Aside from the "timing" and "presentation" of items, which covertly assault the monitored targets without giving any real influence to them...there is also the covering of stolen ideas / phrases etc by starting "waves of coincidence". For example, in the early part of the writer's own surveillance, (early '90's), I complained privately about the "Doof Doof" music I'd hear coming from hoons cars. I don't know if someone else had the same notion or not but as a monitored person these remarks were picked up and the term was then used widely...This feedback can happen with things you say whether they are original or not. EG The phrase "The Elephant in the Room", which dates back at least to Mark Twain's time, has become more popular again because I use it often. Sometimes the references are just to hurt you and make you look ridiculous if you tell anyone but othertimes it's to use you; still laughing off any claim that this was the case. In the case of "Doof Doof".. Waves and waves of references followed by so many others that the origin of the term would be completely lost and now, (probably courtesy of those that took the term in the first place), even Wikipaedia has been used as a cover by stating that a Sydney housewife, a neighbour of the contributor, was first overheard using the term in 1993. Hmm. At least that's an admission that it was taken from the private conversation of a private citizen. Also, occasionally a phrase or idea can actually be subliminally or even knowingly "planted" in the mind of the unwary target just before another person said it to create added confusion. This method can also be used to transfer ideas to corrupt celebrities who then deceive themselves that the notion was theirs; ie not all stolen material is handed over overtly, many are happy to have it subliminally planted and don't want to hear where it came from in either instance.Celebrities realise that all of this goes on but take direction from execs and read what "writers" present them with without question. They have no conscience when it comes to harassing ordinary citizens on behalf of their agency / syndicate handlers.


Why?
 

The purpose is not to lure the target for an interview (or research a story) but to harass you, covertly. The media do have a political agenda and break many laws. Like most politicians they are directed by vested interests.

Also stories / rumours are often released on a timely basis to pressure honest (or semi honest) public figures and law enforcers on certain issues. These people are often monitored around the clock, keeping those who will "stop at nothing" at least "one step ahead". Often the media watchdog role is merely a public facade presented to win public favour / confidence.

 

Usually only those who are corruptible gain prominent positions within a corrupt media empire. No one who questions corrupt practices survives for long; their careers being halted.

In other words, instead of asking why a highly paid journalist / entertainer etc would be compromised just to damage (even) a non public figure the skeptic should ask himself whether that person would have such highly paid opportunities in the first place if they weren"t corruptible. Remember, as with any job / career, ability is not the only criterion for selection in public life.

Alternative method of arranging 'coincidences' (experimental)

  Using subliminal messages, relayed via technologies mentioned in this web site, news, commentary, songs etc which are to be broadcast (whether prerecorded or live) can be planted. The effect would be as annoying as conventional audio-visual media feedback but less involvement would be needed on the part of on-air presenters. An agency operative need only have access to whats yet to be aired or insert material of his/her own by arrangement.

  More bizarre is the possibility that a targeted persons thoughts/words could be subliminally fed to on-air presenters (without their knowledge). They would then occasionally repeat the targets thoughts/words during ad-lib periods, without even realising it. Naturally this would work better during live broadcasts. Proof that such things have been tried is, of course, unavailable.

  Equally perverse is the potential to scan on-air presenters/writers for their thoughts and subliminally feed those to the victim and/or feed a monitors words etc to both victim and presenters so correlations occur in speech and thought.

Like conventional (common) methods these possibilites could lead to deceptions and setups eg some targets may believe that they are psychic or directly accuse presenters of spying.
  The supportive Minister, Brendan O'Connor, was immediately removed as Minister for Privacy in a cabinet reshuffle. He is now, amongst other things, Minister for Homelessness and will have no further involvement in the enquiry.


Article

Privacy Law Flaw

privacylawflow


Article

The Media Mafia
By Paul Baird
Hard Evidence. Vol 1. No.3 May-June 2001

Most people are aware that organised crime and covert Government agencies, especially in the USA, control large sections of the worldwide mass media. What they do not know is how they manage to do this so effectively.

Government agencies like the CIA and N.S.A have access to defence-developed technologies, which facilitate round-the-clock monitoring.

The victims of such attention include law enforcers, lobbyists, writers, justice campaigners, in fact anyone questioning the status quo by speaking out against corruption in high places. The electronic media participate as recipients of the agency information. They oppress the targets, helping to suppress information and views, ridiculing, discrediting and silencing those with opposing views.

I am describing links between organised "businessmen", covert Government agencies and a complicit media Mafia. A simple and readily understood example is the drug trade. Drugs financially fuel the Mafia and the CIA, but that same scourge hides successfully behind "legitimate" business operations including the entertainment industry (music, television, film and radio). Their veiled acceptance is at odds with the lip service paid by celebrities to drug-related health and social problems. Therefore, why doesn"t anyone point the finger…?

Observant readers may see that one of the answers is fear; fear of recrimination or vilification or merely loss of job opportunities. Those that spoke out on behalf of Lady Diana (especially after her death) are another example. Some were "quiet" for some considerable time… Another case of media control.

How do they operate?
U.S. Government agencies have access to computer-driven satellites, which monitor all telecommunications worldwide. The system is called Echelon. If certain phrases or topics are mentioned, then you draw their interest and you are monitored around-the-clock by audio/visual satellite systems so advanced that you have no privacy at all.

These surveillance signals have frequencies which can be "given" or "leaked" to the media. They have equipment to tune in. Alternatively, results can be bought, exchanged or relayed. In fact, even private investigators can be used on a simpler level to supply information to media outlets.

The surveillance results are used to create coincidences for the target to see and hear. Sceptics need to know at the outset that this is one of the media"s roles; a very common practice with respect to media targets (especially people who are not public figures).

Remember that two thirds of what is newsworthy is never reported but through systems like Echelon, the media knows most of what goes on, good or bad. They then "use" that information to terrorise their victims.

Common methods include:

1. Using corruptible aircraft pilots and emergency services personnel to arrange aircraft "buzzes", siren wailing and more around homes, vehicles and individuals; on a timely basis. Letter writing, political discussion or criticism of media tactics is often the catalyst for this sort of harassment.

2. Surveillance based on harassment which can help fuel scams, bribes etc. The use of union/business/political connections to restrict work opportunities disempowers and discredits the victims.

3. Monitoring agency surveillance frequencies also facilitates blackmail etc through the co-ordination of media "coincidences". These involve references to things said or done in private on a timely repetitive basis (out of context and obviously without referring to the source). Any member of the entertainment industry can be involved in this very common practice. Notably, theft of intellectual property (especially by writers) is also a motive (on occasions) for the monitoring.

 

  Using Surveillance Results.
The methods chosen depend on the habits, availability and character of the target as well as what they are doing to justify drawing criminals attention. Silencing an objector or covert censorship of a writer, for example, cannot be achieved via responses on a program he/she does not watch, or a newspaper they do not read… another reason for constant monitoring.

Specifically, articles, news items, advertisements, in fact ANYTHING written or read can be tainted. Researchers, writers, editors, presenters, performers, executives and others can be involved. It only takes a few to create a web of harassment for innocent victims to endure, although some media players have more corruptible employees than others. When publicly presented material contains familiar phrases, ideas, topics and events in a unique, yet constant flow (a daily or even hourly occurrence). The target can then be annoyed, confused or deceived etc. The hope is that this will keep them occupied, stopping whatever it is they were doing (lobbying, writing etc.). The more foolish can be discredited through corrupt law enforcers or medicos; ie if they make a foolish move in response to references to private conversations etc.

How frequently does this happen?
Harassing the enemies of criminals through the media Mafia is extremely common. Ridicule and oppression of disempowered campaigners for justice and true democracy (and any other righteous cause) is now a principal function of the mainstream media, but it is done covertly, as mentioned earlier.

By owning/controlling the media, criminals avoid open challenge. The media "watchdog" role is only a façade to win public approval (and ratings). A perfect example is the extended vilification of media magnate Christopher Skase. Those who pursued him the most vigorously have done worse themselves, but the public will never hear the full truth of it. Instead, the self-regulated industry motors on carefully, influencing how people see and interpret everything… yet no one watches the watchdogs…. we are listening to criminals.

This means that you only actually have democratic freedom to express your views provided you do not oppose criminals in high places. In other words, without power or influence the under classes are silenced. Little wonder the only values and views which many espouse are those fed to them by public figures who have themselves been compromised by a system which would have rejected them had they questioned the corruption around them.

My Favourite News Station(?)
Again, talent is only one prerequisite for any job. Without complicity or silence, no media identity could survive. Lies of fact and omission, vendettas, blatant bias and smear campaigns… "They" won"t ever let the truth get in the way of destroying their opponents. Remember that we are looking at an industry dominated by criminals. Yes your station…every station.

In balancing though, I have met some journalists who refused to harass innocent people nor would they stand by and see their colleagues do it. For this they were harassed themselves, losing jobs as well as opportunities. However, they are out of the industry for taking that stand and can now help no one.

Opinion
I could write a book on the matter but the summation is Freedom of the press should not grant a freedom to oppress.

Media ownership laws allow criminals (organised or otherwise) to silence private citizens on important issues. The more likely it is the activity will make criminals rich, then the more likely it is opponents will be attacked. Drug trafficking, weapons sales, nuclear proliferation, political corruption, environmental degradation, U.S. government agency global control systems, paedophile/pornography networks, prostitution etc… these are practically "protected" from public scrutiny. Naturally, the media run token stories which pay lip service to what"s right. Nobody would be fooled if they did not. Yet people suspect…They may not be able to follow the money trail to US agencies or crime bosses but they do see the media injustices; how it feeds off society while returning half truths, propaganda, and working a secret agenda.

Stories occasionally surface about scams, cash for comment scandals, manufactured reports and so on, but these are presented by another arm of the mainstream media and they amount only to in-fighting. People still believe far too much of what they are told by the media. The popular myths, supplied by the entertainment industry itself survive. Just as the media protects their co-conspirators from exposure, they, in turn, are protected by corrupt crime/agency figures. Only in organised publications like "Hard Evidence" magazine will differing views and absolute truths appear on a regular basis.

Examples of newsworthy items, which are suppressed include medical breakthroughs, laser weapon developments and various other scientific advances, which the U.S. government Defence/CIA etc want to keep secret (so they can use them for evil purposes rather than our benefit).

"Classified" tags, defence "notices" and government secrecy provisions in general are obstacles, but stories with lesser impact are constantly run. The real reason is that information empowers people so criminals insist on controlling the flow of information. The number one way to do that is by controlling the media directly through ownership, or indirectly through sympathetic, planted staff.

Conclusion
Those speaking out on important issues should be protected from the practices outlined in this article. However, no law enforcement or industry body has the power to do so. In addition, both journalists AND politicians are prepared to betray us with their silence, some going as far as to join the criminals in harassing innocent citizens. No one can stop media tyrants.

Media identities may not always know who they are harassing, but when they read material edited to contain surveillance results, they know. (Ever wondered why some comments, ads, etc made no sense?) The fact is they care only for the privileges of their positions and scorn the associated responsibilities. It means nothing that they report what is to become public knowledge when that evades or ignores the vast majority of news. Then there is the media complicity in harassing victims. Some media heavyweights have even gone as far as to approve murders to silence those too forthright to give in to blackmail, bribes, threats etc.

So, if a public figure would endure a vendetta for addressing these matters and U.S. satellite surveillance keeps tabs on everyone whos ever so much as written an angry letter to a newspaper editor on more than one or two occasions, what can be done to raise public awareness? Again, "very little" is the answer. The media are taken at face value by most. Those few who know the truth see through their act and despise their hypocrisy but the rest…. most do not care because they do not know or do not see how it affects their rights and their lives.

It is worth adding that those not silenced or discredited by these methods may have to endure further high-tech harassment at the hands of those responsible. Corrupt U.S. military/agency personnel can access satellite or ground-based equipment designed to torment and run experiments in "remote control" of individuals situations. Through media/political connections, the targets are chosen for these programs. Some very nasty laser driven devices, designed to harm and not kill, have been deployed (esp. on satellites) to silence good men and women worldwide who will not be warned off… something else the media won"t tell you. It is not quite the world you think it is.

Its little wonder many harbour an inherent distrust of the media. Unfortunately, it is all too true… control the media and you control the world, and "They" do.

 


Article

Crimes of the Ruling Class
By Paul Baird
"Hard Evidence", Vol 2, No 4, June 2002 pp 30-34

INTRODUCTION

The myth that we live in a free country and within a fair, semi-ideal system has already been debunked. The truth is that in our capitalistic, money-driven world there remains a clear hierarchy: the ruling class and the underclasses. Unfortunately, in their efforts to gain more information, power and wealth, the ruling class often resorts to illegal methods which create a class warfare (of sorts) between them and those that question those methods. Those forming part of the elite group in question may be there by virtue of birth, association, good fortune or talent. Accordingly not all are guilty, but those that are can achieve and maintain their positions via corrupt and covert means. In turn they push their ideas, systems, rules and wills onto the rest of us. Also, aside from actual crimes (like tax evasion, theft, rape, paedophilia, murder and so on) many betray society in other ways. These range from the co-operation of those compromised (through drugs, money, sex etc) through to assistance with the concealment of matters which are of concern to the general public as well as law enforcers. It is these offences, committed by that section of the community which sees itself as above the rest of us, which form the basis of this article.

CRIMINAL ALLIANCES AND COVERT CRIMES

Wealth allows secrecy for some just as it robs others of their privacy. That secrecy allows crimes to be carried out undetected and unchallenged. Whether you're talking about the Bildeburg club, The Club of Rome, The Mafia of any other group, conspiracies/crimes abound. One of the reasons the upper classes are above the law is that they can access methods/technologies, which the rest of the community cannot. Sure, some celebrities have been interrogated, even jailed for money related offences (tax evasion, fraud etc) but rarely for crimes where there is no money trail to follow unless there are known enemies to set it up.

Take for example the advanced satellite surveillance systems made available by the U.S Defence Department and other agencies. Corrupt "businessmen", including media and political figures, can access audio-visual material as well as intercept telecommunications. The results can be used to rob, blackmail, harass or humiliate targets. Targets include competitors, researchers, writers, inventors, lobbyists, law enforcers etc. The Echelon, Iris satellite systems (et al) leave the victims totally defenseless. Often wealthy public figures actually pinpoint the targets themselves.

Many in high places are also as vulnerable, as if they lived in "glass houses". For example, U.S agencies, like the CIA and NSA, monitor all government ministers from all governments worldwide. They also keep a close eye on many celebrities. Ironically some celebrities help to harass targets who are not public figures.

Notably, the police (State and Federal) cannot access these technologies to solve crime. If they could, powerful people in politics, journalism and big "business" would be incarcerated. Terrorism, the illegal arms and drug trades would be wiped out. Instead honest police are thwarted in their attempts to investigate big time criminals. Lawyers and executives working for organized criminals can make their lives hell. Some police, are even spied on and harassed themselves by various criminals, including the media mafia.

Celebrities and other wealthy individuals simply make themselves unavailable to assist with police enquiries. They'll even go as far as to call in executives and lawyers to stop police harassing them and/or lodge false counter complaints against those who want them investigated. Diligent investigators can be transferred, sacked or worse if they're too persistent. This is especially so since they're not only dealing with the clout of "public figures" but are working for or with fellow law enforcers who have been (or can be) got at.

Ultimately the top of the list of suspects is nearly always the CIA/Mafia. They have access to technology, knowledge and huge sums of money. The CIA doesn't deal effectively with terrorists but instead its employees vow to do whatever they're told without question. They'll harass innocent civilians even going as far as to set them up in one of their remote, illegal, human experimental programs. In truth they themselves are little more than terrorists and would think nothing of killing their own and pinning it on someone else (a possibility re Sept 11 01?)

THE HYPOCRISIES AND COVERS

They say you catch more flies with honey than vinegar, so corruptible public figures have to be good actors: paying lip service to what's right, luring public opinion in a certain direction and covering with publicised acts, like making charitable contributions. It is a willingness to comply with instructions from their criminal employers which forms the basis for career opportunities for all but the most talented amongst them. In fact the CIA, for instance, screens entrants to the most public ranks of the media, politics etc. Some of the better results achieved by so doing include the go-soft approach (in reality) on drugs and the suppression of information regarding U.S/Big Brother technologies.

Media identities (esp. journalists) hurl ridicule (as a smoke screen) at thieves, druggies and so on whilst indulging in worse themselves and/or working for corrupt "businessmen" who foster petty crimes by committing serious ones: like drug trafficking. Still others go a step further, making favourable references in music, film, interviews and so on to drug taking, violent crime etc. Equally, instead of helping campaigners against crimes like drug proliferation, arms trafficking, corruption, (even violence) these same public "icons" harass such people covertly, mainly by feeding back surveillance results. Interweaving these results into what's written, editors and the like have presenters read the "coincidences" out, set agendas/topics for discussion etc. This is a primary and criminal media function of which most are totally ignorant. In fact two-thirds of what's known to the media is never revealed publicly but it's all used.

To elaborate, the media mafia co-operates fully with the covert agencies who spy on anti nuclear, anti-war, anti drugs, anti corruption lobbyists/campaigners using advanced audio-visual satellite surveillance equipment. The frequencies of the surveillance are fed to the mainstream media technicians, they tune in and the executives ensure writers feed "coincidental" phrases, ideas and topics to the on air presenters. The victim is thereby harassed when they listen/view: picking up on the cryptic and not so cryptic references sewn into the on-air material. This is a very common practice, which is tantamount to criminal harassment. However, to openly question powerful public figures on this can lead to set-ups involving police, psychiatrists etc.

Even church and other community leaders approve, or at least acquiesce, regarding such practices. For instance, the Catholic Church co-operates with the Australian Labor Party and their many media connections, even participating in the harassment themselves. They do so for government funding (when Labor is in power) and to avoid smear campaigns over things like paedophilia. The less hypocritical ones will merely go into denial or fail to help, out of fear of those who arrange such conspiracies. In fact the church itself has its own spies.

In the same way most public figures glad hand and associate with known criminals. The organized crime syndicates, (like the Mafia) control the media and entertainment industries, especially in the U.S.A. There are not enough other opportunities to go after, so to oppose a powerful media magnate, for example, may be the end of a career. Yet the same people who can do this, who 'destroy what they cannot control' are just as likely to receive public praise and adulation from others around them. For instance, there are criminals in high places who have received humanitarian awards, knighthoods etc while secretly devoting their time and resources to destroying decent people both in and out of public life.

Occasionally some are set-up or scapegoated because they've lost their 'protected' status for some political or monetary reason. The fact is the media, through the agencies, have something on most public figures (and many not so public ones too) and allow it to "surface" if and when they deem it to be appropriate for their purposes. Those who are not complicit therefore acquiesce out of fear. The rest actually profit by participating in anything from political comedy to " cash for comment" broadcasting to murder. Many of the more corrupt (especially politicians and journalists) are merely criminals with some acting ability. And the public swallows all of it.

DECEIT & PROPAGANDA

Again public ignorance of these practices is understandable. The "bread and circuses" operate as a smoke screen leaving most happy to "consume and be silent". In Western democracies life is free and easy for most: You work, play, even vote. But the freedoms on offer are illusionary. In the same way that advertisements (brainwashing tools in themselves) promote different brands/products which may actually be owned by the one conglomerate, there is little genuine difference between political parties in the two party system so when you vote you are responding to media hype surrounding a false plebiscite because "they" manipulate the voter preferences (on the whole) and both parties; through connections with the leaders.

The ruling classes, through big business, the agencies, the media and so on, justify their existence through their public role but privately/secretively they illegally plot and manipulate. Sport and other entertainment just like religion and "national conscience" type causes, are used as distractions from other important matters. In the end we finish up thinking and believing what we're conditioned to think and believe.

There is no more extreme example of public brainwashing than the general perceptions regarding so-called alien life forms. What was considered insanity by most 100 years ago is today embraced as truth and because we live in a more informed, enlightened age this must be so. Right? Wrong! There are a number of very good reasons why the U.S Government want people believing and a number of devious ways that they have used to convince them. Firstly, regarding how they've done this well it's mainly courtesy of the approach of the mass media (moviemakers, writers of all sorts etc) but also via falsified/staged sightings (using military aircraft etc) and tampering with recorded history. The military and NASA then play out a denial vs. confirmation scenario and so the fantasy builds.

The objects of these "sightings" are usually political targets or human guinea pigs (especially re: alien abductions) but you won't read this in a newspaper. Instead you're more likely to read how arrogant we would be to believe we are the only inhabitants of the universe. This coming from people too arrogant to accept the existence of a God who may just consider us more important than any human mind can acknowledge. So while they can't even get along with their neighbours, can't even deal with the conflicts that surround us here they approve of wasting time and money searching for aliens who would either destroy, or be destroyed by, us.

So what are the reasons for this charade? Well it draws public approval for the space program and Defence spending. The public doesn't realise that surveillance satellites, star wars and other "nasty" technologies are the real focus of the spending. These are not mentioned (the cover is national security). Secondly, it also acts as a cover for illegal harassment and illegal human experimentation. A sort of "blame it on the aliens" or "he's mad" cover. Finally, it focuses attention elsewhere than on the secretive ways of the New World Order. This is becomingly increasingly important as technology allows BIG BROTHER interference and monitoring on a level few readers would appreciate. Of course, none of this would be possible without the co-operation of the mass media and many public figures, many of whom have simply sold us out.

CENSORSHIP

Covert agency personnel and crime figures are spread throughout the business, political, literary, media ranks. Editors, writers, presenters and so on are involved in seeing to it that vital information is suppressed, targets are harassed and propaganda reinforced. The only opinions aired publicly, (on important matters) are those of these people. Those trying, in vain, to expose corrupt practices, are silenced. The public only absorbs what it is fed, be it misinformation or worse.

The workings of publishing houses, movie studios, recording companies and the like are therefore, semi-controlled. Even history books are prepared by "chosen" writers; they're then placed on school syllabuses and fed to our youth to regurgitate in exams and essays. How much of this history is fiction? Who knows, but in a world where skeptics and others are entrained from birth to accept whatever they read in black and white and question anecdotal evidence to the contrary, it is difficult for the truth to surface. This is especially true in relation to covert practices and technologies cloaked by government secrecy orders and legislation. There are no blueprints to present, no proof to supply. So these activities go on undetected. An example is the neurophone. This 40-year-old technology allows broadcasting directly into the brains of targeted individuals (via microwave or satellite). The CIA and 'Mafia' terrorise people with it but the general public is ignorant of this practice.

POLITICAL PSYCHIATRY

Because wealthy criminals can access covert methods to not only commit crimes but to cover them up there exists an age-old defence to accusations of wrongdoing, it's called political psychiatry. It effectively discredits and thereby silences whistleblowers who have not been discouraged by covert harassment techniques such as aircraft swoops, corrupt emergency services personnel, media feedback etc. It's especially effective when targeting people with neurophones or brain scanners. Simply explained it works like this: When a disempowered individual tries to expose practices or particular crimes being committed by ruling class members they are branded as paranoid because they are unable to provide evidence to back their claims (for those tuned in enough to appreciate it, the term "paranoid schizophrenia" was originally penned by a psychiatrist working for the CIA). The police cannot or will not investigate the allegations because they will meet resistance, harassment and embarrassment if they try. Others will not join in the conversations out of fear and so the accuser stands alone and totally vulnerable. If high-tech is used and they complain this only worsens the situation.

A good example involves the teachers in NSW state schools who name paedophiles in the system. They are threatened with a visit to "Healthquest" where government psychiatrists could cost you your job if not your freedom. In this way paedophilia (even paedophile networks) are allowed to thrive. "If you can't prove it it's not happening" is the assumption made by the so-called experts. They not only feign ignorance of practices and technologies outside of their experience but they will not bite the hand that feeds them. So the chances of a fair assessment from a government psychiatrist are about the same as getting a divorce lawyer to advise a client to talk things through with his or her spouse rather than pursuing costly legal proceedings. No chance at all.

Another example of the ways that the ruling class use corruptible psychiatrists is in deflecting any accusations of media surveillance feedback, using surveillance results. By its very nature such a practice is criminal conduct but because of the methods used it cannot be proven decisively in a court of law (and no lawyer has the courage to take on media magnates or governments on such a secretive practice anyway). So a complicit researcher, writer, editor or public figure can safely plead ignorance. One TV news presenter, for instance, has been approached many times by innocent victims of agency/media harassment. She not only fails to help but also sells each and every one of them out; using corrupt cops in attempts to have them committed, saying they harass her. This is class warfare at its worst. Such people are beneath contempt yet their public standing and the public relations/legal machine behind them ensures they are not questioned on such conduct. This is again proof of the different rights of different classes. Honest police are also kept in the dark about such practices (and technologies) and would in any event be dissuaded from investigating the criminal conduct of the public figures or fellow officers involved.

OTHER METHODS

Blackmailing, (using covert surveillance results gathered by agency personnel, media, PI'S, cops etc) as well as set-ups, abductions, brainwashing, blacklisting, imprisonment/commitment even murder are all methods used to silence people or get them to do what "they" want. Aircraft swoops, siren wailing and general harassment are also common, as is the use of certain satellite-based and microwave weapons (i.e. non-lethal weapons).

RULING CLASS ATTITUDES

Whether "born to rule" or attaining wealth and thereby adopting a superior attitude, many are prepared to commit crimes to advance. The combination of greed and opportunity helps to formulate opinions, which they then seek to spread. Comments like "put them down and keep them down" and "this is what happens when you educate the poor" reflect not only a readiness to embrace corruption but a desire to eliminate those who do not. This is the antithesis of fair play, democracy and everything our society is supposed to stand for.

One of the ways this is fostered is the agency/criminal vetting of those entering the more prominent positions in public life. All must be corruptible or at least self-absorbed and fearful or they are excluded. This is contrary to the widely held belief that there are good and bad people in all sections of the community. This is generally true but not where the system and those running it sift out the good. Unfortunately this is the case in modern politics and mainstream journalism. Those few who are ok are usually too afraid to intervene.

EXCEPTIONS

Over the years a few have slipped the net and gone on to take courageous, dangerously moral stances. I'm not referring to charitable works by B. Geldof or Mother Theresa but rather those opposing criminality in the community from influential positions.

For example, smear campaigns were launched against singers M. Jackson and G. Michael because they embarrassed or questioned powerful industry figures etc. Actors R. Redford and V. Redgrave were harassed over their political stances and The Kennedy's, M.L King and others were actually murdered for opposing racism, war, organised crime etc.

Notably this instills fear into others. Fear for their careers, fear for their lives. In extreme cases a dupe can be persuaded, brainwashed or harassed into killing (or taking the blame for killing) a public figure but the real culprits are the manipulators of the CIA, The Mafia etc who encourage (or carry out) the crime. These people can topple governments, set up assassinations or simply arrange accidents (e.g. the suspicious deaths of M.Monroe, Lady Di and G. Kelly). The media know, the law enforcers suspect but the agencies and their "business" connections run the world and operate unopposed and unquestioned.

PRIME EXAMPLE - DRUGS

It's no secret that the CIA/Mafia connection is largely drug funded. Many who see the folly in allowing their children to play in traffic, or who wouldn't even consider entering a few rounds of Russian roulette will, nonetheless, happily embrace a lifestyle that supports this operation and the rewards are not only measured monetarily. If questioned about working for or with such people most entertainers would claim to be drug free or quote the usual lines about it being relatively harmless but the statistics speak for themselves. One drug can lead to something stronger and so on and many, from all walks of life, suffer and/or die as a result. They're defending the indefensible for the personal satisfaction and rewards it brings them. But dare anyone express this simple truth too openly and they will be harassed for it. The wealthy can afford the habit with little or no risk of detection. However, the poor often steal or prostitute themselves to pay for it. Equally they can't afford detox programs etc. It ruins their lives. The ruling classes "do drugs" but for the rest of the community, the drugs "do them".

CONCLUSION

The ruling classes are clearly made up of some of the community's worst criminals leaving targets not only open to harassment but with no one to turn to for help. The logical approaches (to police, politicians, journalists, church leaders) reveal the truth about their role. Those who can be trusted are fearful; many monitored themselves by powerful criminals using high tech satellite equipment. Others still owe favours to, receive support from or glad hand the offenders in question (employers, media contacts, "businessmen"). It's all about money and control.

The truth is, we in the Western democracies are no freer than our counterparts elsewhere in the world. In fact serfs in Feudal England or slaves in ancient Egypt served masters no more evil than some of those we deal with today. The only difference is that the ruling classes today hide their crimes and attitudes better. They can't drag "do-gooders" out of bed at 2:00am and have them thrown into some hellhole to be tortured to death. Here, in a "democracy", they have to use satellite spying and harassment technologies, media feedback, political maneuvering, conspiracy etc. As a result none will be questioned let alone caught and punished. Instead, while opponents are silenced and discredited, "their" attitudes permeate society, drawing others to accept that invasions of privacy, drugs, corruption and all manner of criminal conduct are to go unquestioned, as an acceptable part of life. Their delusions and our apathy must be challenged.


Article

The Ultimate Blasphemy : Mind Reading Technologies etc
By Paul Baird
May 2005

This article is unashamedly scathing in its criticism of those behind the offences in question. To understand and accept the horrible truth to follow, the reader must first realise that corrupt beaurocracies, covert agencies and organised crime figures really do control the entire world.

Read the rest of the article (PDF file download)


Article

Computer State
By Paul Baird
July 2006
"Hard Evidence" Vol 6, No. 5, pp 44-51

There is no doubt that the global conquest which has been secretly carried out by the U.S based military/agency/corporate crime conglomerate would not have been possible without the vast capabilities of extremely advanced computer systems.

Read the rest of the article (PDF file download)

 


Article

Conspiracies of Silence
By Paul Baird
July 2009
2010, "Hard Evidence",Vol 10, No 2, Mar/Apr '10, pp 46- 51.

Despite the stigma that’s been deliberately attached to the word “conspiracy” our modern world is, in fact, run by conspiracies of one sort of another. Some conspiracies are more benign than others but all of them involve undue secrecy and the presumption that those involved have the right to influence the lives of others, without their knowledge or consent.

Read the rest of the article (PDF file download)


Article

TRUTH AND OPINION

INTRODUCTION

In the absence of absolute proof the truth can be dismissed as erroneous opinion by those who do not wish to accept it. This is why, on many crucial social and economic issues, people are not presented with all the facts before they form and express their opinions (eg misled voters). Yet others, who have the relevant information, often express false opinions based on corrupt vested interests (eg politicians). As a result there is an imbalance between truth and opinion which criminals foster. This allows for a minimal amount of real challenge / contradiction to their lucrative, criminal operations. By brainwashing the public into believing that everyone and everything presented publicly should be taken at face value and that those talking of conspiracies, lies and covert operations are paranoid powerful criminals escape detection and condemnation. The gullible are deceived and the few that know oppressed.

CONCEALING THE TRUTH

Liars and hypocrites disguise their deeds by twisting the facts. Criminals are the worst of these but since less than 5% of jailable offenders are actually apprehended most crime, especially that committed by wealthy, protected operators, goes undetected and unpunished.

In the case of governments," National Security" is often quoted as a defence to calls for more open and accountable government. In this way the most hidden conspiracies, scams, oppressive techniques and technologies are concealed from the public. Whistleblowers and detractors who draw suspicion to such secrecy can be discredited in many ways; the simplest being to say they have no proof and are therefore mad. With covert attacks on such people orchestrated by the agencies and organised crime figures they are easily discredited and silenced. A current example is the treatment given to Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. He's been treated like public enemy no 1 for releasing US diplomatic documents online. He's been framed, harassed and disparaged by the media and their agency connections but I believe that this is primarily to discredit whistleblowers and reenforce protections for the flow of classified information. If our military and political leaders were totally trustworthy there'd be no concern but they're not to be believed so the public needs greater access to the truth not less. Not surprisingly there's little of great importance in what was "allowed"to be leaked by Wikileaks, only embarrassing commentary. If it was serious we would never have heard about it.

RIGHT AND WRONG.

In my view anyone or anything that encourages one person to hurt another is wrong; immoral, criminal or both. In the case of used spies, entertainers, MPs and so on money is not the only reward / motivation. Anything that breaks down the character and integrity of the controllers puppets will work : drugs, celebrity, influence etc. Making these people believe that they are above the law and above the rest of us is step one.

In Western domocracies, where freedom of expression, privacy, dignity and more appear to present affluent citizens ( all of us) with the opportunity to help others, our criminal controllers need to also control our thinking. If we're not distracted by self interest we might put pressure on them to do something too difficult to really help our poorer neighbours. Jesus Christ, whether you recognise him as God or just a great philosopher, had to be right when he said we should love our neighbours as ourselves. However, in this age of advanced transportation and communication, where it IS possible to feed, clothe, shelter and protect the whole world, we're told that's impossible by those who mock "The way, the truth and the life"because it's not in their avaricious best interests to recognise Christ's faultless call to care... Funny too how those guilty of the biggest crimes are the ones who see right and wrong as a "Grey area" whilst others just admit their mistakes.

HYPOCRISY

Political leaders in Western democracies often criticise the human rights records of communist and third world countries, and rightly so. Today there's a clear focus on Muslim countries and those run by hostile military regimes. However, while such countries imprison or kill those critical of their governments our supposed "free world" governments are really no better. The only difference is that with free speech and democracy operating as facades covert rumour spreading, blacklisting, surveillance and harassment are used to destroy such people without detection. Corrupt spies and organised crime figures organise this on behalf of power brokers who want to stifle discussion of the real reasons for wars, crime, poverty etc. They do this because they profit from these things one way or another and so want them to continue, at the expense of others. Their targets, those expressing views and truths that these people want suppressed, are treated like political prisoners in mobile concentration camps so the mistreatment cannot be proven; satellite surveillance and 24/7 harassment are the norm. So ,while criminals may freely offend, insult, mislead and corrupt others through their public puppets those disagreeing with them too openly can be robbed of their privacy, dignity, ideas, peace of mind and sometimes even their lives.

CELEBRITY WORSHIP.

People on the world stage front for organised crime figures and members of secret societies as well as cooperating with corrupt agency personnel. They sell their souls and for them the old saying, "who do I have to kill" rings true because they'll do almost anything for money or advantage. Some even willingly submit to subliminal influence and humiliation rather than turning on their puppeteers. With public adulation guaranteeing their influence they're ideally placed to deceive us.

Eg 1. Entertainers... Almost all take illegal drugs. That is not the major concern, though it's less than good. The main worry is that drugs make them malleable and susceptible to criminal suggestions. Drugs are about control first and money second and it's no surprise to learn that the agencies and organised crime figures are involved for both reasons. Entertainers are also exposed to underage groupies making them blackmailable as pedophiles. (There are many teachers jailed for this but few public figures are investigated. The reason is entertainers serve a far greater monetary and influential purpose). Add any financial wrongdoings, infidelities and so on and it's easy to see how they are stopped from stepping out of line.

Eg 2. Politicians and journalists...These present the world the way they want us to see it. As well as the problems mentioned above these mislead the public and betray them with their silence on many important matters. Add to this their criminal mistreatment of those who attempt to expose the truth.

DEMOCRACY AND CRIME

Our democratic right to freedom of thought / expression has been warped for most and utterly destroyed for others. The silent majority may, for example, see more and more of a certain lifestyle portrayed publicly but rather than expressing their concerns they remain silent. For example, gay themes are constantly overrepresented , statistics inflated and experimentation promoted because acceptance is not enough for many homosexuals who control or work within the entertainment industry; they want lifestyle change from others. Those questioning this for religious or other reasons are covertly harassed; their rights removed by a criminal element.

The point is that in a democracy every citizen deserves the right to hold and express their own views without fear of repercussions from criminals hiding behind celebrity, authority, minority status or the political correctness that protects them from comment. The side that resorts to criminal conduct of any sort has, of course, lost the argument and is most likely wrong in opinion as well as action.

Also protecting criminals from accusations are today's beefed up defamation laws. In truth, the only thing that should be censored is something actually inciting hatred and violence. For criminals to seek to stifle illustrative fictional texts and discussion of their criminal and anti-social conduct is ludicrous. Criminal conduct adversely affects the rest of the population that's why there are laws and law enforcers. To try to bully critics of crime into silence with a "you're not perfect, you dropped that gum wrapper" type defence is transparent nonsense.

In addition, bogus National Security laws are also an obvious attempt to hide military / agency crimes that the public should know about. Independent and untouchable investigative bodies should be able to ensure that the agencies, military, media and MPs speak the truth so that faith in authority can be restored. Most citizens have nothing at all to hide but it's impossible to trust or respect anyone in authority that spies on you especially if they harass you with the results and insult you with their lies.

OPINIONS ALTERED

Fifty years ago (even twenty) if you claimed to believe in aliens, embraced homosexuality or were a self confessed atheist you'd be ridiculed (but hopefully not criminally attacked). Today, with belief in aliens reaching 80% in the US (thanks largely to NASA and Hollywood), with large sections of the mass media now owned and run by homosexuals (who favour / promote their own) and the arrogant "it's all about ME" generation turning from God the situation is reversed. Because the wealthy and influential have initiated these changes those not sharing these "modern" views are often criminally harassed.

Again, the point is that regardless of the time frame or the popular view of the day everyone should feel confident and safe enough to express their honest and sincere views without fear of repercussions from criminals who seek to enforce their own views. Expressing a view is not a crime but to harass someone for their view IS a crime, casting doubt on the validity of the criminal's opinions as well.

Censorship of opinions can also prevent any modification of views. Take for example the jailing of Gerd Honsik for denying the holocaust. Are the relevant authorities afraid that he may successfully alter views or are they claiming that he's inciting hatred / violence? I don't think that either is likely. My view is that people ought to be able to put forward whatever, idea, opinion, theory or whatever that they genuinely believe to be true. If you don't like it or disagree you can ignore it ... even tell others they should ignore it. Nevertheless, remember that conspiracies and lies abound in public life. When you say "you can't hear him speak " or "you can't read that book" you raise curiosity and suspicion. It's not only undemocratic to silence conspiracy theorists, it's stupid. In fact, people should be able to stand in a public square and openly declare that the sky is down, it's green and falling without criminal retribution or sanction.

By the way, given the growing skepticism about the official version of the 911 WTC disaster and the suggestion that the Mossad / CIA were involved is it any wonder that a few would also question the holocaust. Funny how mere mention of these organisations brings instant reprisal from the controlled mass media.

MODERN AND ANCIENT MAN

Most opinions and lifestyles are cyclical; constantly changing. Today's fashion is tomorrow's folly. Today's morality is tomorrow's immorality etc. Modern man is not always right or nothing would ever change. And mockery of older or newer ways and opinions doesn't alter that it only accentuates the insecurity behind it all, whether the abuse be harmless and open or criminal and invasive.

Example 1. Today., 2010, tattoos and body piercing are extremely popular thanks largely to the mass media promotion of both. But what happens when fashions change and a significant no. of people (esp. women) want their body art totally removed... Hopefully by then effective technologies will exist to facilitate that.

Example 2. Homosexuals. I use this example again because it's one where significant change has taken place over a very short period of time. Today they've been lured out of the closet by the very same media that not so long ago was oppressing them. But what happens when public opinion sways back and those people are no longer comfortable in full view. There should be no alteration in how the rest of us treat them but, for many, there would be.

Yet again, the point is that it's not a free society in the past, present or future unless you can say that there are no negative consequences for holding a view or adopting a lifestyle AND there is no criminally applied pressure to be or think or act in one way or another, within the law. That also applies to those running new concepts or conspiracy theories especially as many, in time, are proven to be correct.

Eg 1 Galileo was under house arrest until his death thanks to the ignorance and evil oppression of the church / government of his day. He was later vindicated but their small-minded fears had ruined his life. He certainly didn't live in an enlightened, democratic environment but we're supposed to and yet there's little difference today in the cruelty meted out to those presenting new/old or counter cultural ideas. Even those looking at things from different perspectives can be hounded. If it offends powerful people who are prepared to react criminally then you will suffer.

Eg 2 A more recent example is the mistreatment of those doubting the official version of the World Trade Centre disaster of 2001. Surveys show that even half the US population (the most brainwashed) don't believe the gov't/media on this one...Despite that we only get one version of events. Those saying too much can be harassed for it but anecdotal evidence from people who were actually there, including firemen, WTC staff and more, backs up what professional engineers and fire experts say: aviation fuel could not generate enough heat to melt the structures and cause the collapses. Instead explosives were placed (by someone) inside the buildings and detonated on cue. Witnesses confirm this and there's even film of an explosion. Many believe that the Mossad or the CIA were involved; churning up sympathy for Israel and hatred for other middle east countries. Oddly enough Mossad backed security companies allowed the planes to be taken from the airports in the first place and now all travellers bear the brunt of lost rights and airport security checks because of this.

Again, to ask people to believe everything they're told by unscrupulous public figures is unreasonable. We may not have all the facts but that's part of why we doubt. To have those asking questions covertly attacked by so many is unthinkably evil. Many brave men and women fought and died in various wars and other conflicts (many unknown) to establish and preserve our basic rights to dignity, privacy, free speech and freedom. Given the way today's community "leaders" behave when they're out of public view you'd have to wonder if democracy is just a cloak for dagger-wielding criminals to hide behind. It should be an achievable system wherein equality is the central principle. However, with secret police and organised crime dictating to the rest of us I suggest that true democracy is badly in need of a renewal.

OPINIONS FOR SALE

Many professionals (journalists, MPs, psychiatrists, spies, commentators and researchers) are more than willing to misrepresent their opinions in exchange for money or advantage.

Spy agency investigators and medical researchers are prime examples. If a powerful criminal wants a detractor harassed because their views/information may cost him money or embarrass him he can use corrupt agency officials to have that person listed as a subversive or a threat and see him/her covertly harassed. Agency officials have no interest in the truth; they'll produce reports or harass people as instructed by their political/media/business connections. Equally, (for example) ,cigarette companies have been known to pay doctors to report that smoking isn't harmful , psychiatrists have helped killers get off on insanity pleas and committed whistleblowers for speaking the truth. Also, celebrities may endorse products, lifestyles or systems that they don't even approve of. It's all arrant nonsense and very transparent if you care to think about it. Money becomes the truth and the real truth often never surfaces because others are afraid to question the corrupt "opinions" of powerful, "learned" people. I suggest that for many who prostitute their views it's all about power and learning has nothing to do with it except as a barrier to contradiction. Again, how can you trust anyone unless they're prepared to speak/write the absolute truth regardless of the consequences.

FEAR OF EXPRESSING OPINIONS

All of this makes many afraid to express their opinions at all which is precisely what the criminals/bullies behind the scenes want. They freely exercise their rights but seek to stifle ours. It's as if they believe they are above the rest of us and have an extra right; the right to evade scrutiny and criticism for their crimes The ones best protected are often the very ones who most deserve to be imprisoned. Instead they're dictating trends, lifestyles, morality and more without fear of challenge. For most citizens fear of ridicule from those around them, who are influenced by public figures, is enough. For those pushing past that, to the stage where they are known to these criminals,remote emotional and psychological torture and harassment can be organised by gang stalkers including celebrities. These people will do, read, say whatever they're told regardless of the source or the intended target. All involved in such practices are criminals.

As well as hiding behind celebrity and all that goes with it these criminals try to mirror guilt back onto the few who are not afraid to criticise their crimes. For example, imply that politicians are sending innocents to their death in unnecessary wars and they'll call you unpatriotic (the flag being the last resort for any scoundrel). Accuse them of betraying the public with deception on serious matters like who and what is behind the drug trade, who's really responsible for terrorism, poverty etc etc and they'll accuse you of being a conspiracy theorist (though the world is run by conspirators). Try to blame them for any criminal or immoral influence and they'll try to silence you with reference to any minor matter they think you may be guilty of. And I can say from experience that when they find nothing they'll try to embarass you instead with constant, subtle surveillance feedback; oppressing you with surveillance and commentary.

None of this would survive public scrutiny but whilever it's done covertly the culprits manage to tell themselves that they're right and that their targets deserve to be attacked. It's self deception that only the prince of lies could arrange.

EXAMPLES OF THINGS THAT ARE CENSORED

The following are personal views, most of them stated in a banned book, for which I've been attacked covertly.

* We are alone in the universe. This is unpopular with NASA etc because they use Hollywood and their own propaganda machine to boost funding. However, that funding is primarily (but secretly) devoted to satellite deployment which is aimed back at us from deep space; ie surveillance and harassment technologies use us ... sometimes as guinea pigs.

* There is no privacy. Because of the many satellites in geosynchronous orbit every word, action and thought can be monitored if they choose to do so. All public figures are monitored 24/7by the CIA/ NSA/ Military etc.

* Those entering public life are corruptible and/or self -serving. Crimes like arms/drug/people trafficking aren't properly dealt with because of this. Equally, they keep secret technologies from us as well as cures for diseases, inventions like frictionless engines etc.. and all to secure continued financial advantage for those who gain from the status quo. As a result people are mushroomed and progress stymied so that a few wealthy, megalomaniacal criminals can maintain control of everything as long as possible.

* There are no coincidences, most events are stage managed. The air of vulnerability evident after events like 911 doesn't really exist. Such events are orchestrated, provoked or allowed so as to justify war, resource grabs and security clampdowns which greatly diminish our rights and freedoms.

* Those who "have" want even more, including that owned by the "have nots". They have no genuine regard for those who have little, regarding them with disdain and suspicion... since they can't be trusted themselves and cannot relate to honest people. They do not respect us or our rights and see us as inferior beings that they can mistreat as they wish. Accordingly they have no concern for how they offend others. If we return the favour they react criminally since they operate within a legal/moral vacuum.

MY STANCE

The media and politicians have a moral and civic duty to tell the general public the full truth on matters like the middle east conflict(s), 911, satellite capabilities, political influence/pressure, the environment and crime. To do less is to serve corrupt, wealthy vested interests on the false assumption that might ($$) is always right. It is also a betrayal of trust and an abuse of position.

To silence critics and those searching for the truth through covert means is "master plan" mentality and a crime against humanity that even the worst dictator would baulk at.

I do not respect or trust the views of criminals on the topics in question (where full disclosure and accountability are absent). I object strenuously to such people telling us what to think and how to live.

PHILOSOPHY

My belief is that Life is God's test and to pass you have to put others before yourself. Nothing that you achieve for yourself has any value except to the extent it allows you to help others. No-one has the right to misrepresent the truth publicly, to hurt others to silence them or to feather their own nest at the expense of others...

CONCLUSION

These days politicians, media personalities and other community leaders reference free speech, respect, dignity and so on by clearly exercising their own rights publicly and commanding attention in a sort of illustrative "you have this right too" manner. However, the sad fact is that (with the exception of staged tokenism to create a democratic veneer) only those sharing their views are allowed to be heard in public or tolerated in private. Those with opposing views are often silenced via covert criminal conduct which all in public life are aware of.

A lack of honesty and integrity permeates the ranks of our most visible citizens whilst insincere "world stage" acts cover this well. Many celebrities are actively involved in oppressing those speaking or writing the truth and they betray the general public in the process. Because of this covert and undemocratic oppression many truths are hidden,allowing for many false opinions to be foisted on an unsuspecting public. A series of diversionary discussions and distractions are paraded leading the public far from the truth. Mushroomed as they are most people have views that reflect the level of information, half truths and nonsense that they're presented by the mass media. Those seeing through all of this are the ones criminally and covertly attacked.

This situation will only change if public figures have a change of heart and renounce their criminal ways. Failing that, the rest of us need to resume thinking for ourselves rather than lazily accepting the lies of the many criminals in public life.

PAUL BAIRD
PRIVACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS ADVOCATE

p.baird@surveillanceissues.com
www.surveillanceissues.com


Hearing Voices, Mind Reading, Secret Weapons
Media crimes, psychic phenomena, paranormal activity, alien encounters
USA, UK, Australia, China, India, New Zealand, Canada, France, Germany, Finland


“There are those who can but won’t. There are those who cannot yet try. Let’s pray that the efforts of those trying encourage those that are not as that is our best hope”.


Technologies | Surveillance | Surveillance Results | Case Study | References | Links