My Personal Battle for Privacy & Sovereignty
The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on me, because the LORD has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the prisoners.
Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.
2 Corinthians 3;17
And Jabez called on the God of Israel saying,
"Oh, that You would bless me indeed,
and enlarge my territory,
that Your hand would be with me,
and that You would keep me from evil,
that I may not cause pain!"
So God granted him what he requested.
1 Chronicles 4:10
In 1994, I was able to break out of CIA operations, permanently. As I've stated in my previous reports, my escape (the most accurate word I can use) from CIA was not a sudden event, but happened in increments, after many years of battle with my handlers and the evil forces behind the MK Ultra program, under which I received much of my early training in intelligence work.
I had engaged in intense supernatural warfare, I had prayed for deliverence and God answered my prayers. Most of the people who were part of my life at that time had not been told about the double life I had been leading, in fact, for my entire adult life. I was still operating under the "code of silence", for the most part, for which my previous indoctrination had been a powerful deterrent from speaking out, at least specifically regarding CIA.
But the events of that time period were such that I could not help but confide in certain of my closest friends --I needed assistance. I was being persecuted, had been driven into dire poverty, a result of the neutralization campaign being waged against me. I was running for my life, from place to place, and to complicate matters, I had nine (9) cats to support. These animals were my family, in every real sense of the word, as beloved as any human being to me, and in every decision I made, I had to put their welfare first. I have would died, rather than abandon my cats.
Much of my professional work for many years had been conducted "outside" of CIA, and aside from earning a living for myself, served as a sort of cover for the operations I was involved in. Among other things, I had a private practice in spiritual/pastoral counseling, and later as a Jungian analyst.
In order to become a Jungian analyst, one must not only be trained in the discipline, but the candidate is required to go through two years of personal analysis, which I completed in 1993.
That was also the year my mother died. That time was marked by many extreme changes in my life. I had cut my hair (which then fell below my hips) to shoulder length, as a token of mourning for my mother's death.
My analyst was an exceptional man, without whose support I might never have been able to cope with all the crises in my life. It took me awhile to tell him about the government, what they had done to me, to others in my family, as trust was always a serious issue for me, and because I had been previously psychologically abused by CIA psychiatrists, since childhood, perpetrators in the MK Ultra program.
My analyst had the rare gift not only of profound understanding of the mysterious workings of the psyche, but also of spiritual discernment. He was able to recognize that the problems I was experiencing were not due to any "mental" unbalance, but were a direct result of outside forces and circumstances, namely the government agents who had made my life a living hell. He saw the truth: that I was standing alone against powerful enemies in positions of authority, who were hell-bent on destroying my life. He once told me, You are one of the most sane and solidly grounded persons I have ever known. What's more, rather than try to dissuade me from fighting back, as so many other people had done, he respected my decision to stand up against the evildoers and seek justice. Considering that some of the stories I told him were bizarre, to say the least, the fact that he believed me, and understood what was actually happening to me, made a world of difference in my life.
PROFILE OF A BUSYBODY
However, in that terrible time, during which I had been repeatedly uprooted, and during which most of any support (materially and otherwise) I previously had was ripped away, I was further stressed by the relationships I had with friends who not only had no real understanding of me as an individual, but who also took it upon themselves to engage in outrageous inteference in my personal/professional affairs.
In other words, they were busybodies. In fact, busybodies have in many ways been the bane of my existence, for as far back as I can remember. I have written numerous reports on the activities of busybodies. I have constructed psychological profiles on the nature of busybodies. And unfortunately, these people, both individually and collectively, have done as much damage, have stirred up as much trouble, as any bona fide government agents I have ever known.
Why? Because busybodies very simply DO NOT RESPECT THE PRIVACY, THE PERSONAL BOUNDARIES OR THE FUNDAMENTAL GOD-GIVEN RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL.
(Just like the government.)
Based on many years of personal/professional experience, it is my opinion that busybodies labor under a particular type of psychopathology, a sort of obsessive-compulsive disorder. Their profound lack of respect --or even acknowledgment of-- the personal boundaries of others stems, first and foremost, from their own lack of solid grounding in Individual Personhood.
Not having developed this fundamental core of integrity in themselves, they fail to recognize it in others. They therefore tend to project their own subjective values, their own opinions, their own viewpoints, and their own weaknesses and character flaws on everyone around them.
Worse, they attempt to force their own subjective opinions and worldview on others. Their behavior displays an arrogance, a self-righteousness, which always ends up alienating those persons from whom they most seek love and approval. Busybodies are approval seekers and people-pleasers, who follow not the eternal laws of God, but the dictates and temporal whims of men.
Busybodies are collectivists, rather than champions of Individual rights and liberties. They are "team players", seekers of "consensus", who tend to gravitate toward the leftist politics of liberalism, progressivism, socialism and even communism, and are often proponents of the New Age Movement, or supporters of the United Nations. They fail to recognize that the New Age movement is not about "spiritual enlightenment", but is simply another tentacle of the Octopus; that it is an indoctrination system of the New World Order, which seeks to expunge individual rights, thus enslaving the populace under globalist totalitarianism.
Secular humanism, myriad forms of pop-psychology, motivational psychology, self-help courses and books ad infinitum, all geared toward "self-improvement" or "spiritual enlightenment" attract them like a swarm of bees, just as the hive-mentality prevails among them. Positive thinking. Prosperity Consciousness. Create your own Reality. The Law of Attraction. The Ascension...etc. etc. etc. They seem to be on an endless and ever-changing quest for a perfect "formula" by which to live their lives.
But where is God in all these humanist ideologies and contrived systems of thought?
The Personal Living God, who created the heavens and the earth, Who knows the very number of hairs on their heads, Who knows their needs before they pray, Who sees every sparrow that falls, and Who holds the power to deliver them from evil, to bestow His blessings, to answer their prayers, to forgive their sins and save them by His grace.
It is God Who has bestowed on each and every Individual the very rights and liberties, the free will, to live as one sees fit, as long as they are not violating the rights of another.
As for those who fail to respect the rights of the Individual, whose misplaced will for power and control in their own lives manifests as aggression against others (meddling, invasions of privacy, violations of trust) and makes of them petty tyrants, they --both individually and collectively, who apparently cannot distinguish what is right from what is wrong, what is good from what is evil-- are at the root of more suffering, more injustice, than they can imagine, all the while believing they hold the moral high ground, as do-gooders with a "savior" complex.
LETTER TO A FORMER FRIEND
Recently I was sorting through boxes of files, searching for some documents, and deciding what to keep, and what should be burned. In the process I happened to find a letter I wrote, almost twenty years ago. It was addressed to someone with whom I'd had a close friendship, but which had ended when she chose to abandon me, rather than be willing to respect my privacy, my personal boundaries, even my fundamental rights.
This is a story I know well, which sadly, has repeated itself over and over and over...
I decided to publish this letter because it could serve as a classic template, describing to a "T" the behavior of "Busybodies I have known". I have known quite a number of others since that time; their attitudes, their actions, and the trouble they always stirred up in other people's lives, predictable as the sunrise.
Rereading this letter, after so much time had passed, I realized that I had forgotten some of the details of the events of that time. Mostly, I had only remembered the feeling of betrayal and a lingering sadness at the loss of a friend. However, I was outraged afresh at the intrusive, disrespectful and totally indiscreet behavior of this individual.
I have forgiven her, in my heart, long ago. Nonetheless, I cannot forget, nor would want to try.
I have kept the letter in its original form, only removing the name of the recipient and certain others to protect their privacy and mine. The rest speaks for itself.
Barbara Hartwell Percival
July 30, 2013
I am writing this letter because it is important to me that I clearly explain my feelings in regard to what I once believed was a friendship between us. I don't necessarily expect that you will understand nor care about what I have to say. That's for you to decide, but I am writing this for my own sake.
I have felt deeply hurt and shocked by your most recent treatment of me: your betrayal of my trust, your disrespect of my rights as an individual and your disregard for my clearly stated wishes about my own life. So you may know what I am referring to, I will elaborate with a number of cases in point.
With what I believed were good intentions in wanting to help me out of a dire situation, you contacted some friends of mine whom you asked for money on my behalf. You had suggested this to me beforehand, at which time I clearly told you I did not feel comfortable about it. When you later told me you had done it --in spite of my wishes-- I reluctantly accepted it, as I told you then, but only in the belief that it was solely out of concern for me. But judging from the way you have treated me since that time, I feel that if you had truly cared about my well-being you could not possibly have shown so little respect for me, nor would you have gone from one extreme to another: first taking on the role of would-be "savior" (which I never wanted, needed or requested), then abruptly switching to a sudden total abandonment of any concern for me at all.
Your attitudes toward me, as well as your actions, whether coming from one extreme or the other, apparently had nothing to do with me. It now seems clear that you were projecting upon me your own beliefs, opinions and psychological problems. The nature of my problems was material and circumstantial, not psychological, but you insisted on projecting your own feelings on me. You repeatedly made remarks which suggested that I was to blame for the financial problems besetting me. You tried to lecture me about "taking responsibility" for my life, admonishing me that I could not expect to be "dependent" on certain individuals forever. With all the zealotry of a fundamentalist, you preached to me about aspects of my life which you knew nothing about, often using your life as an example to illustrate your point. Irrespective of the fact that I don't need to follow anyone's example --and certainly not yours-- it was not your place to give me unsolicited advice, which only caused more stress for me, the last thing I needed.
The relationships, agreements, and arrangements (financial or otherwise) I have with particular individuals are my business exclusively, whether or not I choose to confide in anyone else regarding them. I chose to confide in you only because I believed you to be my friend. I thought then that you had at least some understanding of me and my situation. As you were well aware, the last thing I was seeking was advice.
You and I have very different viewpoints about many things. I have no problem with friends holding different viewpoints; in fact I would naturally expect it. But I do have a problem with someone trying to impose her particular viewpoint on me. And for you to do this was especially distressing to me under the miserable circumstances of my life at that time. My problems were never "confusion", "lack of clarity" about my situation, or refusal to "take responsibility" for my life. Yet you treated me as if advice from your totally erroneous perspective of my circumstances were some sort of remedial measure. My perspective never needed changing. I simply needed money. Poverty is not a mental disease. If you believe otherwise, so be it, but your personal, subjective beliefs had no relevance to the reality of the situation I was in.
You repeatedly insisted that I had other immediate options (which were in fact non-existent), or that there were alternatives to financial dependency on certain persons at that time. This was merely your opinion; a baseless conjecture backed by nothing of substance. But your attitude indicated more than just a total lack of understanding of me and my situation. You were placing blame on the victim --the last place it ever belongs.
You seem to have little respect for the privacy, the individuality, the integrity or the personal boundaries of others. Respect and loyalty, without which there cannot be true friendship-- at least according to my standards-- mean respecting another's right to make her own decisions, to hold her own beliefs, even if they are not in accordance with yours. Respect and loyalty also mean keeping a friend's confidences, especially when you know the person is trusting you to do so.
Since I last spoke to you I found out that you called my sister, although I had specifically asked you not to, after you had revealed to me that you had called others. Fortunately, she showed the good judgment in this instance to consult me, instead of making calls to my relatives, the Percivals in Virginia, which you had urged her to do, even after I had made it very clear to you that I did not want these individuals contacted. I am thankful that she knew better than to give you their telephone number, as then your meddling might have made a bad situation considerably worse. Since I told you that I did not want certain people called, I obviously must have had my reasons, and whether or not I chose to explain them to you, it was my right to decide, not yours.
You showed no respect for me, for my wishes, nor for my privacy. You treated me as if I were a recalcitrant child or a mental incompetent, unable to think for myself or know what was right --or wrong-- for me.
Just because someone is under severe stress, which at times can certainly drive a person to nervous exhaustion, does not mean she has lost control of her mental faculties, or that her basic sense of judgment is impaired. Nor does it mean she has forfeited her right to make her own decisions. In any event, nothing in my situation granted you the right to surreptitiously interfere --especially against what you knew to be my wishes --in my affairs. And you are certainly far from qualified to judge another person's mental state.
In the last phone conversation I had with you, I clearly explained that I did not want X to be given any further information about my business, as I had quickly discovered that confiding in her was a mistake. I asked you then not to discuss me or my business with her.
However, less than a week later, X called me and stridently informed me that the two of you had indeed been discussing me. Malicious gossip would be a more fitting description. According to her, you and she had agreed, in what seemed to be a general impeachment of my character, about how "selfish" I was, since my friendship with others was only "conditional". She accused me of caring only about myself, because in her view, if I cared about others I would care what they thought of me and would be open to taking their advice. This is a totally absurd concept. Simply because I am not willing to allow others to coerce me or determine my course of action, in my own life, and because I care nothing about gaining approval from others, certainly does not mean I have no concern or caring for others.
She was evidently insulted because I had politely explained, on more than one occasion, that I was not in need of --nor seeking-- advice. I had told you the same thing, and since you had already apologized once for having presumptuously given unsolicited advice, I though you at least understood.
But what upset me more than anything was your betrayal of my trust. I told you a number of sensitive, highly personal things in confidence, and yet you evidently thought nothing of violating that confidence with a person I had told you specifically I did not want information about my business entrusted to.
Much to my regret, I now understand that my trust was misplaced on more than just one count. As to the idea of "conditional" friendship, it is obvious you and X are the ones who subscribe to that idea: If a friend does not agree with you, refuses to become part of the "herd mentality", the New Age collective consensus, or does not take your unwanted, unsolicited advice, personal criticism follows and your friendship is summarily withdrawn. That's as conditional as it gets. It's also another example of projecting your own values on someone else, for whom they are totally inappropriate values.
In addition to a tirade about my "selfishness", X also seemed to feel it was her appointed duty to inform me of --and to blame me for-- the supposed fact that you had been driven to seek counseling because of problems caused by your relationship with me. My reply to this was to tell X that if in fact you had psychological problems which you mistakenly attributed to your relationship with me, then your problems indeed needed to be addressed, assuming you wanted to resolve them. I also explained that these problems --whatever their nature-- were not caused through any fault of mine, and had nothing to do with me. I did not bother to elaborate, as it was none of her business what I thought about you or your problems. Although I was polite to her far in excess of what she deserved, this final example of her obnoxious pushiness in meddling where she had no right resulted in my immediate decision to permanently discontinue all communication with her. Presumably she got the message when I thereafter failed to return her phone calls.
For some reason, you seemed to be behaving as if it were your mission to "save" me, as if making decisions about my life were your responsibility. (As an aside, let me point out the similarity in the way you treated your brother, though there was never a similarity between your brother and me, nor between our respective situations.)
All I ever expected from you was to be a loyal friend I could trust and confide in. A friend cannot reasonably be expected to give more than is possible within the limits of what one is comfortably able --or willing-- to give. I never expected --and certainly did not ask-- for more. In fact I repeatedly made this clear to you. If I asked you for something you could not --or would not-- do, I expected that you would truthfully state that to me, and I certainly would not have been offended, nor would I have blamed you.
But I do believe that if you had been a true friend --that if your concern for me had been genuine, and not an attempt to serve some agenda of your own-- that you would not have been capable of such a betrayal of trust, let alone the sudden and complete desertion of a friend in that person's worst time of crisis --no matter what your own problems or circumstances.
Until the time you decided to abrubtly withdraw your "concern" (such as it was), you seemed compelled to go to the oppositte extreme by aggressively dispensing psychological and spiritual advice, which I had not asked for, had told you I did not need, and certainly did not agree with. You have absolutely no background, training or knowledge in these areas, yet you often made comments in an authoritative manner about these formal systems of thought (such as Jungian and other forms of psychology, various religions, spiritual or metaphysical traditions) which only reflected your ignorance of these very ideologies. Your opinions in these matters were nothing more than uninformed personal speculation. You're certainly entitled to your opinions, but to try to push these opinions upon someone else is presumptuous and intrusive, no matter how well-meaning you may convince yourself are your intentions.
I can see that you and X have much in common; she too has a penchant for attempting to push uninformed, unsolicited, unwelcome, non-professional spiritual and psychological advice upon others. Both of you seem to share the notion that some "generic human condition" exists; that all of us have the same motives, the same experiences; that everyone should aspire to the same definite models of mental, emotional and spiritual "health." Your many broad, general and sweeping statements to this effect reminded me of what Carl Jung once commented upon: that unaware, unindividuated persons either assume all others are like them, or else believe that all others should be like them. Be that as it may, both you and X seemed intent upon negating my individuality. Neither of you showed any respect for me as a person, nor for my right to think for myself and make my own choices.
Any "help' offered by either one of you was extended with the concealed proviso (aka the hidden agenda) that your support was to be had only at the price of allowing myself to be manipulated into accepting your advice and interference in my affairs. The only difference I could see between your respective tactics was that X's interference was more brazen, while much of yours was conducted covertly. Because so much of your meddling was conducted behind my back it was harder --and took longer-- for me to confront and neutralize.
You tried to tell me how I should spend money which you solicited without my permission. You told me I should not spend any money I received for desperately needed medical care --that I should spend it instead on rent, since that was what you chose to convey as my most pressing need to people from whom you solicited the money. What would those people think when I did not spend the money on rent? you asked. What others would "think" was never my concern; however, what other people would think of you was evidently your primary concern, apparently outweighing any concern about the severity of my material situation --including the constant pain I was forced to endure for lack of medical care.
When I refused to allow you to tell me how to spend money --even though you thought your part in soliciting it gave you that right-- you then tried to lecture me about applying for "welfare". I told you that it was not an appropriate or viable option for me. I was not obligated to justify my actions to you, and I didn't owe you an explanation; however, you persistently interrogated me as to the reasons why I would not consider it. When interrogation failed to persuade me, you resorted to imposing arguments which I obviously did not agree with, and had no desire nor need to hear. Once again, you showed no respect for my ability to know, and my right to choose what would --and would not-- be appropriate or possible for me.
Then, you tried to tell me how I should arrange to repay money (in the form of professional services) [counseling, as a Jungian analyst and Christian minister, at which time I had a private practice] --money I did not owe, since it was never borrowed by me, nor loaned directly to me. I refer to the money you received from XX, which you later gave to me. You gave me the money saying only that you had borrowed it from someone you chose not to name and that I could pay it back to you when --and if-- I were able or chose to do so: nothing more.
According to you, there were no strings attached. It was not your place to attempt to make agreements behind my back, brokering deals without my knowledge or consent. Then, to impose an assumed obligation on me to repay money I would never have agreed --and in fact did not, at any time, agree-- to borrow from another individual, and had already accepted on quite different terms from you. Nor did you have the right to barter my professional services to another person without my consent. Even were such terms suggested by another party, you should never have even discussed that without my knowledge or consent.
You borrowed money from a third party --an unamed source which you chose not to disclose to me at the time the money was presented to me-- and therefore you are the one responsible for the debt. Soliciting and borrowing the money was your choice, not mine. If my circumstances had not been so very desperate I would have returned the money to you immediately once I learned of the meddlesome arrangements you were attempting to make without my knowledge or consent. I do not have the money to return to you at this time. When I do I will send it back to you directly, since you were the one from whom I received it.
Yet another presumptuous, intrusive action on your part (also conducted behind my back) which I have discovered since my last contact with you, was that you called my analyst, with the intent of discussing with him, as he explained to me, your "side" of your relationship with me. He immediately recognized the inappropriate nature (as well as the manipulative intent) of such an action and refused to participate in it. I am thankful that he, at least, knows the meaning of confidentiality and loyalty, whether it involves a friend or a client. This ill-considered action is yet another example of a completely unwarranted invasion of my privacy. Such behavior suggests that you seem to think you can make of my personal life an open book: a cheap tabloid for all and sundry to peruse and speculate upon.
If you want your personal life to be under public scrutiny, then join an "encounter group" with like-minded individuals, like the one X belongs to. But it's wrongful to expect me to tolerate my private life becoming grist for the mill of "group therapy" as a result of your misguided attempt to deal with your own psychological problems.
If a group of neurotic individuals with a "herd mentality" decide to get together and and shout their individual and/or collective personal business from the rooftops, that is their prerogative, but I certainly don't appreciate your lack of discretion in attempting to put my business in the street, by calling those persons I had asked you not to contact, behind my back, violating my personal confidences, and spewing forth erroneous perceptions of me and my life in the process. Such subterfuge is beyond my capacity to tolerate.
I have never done anything to deserve such disrespectful treatment. I was not only shocked, but deeply hurt, to learn of it.
I once heard you describe yourself as an "ethicist", the meaning of which is a specialist in ethics. Why you felt entitled to claim this designation, I haven't a clue. Such self-evaluation can only have been either delusionary or contrived. In my considered professional opinion, based on my observation of your behavior, I think it is likely that you have a need for others to see you as such a person, due to a problem with your self-esteem, which you feel may only be elevated by gaining approval from others; perhaps by being perceived by them as an "ethicist".
(Please note: This is the only such unsolicited opinion you have received from me. Under the circumstances I feel justified in giving it.) Even speaking solely from my personal experience with you, the way you have treated me is decidely unethical, in the broadest possible sense.
It should be obvious to you by now that I feel considerable anger about your treatment of me. Certainly such anger is justified, but your behavior has also caused me emotional pain, since at one time I trusted you and considered you to be among my closest friends. I have never violated confidences which you entrusted to me by indiscriminately relating them to others. I have never betrayed whatever trust --if any-- you may have had in me. I have not given advice about -- nor even commented on-- your personal life, your finances or your relationships, unless I was specifically asked by you to do so. Otherwise, whatever observations I made, or opinions I held about these things, I kept to myself, out of respect for your privacy, and your right to make your own choices in your life. I never refused to listen to your problems or concerns, when you chose to confide them to me. I did not expect you to adopt my viewpoints, nor did I expect you to justify your actions to me.
I did not withdraw my friendship just because you did not understand me, or did not agree with me, for instance, because you were not an animal rights activist, as I am. Those are my views, and I would not attempt to impose them on anyone else --including you. The only things I ask from my friends are loyalty, respect for my rights, and to give whatever support of me they are able and willing to give --no more. Certainly I treat them as I would like to be treated, by keeping their confidences and respecting their right to be who they are, as long as they don't violate my rights in the process.
The last conversation I had with you, on the telephone, felt to me like an exercise in futility. You were telling me that you wished you could "be there" to help me with what I was going through, but you could not. In explanation of this, you made a comment which I could not easily forget. Your exact words were: "It's your journey." As if this so-called "journey" were some sort of mystical initiation or "learning experience", something I was meant to go through alone. I feel it is imperative to correct your immense misperception, evidently spawned by incredible ignorance: What I was going through was not a "journey" in any sense of the word --not literal, metaphorical, spiritual or otherwise. It was a severe and life-threatening, existential, material crisis. It was crippling poverty brought on through no fault of mine, over which I had very little control. It was extreme physical and emotional stress brought on by the constant desperate struggle to obtain the most basic necessities to sustain life and the lives of my beloved cats. It was chronic, painful and debilitating physical illness which could not be relieved for lack of the proper medical care, proper food, supplements and medicines.
My emotional distress was not brought about by anything amiss within my psyche, as you seemed to suggest, but rather by the total exhaustion and near-despair I felt knowing that I would soon lose my home, my car, as well as all opportunities for obtaining the money I had worked so long and so hard to generate; and this was exacerbated by grief over my mother's death. The one and only thing I "learned" from this miserable experience --quite incidentally-- was who my friends were, and who they were not. And if I had been forced to go through the last, and worst part of this horrible ordeal alone, without the help and sincere support of a few who did care, I might, some time since, have taken a "journey" off the earth plane.
Your casual insensitivity in referring to these dreadful circumstances in my life as a "journey" can only be a reflection of profound ignorance and/or shallowness. Fully aware of the horrendous circumstances in my life, but apparently unconcerned, your last conversation with me was littered with such cliches as "exploring my creativity", as you phrased it, and other mindless pop psychology and New Age jargon.
I finally realized that there was nothing further I could say to you.
And I didn't even realize then that you had betrayed my trust, violated my confidences, and in the process had seen fit to unjustly malign my character. Or that you had approached people you had no ethical right to talk to, about me, or my personal business.
If I had known, I certainly would have confronted you with it then. The last thing I heard from you was that you would call me "next week". That was early in May; it is now late October. My phone was disconnected on July 1, the day I was evicted from my home. Even if you had any belated concern at all about me you could have mailed a note to my P.O. box.
I have said what I needed to say. I would have done it sooner, but could not find the time. As I explained, I have the need to be direct in saying what I feel, especially since you are someone I once cared a great deal about and considered to be a close friend. I expect that the writing of this letter will dissipate much of the anger I still feel, but despite that, I have no ill will toward you. The choice to end our friendship was not initially mine; but in light of your attitudes toward me I would have had no alternative in any case, once I realized the scope of your betrayal of my trust.
October 25, 1994
Barbara Hartwell Percival
Legal Defense & Research Trust
PO Box 22
Old Orchard Beach
Barbara Hartwell Vs. CIA
Legal Defense & Research Trust
PO Box 22
Old Orchard Beach
Barbara Hartwell Vs. CIA