Barbara Hartwell

My photo
Independent Investigator, Intelligence Analyst, Journalist. Former CIA (NOC, Psychological Operations) Black Ops Survivor. Sovereign Child of God. Minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ (Ordained 1979, D.Div.) Exposing Government Lies, Crimes, Corruption, Conspiracies and Cover-ups.

Sunday, March 18, 2018

Gun-grabbing Tyrants & Totalitarians: All Enemies Foreign & Domestic

Amendment II, U.S. Constitution

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Mobs of left-wing radical lunatics are hell-bent on trampling our God-given (natural) unalienable, constitutionally protected rights. Including the right to self-defense, the right to keep and bear arms.

They march in the streets for 'gun control', claiming they want “sensible”, “reasonable”, “common sense” gun laws. But these terms are deceptive, as any true defender of unalienable rights will know.

You give them an inch, they'll take a mile – and then some. That is the nature of the beast, and the nature of tyranny, the nature of all totalitarian systems, no matter by which name they are called.

They may call themselves liberals, progressives, socialists, communists, anti-fascists. Many see themselves as do-gooders, claiming they are motivated by compassion; they claim their objective is “protecting the children”. In fact, they are aggressive busybodies, who falsely believe that they know what is best for everyone, and will stop at nothing, who will use any means necessary (regardless of all manner of violations) to get it. The ends justify the means, no matter the grievous violations to your right to life, liberty, property.

But, whoever they are, as long as they attempt to mitigate, moderate, adulterate, negate, nullify the unalienable rights of others, they are undoubtedly tyrants and totalitarians. For those of them who have taken an oath or affirmation to uphold, protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, they are also traitors. They have become the enemies within the gates.

Like it or not (and they certainly do not), the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. This nation was founded as a Constitutional Republic. It is NOT, nor has ever been, a democracy. Democracy is mob rule, rather than the rule of law, under the Constitution, where individuals may enjoy the blessings of liberty, free from all forms of tyranny.

Democracy would allow the majority (no matter how stupid, how ignorant, how willful, how aggressive, how unscrupulous, how unprincipled, or how evil) to control of the lives and the fortunes of every individual in this nation.

Mobs of left-wing agitators, in lockstep, chant, “This is what democracy looks like!”, in answer to the bull-horn wielding leader, “Tell me what democracy looks like!” Many of them are teenagers, or even young children.

I watched one video of high school students protesting “gun violence” and screeching for gun control. Among them was a sixteen year old, who blurted out, In 2020 I will be able to vote, and then I'll have a say! Answered with cheers from the mob and affirmation from the mainstream left-wing news media.

No, he won't “have a say”, not about gun control, not under the law. But that is exactly what these children are being indoctrinated to believe. The children (most far younger than this kid) are being exploited as tools of the state. They are not even taught about the Constitution in most of the schools. And they are not old enough to remember a time when this most fundamental document was even discussed, much less cherished and revered, by liberty-loving, law-abiding people who were willing to stand up and be counted in the cause of freedom and justice.

Add to this twisted scenario the fact that each time a mass shooting occurs, the deaths of the victims (especially children) are exploited in the agenda of gun control.

(Remember Al Gore and Columbine?)

They call for “gun free zones” (including schools, churches, stores, restaurants, etc.)

The facts are clear and proved over time.

Gun free zones are an open invitation for criminals, who never have and never will respect the law, including “gun laws”. They will get the guns, and the only way to stop the bad guys with guns is good guys with guns, good guys who will shoot back, in self defense and in defense of others. All it takes is one bullet with the perp's name on it. Lives are saved, and the criminal is neutralized.

The police won't save the victims, because they can't possibly get there fast enough. By the time they arrive, the massacre is over. If you don't believe me, check the statistics, which prove the point, time and time again. Or, in some cases, the police won't engage an active shooter, or perhaps (suspicious, isn't it?) they are issued a directive to stand down.

All that said, here are quotes from some of the good guys (those who respect the unalienable rights of individuals, including that of self defense and defense of others against murderous criminals), and some of the bad guys, whose agenda was/is CONTROL, plain and simple.

As the saying goes, It is not about gun control, it is all about CONTROL.

"This year will go down in history! For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"

Adolf Hitler

"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let’s not have any native militia or native police."

Adolf Hitler

"If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves."

Joseph Stalin

"The measures adopted to restore public order are: First of all, the elimination of the so-called subversive elements. … They were elements of disorder and subversion. On the morrow of each conflict I gave the categorical order to confiscate the largest possible number of weapons of every sort and kind. This confiscation, which continues with the utmost energy, has given satisfactory results."

Benito Mussolini, address to the Italian Senate, 1931

"All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party."

Mao Tze Tung, Nov 6 1938

"US Senator, If I could have banned them all – ‘Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your guns’ – I would have!"

Diane Feinstein, Statement on TV program 60 Minutes, Feb 5 1995

"They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

Barack Hussein Obama

"I don’t believe people should to be able to own guns."

Barack Obama (during conversation with economist and author John Lott Jr. at the University of Chicago Law School in the 1990s)

"I don't care if you want to hunt, I don't care if you think it's your right. I say 'Sorry.' it's 1999. We have had enough as a nation. You are not allowed to own a gun, and if you do own a gun I think you should go to prison."

Rosie O'Donnell

"The Supreme Court is wrong on the Second Amendment. And I am going to make that case every chance I get."

Hillary Clinton, from speech at a private Manhattan fundraiser

"If the FBI is watching you for suspected terrorists links, you shouldn't be able to just go buy a gun."

Hillary Clinton, at campaign rally, 2016

"When we got organized as a country, [and] wrote a fairly radical Constitution, with a radical Bill of Rights, giving radical amounts of freedom to Americans, it was assumed that Americans who had that freedom would use it responsibly .... When personal freedom is being abused, you have to move to limit it."

Bill Clinton

"We cannot let a minority of people—and that’s what it is, it is a minority of people—hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people."

Hillary Clinton

"Circling back around on guns as a follow up to the Friday morning discussion: the Today show has indicated they definitely plan to ask bout guns, and so to have the discussion be more of a news event than her previous times discussing guns, we are going to background reporters tonight on a few of the specific proposals she would support as President - universal background checks of course, but also closing the gun show loophole by executive order and imposing manufacturer liability."

Clinton campaign press secretary Brian Fallon, from leaked e-mails

"The Second Amendment only protects the people who want all the guns they can have. The rest of us, we've got no Second Amendment. What are we supposed to do?"

Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-New York)

"What I support is sensible regulation that is consistent with the constitutional right to own and bear arm. I think a total ban, with no exceptions under any circumstances, might be found by the court not to be (constitutional). But I don't know the facts."

Hillary Clinton

Now that we've heard from the tyrants and totalitarians, here are the defenders of liberty and unalienable rights.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."

Patrick Henry

"A free people ought to be armed."

George Washington

"Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion in private self defense."

John Adams

"To disarm the people is the most effectual way to enslave them."

George Mason

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."

William Pitt, Nov. 18, 1783

"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun."

The Dalai Lama, May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest. If we want the Arms Act to be repealed, if we want to learn the use of arms, here is a golden opportunity. If the middle classes render voluntary help to Government in the hour of its trial, distrust will disappear, and the ban on possessing arms will be withdrawn."

Mohandas K. Gandhi

"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."

Richard Henry Lee, Virginia delegate to the Continental Congress, Initiator of the Declaration of Independence, and member of the first Senate, which passed the Bill of Rights

District of Columbia v. Heller, case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on June 26, 2008, held (5–4) that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to possess firearms independent of service in a state militia and to use firearms for traditionally lawful purposes, including self-defense within the home. It was the first Supreme Court case to explore the meaning of the Second Amendment since United States v. Miller (1939).

In District of Columbia v. Heller the court ruled that the federal government could not restrict an individual from keeping an operable handgun in their home for self-defense.


And here, one of my all time favorite quotes:

Blaming guns for school shootings is like blaming spoons for Rosie O'Donnell being fat.

JBS leader John Perna (2007)

And now, this. To demonstrate just how far this nation has fallen from the principles of the Founders, we have this totalitarian message from this utterly despicable leftist control freak, Michael Moore.

I have highlighted some of the most egregious and idiotic passages, but they're all outrageously totalitarian, to the max.

Who the hell does this fat, bloviating Marxist freak think he is!

My Proposal to Repeal the Second Amendment and Replace It With This:


"A well regulated State National Guard, being helpful to the safety and security of a State in times of need, along with the strictly regulated right of the people to keep and bear a limited number of non-automatic Arms for sport and hunting, with respect to the primary right of all people to be free from gun violence, this shall not be infringed."

I, Michael Moore, along with all who support an end to this epidemic of gun violence, propose a new Amendment to our Constitution that repeals the ancient and outdated 2nd Amendment (which was written before bullets and revolvers were even invented), and replaces it with a new 28th Amendment that guarantees States can have State militias (a.k.a. State National Guards which are made up of citizen-soldiers who are called upon in times of natural disasters or other State emergencies), allows individuals to use guns for sport and gathering food, and guarantees everyone the right to be free of, and protected from, gun violence (i.e., the public’s safety comes ahead of an individual’s right to own and fire a gun).

This amendment would allow states and the federal government to pass laws that would regulate gun ownership in the following manner:

**As over 90% of gun violence is committed by men, in order for a man to purchase a gun, he must first get a waiver from his current wife, plus his most recent ex-wife, or any woman with whom he is currently in a relationship (if he’s gay, he must get the waiver from his male spouse/partner). This law has greatly reduced most spousal/domestic gun murders in Canada.

**All automatic and semi-automatic guns are banned.

**No gun or clip can hold more than 6 bullets.

**To activate a gun for it to be used, the trigger must recognize the fingerprint of its registered owner. This will eliminate most crimes committed with a gun as 80% of these crimes are done with a stolen gun.

**One’s guns must be stored at a licensed gun club or government-regulated gun storage facility. Believing that having a gun in your home provides you with protection is an American myth. People who die from a home invasion make up a sad but minuscule .04% of all gun murders in the US. And over a third of them are killed by their own gun that the criminal has either stolen or wrestled from them.

**To own and operate a gun one must obtain a license (like one does to operate a car). To get a license you have to complete a gun training and safety course and pass a thorough background check.

**As nearly half of all gun deaths are suicides, mental health care must become a top national health priority and must be properly funded. And by making it more difficult to purchase a gun - and requiring its storage outside the home - easy access during a suicidal moment is denied.

**Current restrictions placed on the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), due to successful lobbying by the NRA, have prohibited them from studying the gun violence epidemic in the US. These rules need to be removed and the funding restored. Science will then be free to find out why we are ALONE among nations in killing each other at such a massive rate (hint: It’s not just the guns - it’s us as Americans).

These are a few of the regulations that can be enacted to both protect society yet not deny hunters and sportsmen their fun.

This is the sane approach that meets everyone’s needs -- everyone, that is, except those of the serial killer, the mass murderer, the violent ex-husband, the disgruntled employee or the disturbed and bullied teenager. We will never eliminate all murder; that’s been with us since Cain killed Abel. But we CAN join the community of enlightened nations where gun violence is that rare occurrence — as opposed to the daily tragedy we now suffer here in the United States of America.

This can come to an end with the repeal of the 2nd Amendment and replacing it with the 28th Amendment.

For those who believe it will be impossible to do this, let me close by sharing with you two important facts that should give us hope:

1. We are not a country of gun nuts. 77% of all Americans do NOT own a gun! If three-quarters of the country has decided they have no need for a gun, three-quarters of the country may also decide they have no need for an archaic amendment that allows retired accountants to own 47 assault weapons. LET’S ORGANIZE THE 77%!

2. When President Obama tried to get Congress to pass simple, common sense gun control legislation after the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary, polls showed 90% of the country backed him! But the NRA beat him. LET’S ORGANIZE THE 90%!

We can start with the upcoming midterm election. Let every candidate know: If you take NRA money, we will
remove you from office.
Then do it.

No, Mr. Moore, those of us you consider to be “gun nuts”, simply for exercising our God-given, unalienable, constitutionally protected RIGHTS, including SELF DEFENSE, will absolutely NOT do it.

You could be named the Poster Boy for the most absurd and idiotic totalitarian ideas ever to be spewed on a Facebook page.

Why don't you just go join a communist revolution in some third world hellhole, where your ideology will be truly appreciated.

And take Bill and Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Diane Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Rosie O'Donnell, and the rest of the gun-grabbing totalitarian freaks with you!

Barbara Hartwell Percival
In Defense of God-given Unalienable Rights
Against All Enemies, Foreign and Domestic
March 18, 2018

Monday, March 12, 2018

To Correct the Inhumane CJS

When the government runs out of crimes to charge against the people, the tyrants simply secretly pass a number of civil statutes that carry severe sanctions (against which the accused has virtually no defenses or Constitutional protections), and then process the accused in a largely invisible civil 'justice' system (orchestrated by government thugs and assassins) that is designed to lead to the imprisonment or death of the accused.

-- Former FBI Agent, Attorney Geral Sosbee

Here is a summary of my insights into the current so-called Criminal Justice System which in effect is a criminal enterprise spearheaded by the supreme thugs in American society, the fbi, and is perpetuated by government institutions and colleges.

On the pervasive thinking inherent in the USA’s criminal Justice System (CJS) and related institutions:

I present here a few more observations on my theory regarding the ‘State vs. Individual’ with regard to 1) alleged crimes or offenses by the individual and 2) actual crimes against the individual by the State.

The current CJS wherein the State or federal authority overwhelms the accused is a behemoth of horrors. The mere accusation itself is enclosed in an institutional setting that is grossly prejudiced against the innocent accused, while favoring the accusing authority with procedural mandates from the inception of the charges continuing often for the life of the accused.

In all instances of charging or accusing someone of a crime or an offense, the State benefits by feeding new victims of the CJS into its massive and immoral and largely political regime. See my reports of crimes by U.S. Senator John Cornyn.

Indeed, the rampant crime spree by fbi and police are encouraged by ever expanding and widely accepted sting operations against innocent or confused persons. See my report on sting and entrapment exercises by the State.

The underlying problem with the current, politically motivated, accusatory process is that rumor, innuendo and half- truths (cherry picked) ultimately and wrongly brings disaster to the accused and rewards to the accusers (fbi, police, prosecutors, judges).

So, the thinking itself must be changed in order to not self -perpetuate the very activity that we pretend to abhor. In this regard the government displays a kind of conspiracy against all of society.



Additionally, the current, secret global program of 'State vs. Individuals' clearly exemplifies the crimes by State officials that I describe in many of my papers at


For specific atrocities committed by fbi against me and other political Targets see my paper at on, "What Would You Do, If?".

In regards to charges brought in public and often in secret by the State, the entire structure and underlying objective inherent in the State's power to destroy lives must be overhauled.

Currently, the State uses corrupt authority in the police/Fbi and in the general community to accuse someone publicly or in secret of an offense. The individual cannot generally accuse the State of a crime because accusations are almost always the exclusive domain of the State. This protocol is particularly egregious in State action against political Targets and against others who simply make *intellectual mistakes.

Today, the massive State apparatus
(for bringing charges of offenses against the community) is a monstrosity out of control. The State even expands their power to accuse people by a fbi sponsored "New, Unheralded, Illegal Quasi Criminal Justice System Forged By fbi" (Academia. Edu). This fbi program is an abomination that allows fbi et al. to torture, maim and murder/assassinate our people. See my reports on how the entire federal judiciary is now a party to and principal in the fbi’s unconscionable crime spree which is unprecedented in human affairs:

In another paper at I suggest a way to convert modern, corrupt prosecutorial thinking into an humane and transparently honest method to address errors against the community.


Note the long and painful history of our current structure for processing the accused and see another report here by Randall G. Shelden at:

I maintain that no rewards be offered to anyone for manufacturing a case against any person.

In my experience as a Special Agent with fbi I discovered how fbi agents receive different kinds of benefits (including money) for fabricating a criminal case against an innocent person. See the Rodriguez case:

Finally, any fbi agent who ' blows a whistle ' on illegal fbi or police operations is abruptly and irreversibly processed in yet another inhumane system referred to as 'counter intelligence and psychological operations ' designed to imprison, force suicide or kill the whistleblower and others. All manner of fbi atrocities are heaped on the Target in these covert maneuvers, including attempted murder and attacks with DEW & ELF weaponry.

The biggest obstacle in the reformation of corrupt government is that prevailing thoughts are not easily modified, especially (in the case of the CJS) where colleges and universities tout their “splendid” academic programs which in effect control the minds of the students and practitioners in that decadent field of study. All such CJS and police training programs should introduce my papers as required reading.

Thank you.

Geral Sosbee, JD

Saturday, March 3, 2018



"Hell is empty and all the devils are here."

    William Shakespeare, The Tempest

This report addresses phenomena which are, in large measure, considered as “conspiracy theories”, rather than as actual events, involving very real conspiracies.

Conspiracies to perpetrate all manner of evil deeds, each by an organized group of persons, against a designated Target or Targets, individually or collectively.

To be more specific, my focus here is on conspiracies which target individuals, or designated groups of individuals, for the following:

Harassment; persecution; stalking; sex crimes (rape and/or pornography); defamation (libel, slander, false light, injurious exploitation/appropriation of name/images); invasions of privacy; criminal menacing/death threats; physical assault; intentional infliction of emotional distress; blackmail/extortion; attempted murder (either by an acute attack or 'slow kill' incrementally).

In my analysis, I will reference two separate articles which address some of these issues. I should make it clear up front that there is no connection between these websites or authors (not that I have seen), and that I chose each one because the name of Barbara Hartwell was included therein, either by the writer and/or by those commenting on the article. In one article, the name of my friend/professional colleague Geral Sosbee appears as well.

As my regular readers will know, my reports are based on actual events and name the names of real people (individuals or groups). I have been accused, repeatedly and continually of “attacking” the persons whose names have been exposed; of spreading “disinformation”; of being a “character assassin”; of running a “libel site”, etc. etc. And most often, I am called a “CIA disinfo agent”.

From my observations, the accusers fall into one or more of these categories: criminals (especially government agents/officials and their minions), attempting to cover up their crimes against persons; aggressive/ambitious persons who have tried to latch on, or horn in on my professional work, and/or exploit my name for a self-serving agenda; busybodies who lack all respect for privacy, personal boundaries and unalienable rights of the individual (in this case, me.)

One more issue: I do not run an “interactive” website. I do not host a platform, nor provide a venue for airing the opinions of every Tom, Dick and Harry who comes down the pike, or who has an axe to grind. Nor do I participate in the pervasive free-for-all Internet culture of social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) I do not join discussion groups, nor do I respond to the writings/broadcasts of others in a section reserved for “comments”. I do not engage in personal arguments or debates with others, be they my detractors/adversaries, or otherwise. In cases where someone has used my name in their broadcasts and/or articles, my policy is to address the issues in my own reports. Just as I am doing here.

The first article comes from a site called THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CONSPIRACY THEORIES.

This article was authored by one Mike Wood.

The psychology of gang stalking, and the difference between conspiracy theory and delusion

Here, some excerpts copied from the opening paragraphs.

If you’ve spent enough time on the Internet, or read the New York Times yesterday [link removed] you might have come across the phenomenon of gang stalking – the alleged stalking of particular individuals by organized groups. It might seem like gang stalking is a sort of conspiracy theory, and that we can maybe understand it in the same way that we think about things like the 9/11 Truth Movement and beliefs in UFO coverups. I’m not sure about this. There are some pretty major psychological differences between the two. It’s probably not helpful to conflate run-of-the-mill conspiracy theories, which are not considered to be an indicator of psychopathology, with gang stalking, which is widely considered to be the product of delusional thinking.

In gang stalking [link removed] large gangs of perpetrators will (allegedly) use subtle methods of manipulation and harassment – muttering hurtful phrases or insults while passing their target on the street, repeatedly driving past the target’s house, preventing them from sleeping by making loud noises at odd hours, and so on. Many people who claim to be victims of gang stalking (search YouTube for a reasonably representative sample) allege more exotic stalking methods – in particular, “electronic harassment,” the use of advanced technology to torture, annoy, or even control the mind of the target from afar.

If you think this sounds pretty far-fetched, you’re not wrong. Stalking is real, of course – there’s no denying that. And there are situations where multiple people participate in bullying or even stalking – often close friends or family members. But “gang stalking” – the type that involves muttered insults, dozens of strangers working together, electronic harrassment, secret hand signals – is not really an accepted thing. In fact, suspicions of gang stalking are considered to be markers of delusional disorders like paranoid schizophrenia.

[See link to article for referenced material.]

I will start by stating that my professional background is in counterintelligence and psychological operations, which include a wide range of disciplines.

I am not a “psychologist” (as a term protected under licensing); I am trained in psychoanalysis, in intelligence analysis (both of which include profiling) and as a Christian minister (ordained 1979), specializing in pastoral counseling.

Equally relevant, I have been a designated Target of counterintelligence operations and psy war, especially by CIA and to a lesser extent FBI (as well as other domestic and foreign entities), for more years than I care to remember, but which, unfortunately, I cannot possibly forget.

I have investigated numerous cases of persons who were/are targeted for what is known as a neutralization campaign, over a course of more than three (3) decades. Most of the cases involved former military, law enforcement, and intelligence professionals. But there were also others, including journalists, activists, dissidents and especially, among them all, Christians.

I have written extensively on these topics, my reports published on the Internet since 1995, and my websites online since 2000.

So, when I see an article such as this one, by Mike Wood, which offers a theory, such as, that Targets of persecution (in this case, labeled as “gang stalking”, a common term, but one I do not like, or use), may be “delusional”, that some form of psychopathology (such as schizophrenia) may be responsible for the “beliefs” of the Targets, I will state, for the record, that such a theory is only that, a theory.

A theory with very sinister connotations. Labeling a person who has been targeted for persecution (of any kind) as “delusional” is an attempt to negate, to invalidate, to discredit, and ultimately, to blame the victim. And so it follows, if the victim is responsible for what is visited upon him, then the perpetrators cannot be held accountable. Because, according to the would-be “debunkers” (including, but not limited to the adherents of conventional psychology) no such perpetrators exist. No, it is all in the unbalanced psyche of the Target.

Those of us who have actually studied these phenomena, in real time, in the field, (not at a remove, in some theoretical, academic environment) as well as those who have personally experienced them, will be in no doubt of their horrific reality.

Then, there is the fact that a significant part of the purpose of these harassment campaigns against individuals is to attempt to induce neurosis, even psychosis, through the constant or intermittent stressors and trauma (psychological and/or physical) heaped upon the Target. Aside from all the other damages, they hope to “drive the Target crazy”.

And even if they don't succeed in that objective, they may well have achieved another: That at least some of the people close to the Target, family, friends, associates, colleagues, hearing some of the “implausible”, even bizarre stories related to the Target's experiences, will view that person as “paranoid” or “delusional”. After all, they think, such things could not possibly be happening.

And so, the Target may end up ostracized, even by those from whom he/she believed there should have been a reasonable expectation of concern and support.

As I've stated many times in my reports, the perps of these campaigns aim to drive the Target into a state of affairs in which he suffers isolation, alienation, deprivation. (CIA psy ops protocols.)

He often finds himself alone, poverty-stricken, chronically ill, abandoned and/or betrayed by friends, family and colleagues. He is marginalized, discredited, invalidated.

No delusions, no paranoia, except that falsely attributed to the Target by those perpetrating the crimes, and those who, in their lack of understanding, fail to see the brutal truth.

Now, an item from the “comments” section of the website by one “PFA Beacon”. That seems like a screen name, rather than an actual name, the usual device of anonymous cowards hiding their identities.

PFA Beacon:

Mike- in the spirit of enlightenment, I would like you to revisit this post, and have a look at some of the glitterati amongst the disinfo crowd in the organized gang stalking community.

Here’s one of the classic “gang stalking” spats that broke out between several former intelligence agents from the FBI and the CIA from around 2007, Barbara Hartwell, James F. Marino, and Geral Sosbee (who sued the FBI at one point for gang stalking)

These agents use the organized stalking discourse to communicate and cross communicate data. Part of disinformation operations is the flip side- to gain information, or to relay information in coded language. Another part is attempts to vindicate themselves after a discrediting narrative has been run about them, and more.

Odd, but true. Have a read, and try no to laugh. But it is a real thing that can and does involve mental illness, but also feigned mental illness, and sometimes, mental illness as a result of contradictory signals, or intelligence quandries, similar to Bateson’s porpoises experiment which created ‘schizophrenic symptoms’ in a double bind simulation.

This character, Mr. Beacon (as I will refer to him) makes one false statement after another, beginning by referring to Barbara Hartwell and Geral Sosbee as

"the glitterati amongst the disinfo crowd in the organized gang stalking community."

Here, he is apparently parroting the party-line widely disseminated, since circa 2000, a plot spawned by the late FBI Chief/COINTELPRO Kingpin Ted Gunderson et al, to label Barbara Hartwell as a “CIA disinfo agent”. And repeated ad infinitum, ad nauseam by the hordes of ignorant, malicious government stooges ever since.

For the record, I am not, nor have ever been, part of any “organized gang stalking community” in any way, shape or form. I don't use the term “gangstalking”, since I find it inaccurate. Nor have I ever participated in, nor been affiliated with any such “community”. I am not a member of any organizations or groups connected to these issues.

Next item:

"...the classic “gang stalking” spats that broke out between several former intelligence agents from the FBI and the CIA from around 2007, Barbara Hartwell, James F. Marino, and Geral Sosbee (who sued the FBI at one point for gang stalking)"

Mr. Beacon now brings in the name of one James F. Marino, and lumps it in with Barbara Hartwell and Geral Sosbee, as if there were any commonalities, which in fact, there are not.

James F. Marino is not a “former intelligence agent”. Marino, in fact, is merely one of a number of government stooges who tried to latch on to Sosbee and Hartwell, to ride our coattails in attempts to gain credibility for his own claims of being a target of a “FBI COINTELPRO sting operation” .

Mr. Marino is a name-dropper and gate-crasher, who was shamelessly exploiting the names of Sosbee and Hartwell, and promoting a plethora of false information in the process. These characters are a dime a dozen, but in Marino's case, he was extremely aggressive and refused to back off when he was told to stop promoting false information, to stop exploiting our names.

He then, predictably, began to libel us on his website, accusing us of all sorts of dastardly deeds, including (you guessed it) of being government disinfo agents.

There were no “spats” involved. Only one aggressor (Marino) engaging in offenses against two legitimate persons (Sosbee and Hartwell) in attempts to discredit us. And his libelous falsehoods against Sosbee and Hartwell remain online to this day.

Mr. Beacon claims that Geral Sosbee “sued the FBI for gangstalking”. Since I have a copy of the WRIT (which is posted on Sosbee's website), I can say that this is an inaccurate statement, but beyond that I won't presume to speak for Geral. Anyone who wants the facts of the case may easily find them on the website, Sosbee v. FBI.

"These agents use the organized stalking discourse to communicate and cross communicate data. Part of disinformation operations is the flip side- to gain information, or to relay information in coded language. Another part is attempts to vindicate themselves after a discrediting narrative has been run about them, and more."

I think that maybe, Mr. Beacon has been reading some grade B spy novels. He does not know whereof he speaks, but continues with the “disinformation” theme, promoting it AS IF this is established fact, and AS IF he is some sort of expert on these operations.

"Odd, but true. Have a read, and try no to laugh. But it is a real thing that can and does involve mental illness, but also feigned mental illness, and sometimes, mental illness as a result of contradictory signals, or intelligence quandries, similar to Bateson’s porpoises experiment which created ‘schizophrenic symptoms’ in a double bind simulation."

Now, he attempts to ridicule us (“try not to laugh”), bringing in the old standby, used to discredit legitimate expositors of counterintelligence operations, “mental illness”.

But who is this character, really? What is the source of his “information”? Why all the technical jargon, with no references, no connection whatsoever to the individuals he is trying to discredit?

What is Mr. Beacon's real name? Whoever he is, he has failed to establish any facts, and presents no evidence for his claims. Case closed.

Now, the author of the article, Mike Wood responds to Mr. Beacon.

Mike Wood:

I’m not really sure what to make of that post. Marino said something about remote satellite neural monitoring (which anyone who has experience in imaging would tell you is pretty ridiculous, because it’s hard enough to do reasonable brain imaging when you’ve got someone sitting in a damn fMRI machine) but most of it isn’t really gangstalking-related. It seems like a chapter in a weird ongoing internet slapfight that doesn’t make a lot of sense without knowing the people involved.

Well, here we go again...with an accusation of a “weird internet slapfight”.

But before I address Mr. Wood's comments (at least he uses what appears to be his real name) I advise anyone who is interested in reading my report on James F. Marino to view it here:

The link given in the comments is from an old website (2006-2010) where I no longer post, though I have left it online for reference purposes.

I won't bother repeating myself in regard to James F. Marino. Those interested may also find other reports exposing him on this website.

But I do take issue with Mr. Wood's statement about the existence of remote neural monitoring. Marino's claims (most of which in my opinion are not credible) aside, this technology does exist. Look it up (NOT on Marino's site), especially in connection to a lawsuit filed by John St. Clair Akwei re NSA.

And speaking strictly for myself, no, Mr. Wood does not know me, nor anything at all about me. He is free to believe what he will, and promote his theories about delusions, paranoia, schizophrenia, though I can't imagine that anyone who is informed on these issues would buy into his doctrinaire biases.

Next up, another article, this one named as a “book review”, by one Anita Dalton, on a website called Odd Things Considered

Anita Dalton

Book: The Franklin Cover-Up: Child Abuse, Satanism, and Murder in Nebraska

Author: John W. DeCamp

Type of Book: Non-fiction, conspiracy theory, Satanic Panic, politics

Again, you may read the entire article (link above), but my focus is once again on the use of the name Barbara Hartwell, in connection with the principals, Ted Gunderson and John DeCamp, as well as Ms. Dalton's opinions on some of the issues addressed in DeCamp's book, The Franklin Cover-up.

Here, some excerpts from the book review and the comments section, all by Anita Dalton:

[Highlighting is mine.]

Hoo boy. This is some excellent conspiracy theory, in that it is amazingly insane and involved. On one level, I actually believe about 1/8th of this book. The rest is just so whacked and beyond the realm of reason but with just enough grains of truth here and there that you can’t help but get sucked in.

This book has it all, for the seasoned conspiratologist. It has Satanic Panic, with cabals of Satanists killing children, burning their bodies and grinding up their bones and teeth. It has a ring of pedophiles all the way up to the White House, flying out kids from Nebraska for sexual purposes. It makes reference to militias, Oklahoma City, the Montana Seven, the Monarch Project, Bohemian Grove, the Gosch kidnapping (but no Jeff Gannon, alas – perhaps DeCamp will issue a new edition?)...

But on the most basic level, there is a kernel that can be believed in this book, though like I said, 7/8 of it, if not more, should be dismissed.

Nor was it a surprise to find the unpleasant, sticky presence of Ted Gunderson, former FBI agent, in this book. The man believes in Satanic Panic to this day, but he also believes all kinds of bizarre things, as I will discuss in a moment. He is either a loon or crazy like a fox and either way, he is dangerous. He is also lawsuit happy, suing people whom he thinks slander him, including people who have clear screws loose and should be pitied rather than sued. (Google Ted Gunderson and the name Barbara Hartwell and just marvel at the sadness of it all.) I can say without any hesitation that his investigative presence in the Johnny Gosch kidnapping (and sadly, as most believe, murder) has kept the vulnerable Noreen Gosch in a realm where she will believe anything as long as it means her son is alive. It has made her prey to con men and people who torment her.

I dream of seeing Gunderson in a whacked-theory cage match with someone – I just can’t think of whom I would inflict Ted on. Art Bell has already won an out of court settlement against him for calling him a child molester so it will have to be someone else (and since it was an out of court settlement with a gag order, there are no firm facts and all the information out there comes from sources that I would rather not link to, lest I become overrun with avid true believers from the whole rainbow spectrum of conspiracy, and if you think I’m verbose…).

Gunderson to this day believes the McMartin preschool molestation/Satanic ritual abuse case happened and has been a force behind sending innocent people to prison. He is wicked, nasty and preys on the unstable and it’s not entirely logical for me to say that I automatically believe the opposite of anything he has to say, but that’s actually close to the truth.

Wait. How is L. Ron Hubbard a Satanist? And how come you associate Satanists with power. I don’t know any with power. Anton LaVey had little, Aquino less, and current Satanists all work wage slave jobs. Not to disrespect a way of thinking I find bizarre (as an atheist, Satanism makes less sense to me than Christianity, but never mind), but it seems that Glenn Danzig is the most powerful Satanist around and he denies being a Satanist and has memes made about him taking care of his cats. I just don’t see the menace of Satanists.

I'll start with Ms. Dalton's characterization of Barbara Hartwell:

people who have clear screws loose and should be pitied rather than sued. (Google Ted Gunderson and the name Barbara Hartwell and just marvel at the sadness of it all.)

So, Dalton believes Barbara Hartwell has “clear screws loose” and that I should be “pitied”. I wonder, on what does she base this opinion? How does she presume to know anything that would cause her to slur my name in this smug, arrogant and condescending manner?

Well, aside from the fact that she is glaringly ignorant about the issues she addresses, such as child sex-trafficking, satanic ritual abuse, even the practice of satanism itself, it appears she is attempting to discredit the very existence of these things on which she pontificates.

"Gunderson to this day believes the McMartin preschool molestation/Satanic ritual abuse case happened..."

And how, pray tell, would Ms. Dalton know, one way or another, whether or not it “happened”?

Does she know anyone connected to the case? Has she conducted her own investigation of the case? Since she never cites as much as one reference or source to back up her claims, she is merely engaging in speculation.

As it happens, I knew Ted Gunderson very well, and worked with him for three years. I also know Jackie McGauley, the principal whistleblower in the case, a journalist and the mother of one of the children who suffered the satanic ritual abuse by the predators.

I also know, from multiple sources (including McGauley) that Ted Gunderson was not the person who “investigated” the case; he only swooped in to try to take over the case, and then used it on his “resume” for years, for bragging rights.

I have a number of reports on this website which relate to the McMartin case. I don't claim to be an expert on the case, I did not personally investigate it. But I do know credible sources who were involved, and who are armed with the facts.

Same holds true for the so-called “Franklin Cover-up”. It was, in fact, a double coverup, a coverup of a coverup. John DeCamp himself was a pedophile, a fact of which Ted Gunderson was well aware, and who admitted this to me in 1999, when I informed him that I had this information, from multiple trustworthy sources.

When I exposed this information publicly (beginning in 2003), DeCamp was the one who threatened to sue me, mounting a libel campaign extravaganza in electronic media in 2005. He never followed through on the threat.

But according to Ms. Dalton, I should be “pitied rather than sued”.

Dalton states:

"But on the most basic level, there is a kernel that can be believed in this book, though like I said, 7/8 of it, if not more, should be dismissed."

So, she pulls a fraction out of thin air, that “7/8 of it, if not more, should be dismissed.”

Yes, indeed, just one of those whacky conspiracy theories, which “should be” dismissed.

Simply because, without presenting any credible sources, no evidence, operating on a total lack of knowledge, Ms. Dalton says so.

And consider this statement:

"And how come you associate Satanists with power. I don’t know any with power. Anton LaVey had little, Aquino less, and current Satanists all work wage slave jobs. Not to disrespect a way of thinking I find bizarre (as an atheist, Satanism makes less sense to me than Christianity, but never mind), but it seems that Glenn Danzig is the most powerful Satanist around and he denies being a Satanist and has memes made about him taking care of his cats. I just don’t see the menace of Satanists."

Ms. Dalton says she is an atheist. That might explain (though maybe not) why she dismisses the idea that there is any menace from Satanists.

And how would she know how much “power” to attribute to the various satanists she names?

So, she does not believe in God and perhaps as a corollary, she does not believe in Satan.

I can only say that in my opinion Ms. Dalton has been greatly deceived; that she thinks she knows far more than she does; and that what she thinks she knows is based on speculation, erroneous assumptions, and probably on buying into some very well-crafted disinformation, meant to discredit legitimate sources who have exposed the very real horrors of child sex trafficking/pornography; the epidemic of satanism, which has reached unprecedented proportions, worldwide and which is drawing in millions, especially through the heavy metal/devil worship culture.

Satan does not exist? His minions don't really exist and have no power to wreak havoc and destroy the lives of innocent children?

Try telling that to the victims, the countless children abducted every year, to be used as sex slaves, and then merely disposed of. Tell it to those who are kept in cages, who have experienced the worst of the worst soul-shattering evil, from which they can never completely recover, even if they live to tell their stories. Tell it to the parents and the families whose lives have been ruined in the wake of these devastating crimes.

In summary, I ask the readers to please seriously consider the topics covered here; if you are not concerned about them, you should be, even if only for the sake of your children and grandchildren.

Don't allow self-proclaimed 'experts' or pontificating pundits, to determine your beliefs.

Those who would have you believe, Oh that? That's just a whacky conspiracy theory. Pay it no mind.

After all, it is clear that those who talk about such things are delusional, paranoid, mentally ill, they have a few screws loose....

Believe this at your own risk, because mark my words, it will eventually involve you, your family and loved ones, one way or another, whether you think so, or not.

Barbara Hartwell Percival
March 3, 2018