PROFILE of a TSA Criminally Insane Hireling: Brenda Negri

  

 

 

Brenda Negri: Would you want this whackjob screening YOUR baggage?

"...the Mexican Mafia, the gangs, the heroin junkies and the meth dealers. They'll whip your ass into a pulp if we ask them to, and thats only if you're lucky. If you're not, they'll just flat kill ya......they'll slit your throat just as soon as say fuck you."

-- ex-TSA employee Brenda Negri's death threat against Barbara Hartwell, posted on Larry Lawson News, 2002

 

In December 2001 I first exposed a criminal psychopath by the name of Brenda Negri, a woman who was posing on the Internet as a male FBI agent. 

Negri, calling herself  "Ranger Rick", "Ace G-Man", was perpetrating various scams and crimes against former intelligence, military and law enforcement persons, those who are legitimate whistleblowers and expositors of government crimes and corruption. In a nutshell, Negri stalked, harassed and libeled those of us whom the government had targeted for neutralization. 

Brenda Negri is a law enforcement/intelligence groupie and G-Man wannabe who worships   government authority figures and who desperately wants to be one of them. Having been summarily rejected by every government bureau and agency whose gates she tried to crash, and having incurred the righteous outrage and wrath of those she targeted for harassment (including sexual harassment  where several men were concerned), in 2003 Negri finally landed a low-level menial government job, working as a baggage screener for TSA.

But Brenda Negri didn't last long at TSA.  Negri, a pathological liar, claimed she had "resigned" from TSA in May, 2003, but the truth is that Negri was terminated as a result of formal complaints made by some of Negri's targets, including former CIA whistleblower Barbara Hartwell, former LAPD officer and military black ops whistleblower Ed Schooling, and federal whistleblower Stew Webb.

After being fired from TSA, Brenda Negri subsequently attempted to exploit her short time of employment there, fabricating tales of  "exposing" corruption in TSA and ludicrously claiming  some sort of "whistleblower" status. But as you read on you will discover how patently absurd are all of Negri's claims. 

Here's the point of this report: Considering all the recent outrage generated by TSA's escalating   and outrageous violations of unalienable Individual rights, including 'naked' body scanners which emit dangerous radiation, strip searches and sexual assaults perpetrated against travelers in airports, who are treated as if they were nothing better than criminal suspects, I thought this would be a good time to once again expose the criminal offenses of police state minion Brenda Negri --for she exemplifies all of the worst characteristics of the government thugs she worships and imitates. So here's a profile of just one of TSA's criminally insane hirelings...

For this article, I have used some excerpts from a comprehensive report I wrote in 2003, titled: 

IRRREFUTABLE EVIDENCE: THE TRUTH ABOUT BRENDA NEGRI  

 

A CASE STUDY IN FRAUD, INSANITY AND CRIMINAL HARASSMENT

I have also included some of the testimony of the rank amateur and impostor  Brenda Negri, posted on various message boards, using her real name, in which she is still lying, still posing as some sort of government insider and "whistleblower".

Brenda Negri is a psychopath engaged in criminal harassment of legitimate government whistleblowers, survivors of black operations, ex-military and intelligence personnel.

Brenda Negri is a scamster who hides behind many screen names and aliases to do her dirty work, writing and posting libelous material on various message boards on the World Wide Web.

Negri has NEVER used her real name, when posting her libelous disinformation --despite the fact that she was exposed as a phony, a pathological liar and a fraud back in December 2001, by myself and other legitimate whistleblowers whom she has targeted for criminal harassment and libel.

Negri's primary targets have included: Former FBI agent Geral Sosbee; former ONI and Iran Contra whistleblower Al Martin; former CIA Barbara Hartwell; federal whistleblower Stew Webb. 

Several of us, all ex-military; intelligence and law enforcement, have conducted an intensive investigation of Brenda Negri, aided by licensed private investigators. We have now collected all the information and evidence we need to FULLY EXPOSE Negri and put this woman out of business, once and for all. Hard, irrefutable evidence, presented here for the first time in a comprehensive report.

Documented evidence as well as the testimony of reliable witnesses and trustworthy sources will clearly show that Brenda Negri has engaged in the following criminal violations:

Impersonating Federal Officers, fabricating, carrying and flashing false I.D.

(Stew Webb was one witness to whom Negri flashed a bogus Los Angeles County Sheriff Dep't badge as well as an FBI shield.)

Engaging in criminal harassment and stalking by phone, e-mail and in person.

In February 2002, Negri was fired for lying to her former employer, Delia Swan, of Swan Legal Services in Los Angeles; for using the office computer without her employer's knowledge or consent to run Internet scams; to write and post libelous material; and to engage in criminal harassment of legitimate government whistleblowers.

Brenda Negri is also a thief. Delia Swan told us that Negri engaged in theft of services: unauthorized use of the office's metered mail system and office telephone lines and that she ran up THOUSANDS of dollars in phone bills at Swan Legal Services while perpetrating her criminal harassment.

Lying to her current employers (Federal Agents from TSA) on her application form to land a government job, falsifying personal records and employment history. Negri also failed to report her history of mental illness and having been placed in a psychiatric facility by family members due to her delusional and bizarre behavior.

Brenda Negri is currently employed at the Transportation Security Administration, in a low level, menial job as a baggage screener. Meanwhile, Negri continues her criminal harassment of myself and others, writing and posting libelous disinformation and STILL telling outrageous lies, variously claiming to be an "undercover Fed" or a "mole" inside the Department of Homeland Security, "ratting out"; "snitching"; and "spooking on" (in Negri's own words) her employers.

DELUSIONAL FANTASIES OF BRENDA NEGRI, "ACE G-MAN"

Here, some comments posted by Negri on her website, 'The Fifth Horseman', using a pseudonym, at the time she was employed by TSA.

Negri: "We suddenly seem to have police escorts and undercover hovering around watching our back...."

[Negri exhibits classic symptoms of being delusional and clinically paranoid, believing she is being followed and watched, either by her 'enemies' or by those she imagines would want to 'protect' her.

But in reality there would be no reason whatsoever for anyone working "undercover" --good guys or bad-- to take ANY notice of Brenda Negri. The very thought is laughable to those of us who have actually been INVOLVED in covert operations or who have actually been targeted for such surveillance.

Negri is a nobody who has never been involved in anything remotely resembling these operations. Nobody would waste their time or money targeting the inconsequential Brenda Negri.]

Negri: "A national mag does a big hit piece on our agency and there we be, front and center, The Fifth Horseman, in living color, quotes and all, snitching them off...the artful timing of it putting a big bucket of water on Babs' [referring to Barbara Hartwell] bogus threats and Webb's frivolous lawsuit...and making their handlers sweat nails...and back off..."

[Negri evidently imagines that she will be 'protected' from criminal prosecution simply by having her name and picture in a magazine in connection with her employment in a low-level government job.]

Negri: "Meanwhile, US? Still moled inside the DHS...spooking on and ratting out the cretin who are up to no good..."

[Here, Negri claims to be a "mole" and "spook". Instead of naming TSA, where she ACTUALLY works as a lowly baggage screener at LAX Airport, she cites the Department of Homeland Security, which sounds more IMPORTANT and OFFICIAL, under the delusion that she could actually impress people with her 'credentials'.

The irony and the unmitigated stupidity of Negri's approach is that NOBODY actually working "undercover" would brag about it on a public mesage board!

 

Negri also promotes many other lies about Barbara Hartwell, such as that I am a "CIA plant"; a "CIA goon"; "former CIA prostitute"; that I receive "funding from Langley" for "rogue black ops"....and on and on in this vein...

In truth, I am NONE of these things, nor ever was.  And the last "funding" I ever received from Langley was over ten (10) years ago, when I was still involved in their black operations. Yet Negri's vicious lies about me have created a world of trouble; compromised my professional reputation and security; even endangered my life.]

Now, an excerpt from a magazine article about TSA, in which Brenda Negri is quoted.

GROUNDED: BRENDA NEGRI BECAME AN AIRPORT SCREENER TO SERVE HER COUNTRY

For Brenda Negri, becoming an airport screener in the months after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks was the culmination of her deeply felt need to serve her country.

“It meant so much for me to work for the government,” says Negri, an airport screener at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). “I cried when I got sworn in.” Because many of her family members served in the military, working for a federal law enforcement agency “epitomized the ultimate in terms of professionalism and integrity.”

“I'm answering the call to civic service and doing something to combat terrorism,” says Negri. But without a voice on the job, airport screeners are powerless to improve TSA or public safety. “Now we're propping up a house of cards,” she says. “That's been the hardest thing for me.”

[So, Negri claims she wants to "combat terrorism"?

Well, if Negri REALLY wants to "serve her country" and to "combat terrorism"; why in hell doesn't she start by ceasing her OWN CRIMINAL HARASSMENT AND THREATS against legitimate whistleblowers and survivors of government black operations?

Negri has called Barbara Hartwell a "terrorist" on more than one occasion in her public commentaries, "Barbara Hartwell and her Terrorist Connections"....as well as making blatant comments about threats to my life, such as that "Hartwell could be whacked by a Rusky with a silencer". Sounds like a terrorist threat to me.......

Negri has also made threats to both Stew Webb and Al Martin, by phone and in her public commentaries.

As far as "professionalism" goes, Negri lacks any semblance of it. She has no formal education; no professional training whatsoever in ANY field.

Remember folks, the only job she could get working for the government was as a BAGGAGE SCREENER! And since the newly created TSA was desperate to fill the slots, they hired just about ANY Joe or Jane who came down the pike --many of whom, it was later learned, were criminals. 

Here are Negri's comments, from "Flynnsghost" (another site created by Negri) about the fact that baggage screeners with criminal records had been allowed to slip through the shoddy security and background checks at TSA.

Brenda Negri (using a screen name) wrote: "Hey, so what's a few felons here and there, anyhow? I mean, so they let a bomb go through a checkpoint or part of a gun get on a plane, heeeey! It's LA!
 

Sheesh....

And the inevitable question arises: Did WE have something to do with this leak? YOU BETTER BELEIVE IT."

[So now, here is Brenda Negri, ADVOCATING allowing bombs and guns to go through the security checks. Unbelievable!

Not only that, but Negri actually tries to TAKE CREDIT for the "leak"! Again, unbelievable!

Perhaps most unbelievable of all, Negri is ONE of the VERY individuals who LIED on her application to get the job! LIED about her history of mental illness. LIED about her criminal activities. LIED about her employment history.

BRENDA NEGRI: A PATHOLOGICAL LIAR. A THIEF. And worst of all, A DELUSIONAL NUTCASE WHO CLAIMS TO BE A "MOLE" AND "SPOOK" inside the Department of Homeland Security.

Let me ask you something...Would you want this psycho screening YOUR baggage?

And if engaging in criminal harassment; stalking; making threats and telling outrageous lies, is Negri's idea of "INTEGRITY", then I think Brenda Negri needs to do some serious soul searching. And while she's at it, it would behoove her to seek professional counseling for her mental illness.

FORMAL COMPLAINTS FILED AT TSA BY TARGETS OF BRENDA NEGRI

In early April 2003, several of us being criminally harassed by Negri, including myself; Federal Whistleblower Stew Webb; and retired LAPD officer Ed Schooling, tracked Negri down and received confirmation from a TSA official, Mr. Paul Lipscomb, Assistant Federal Security Director at LAX Airport, that Negri is in fact working as a baggage screener for TSA, the newly created Federal agency under the umbrella of the Department of Homeland Security.

All of us filed formal complaints with TSA by telephone, furnishing information about Negri's unscrupulous and criminal activities and her mental illness; as well as outlining the damages done to each of us by Negri's continuing interference; criminal harassment; libel and slander.

We also provided evidence of Negri's illegal activities from archives of posts written and disseminated by Negri on various Internet message boards.

We requested that a formal investigation be conducted by TSA and advised them that we would also be contacting other Federal and state agencies in regard to Brenda Negri.

Following are excerpts from my own letter to TSA official Paul Lipscomb.

Dear Mr. Lipscomb:

Please consider this letter as a written formal complaint against Brenda M. Negri for criminal harassment. As confirmed by you in our phone conversations of April 4, 2003, Negri is currently employed at LAX Airport as a baggage screener for TSA.

During two (2) phone conversations, to which a Mr. Jonathan Fleming was also privy via speakerphone, I gave you my testimony and a brief overview of my dealings with Brenda Negri. I will repeat some of that here, for the record and will provide additional details.

I understand that you also spoke with other witnesses, including Stew Webb and retired LAPD officer Ed Schooling, also targeted by Negri for criminal harassment; libel and slander.

TALL TALES BY G-MAN WANNABE BRENDA NEGRI

Now, let's turn our attention to some of Negri's self-aggrandizing lies, posted on message boards, using her real name.

Brenda Negri wrote:

"I resigned from the TSA in May. I was a Lead Passenger Screener at LAX (Los Angeles). I have a background in investigation and intelligence work, which immediately made me a threat to the incompetent TSA LAX management, most of whom had come over from either the airlines, through nepotism, cronyism, or the former private company — the same one who used to hire kids off of the California State parolee programs.

I resigned after making protected disclosures to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, Congress, Senate, the FBI, the IRS CID, DOT IG, DHS IG, the media, and others about a myriad of incidents, documented security breaches and violations of TSA policy and regulations. I was able to get the TSA Internal Affairs to come in for all it was worth; days after they left, we had another huge evacuation thanks to a backpack full of fireworks getting through the same Terminal 7 checkpoints that the IA supposedly had just paid a visit to. Until the TSA becomes accountable, you are very right, we are in for the same stuff. All over again.

Brenda M. Negri
San Pedro, Calif."

[Fact: Brenda Negri is an uneducated rank amateur, with no training in any field or discipline, who worked as a secretary before being hired by TSA. Negri has absolutely NO background or training in "investigation" of any kind, much less "intelligence work".

What's more, she herself is the very type of criminal whackjob who slipped through the shoddy security and background checks. So much for Negri's  "credentials", fabricated in an idiotic attempt to present herself as some kind of  government "whistleblower."]

Brenda Negri wrote:

"A "mere" 1,200 felons waltzing around within our TSA ranks, Mr. Loy, and screeners like me are being asked by you and your management to "look the other way." We are quickly targeted for retaliation if we dare point out any criminal-like activity at TSA, whether it be in management (where unfortunately, a good percentage of it lies) or at the lower screener ranks. Thank you, Tom Brokaw, for breaking the news to me that while working for the TSA in Los Angeles, "I Worked With A Convicted Murderer" too bad I had to hear it from you instead of from my own agency. Thank you, Congress, for trying to pin down the TSA for straight answers: good luck. I was on board over three months before any of my references were contacted. I worked with gang punks and ghetto 'homeys' who bragged about Crips connections and were throwing down gang sign all day long. When I brought it up, my supervisors and management stuck their collective heads in the sand. I had LAPD cops pointing out gangbangers in TSA uniforms to me all day long; they were as incredulous as I was. Every American, every taxpayer, every family member of those who perished on 9-11-01 should be outraged and demanding Loy's head on a platter for this hiring debacle. Rest assured al Qaeda has probably already taken full advantage of it by bribing those void of integrity and ethics in the TSA. There will be another 9-11 and yes, both Tom Ridge and James Loy will have blood on their hands."

[Yes sirree Bob! Brenda Negri and her unsurpassed "integrity" and "ethics".  As for those gangbangers in TSA uniforms, I can't imagine they could have been any worse than her pals in the Mexican Mafia, whom Negri boasted in her death threat against Barbara Hartwell, would "slit your throat as soon as say fuck you."

Great job, Brenda Negri, in exposing yourself yet again, not only as a liar but also as a parading idiot.]

BRENDA NEGRI: OLD DOG, NEW TRICKS?

For the past few years, it seemed that Brenda Negri simply fell off the face of the earth. And although I'm sure she had simply taken on some new pseudonyms under which to publish her libelous falsehoods about patriots and whistleblowers, I saw nothing online that definitively identified her.

But just recently, I was reminded of Negri by the TSA police state debacle, and decided to look her up. Lo and behold! Aside from the older posts comprised of self-aggrandizing lies about her "background" in "investigation" and "intelligence work",  I found Negri on two other sites. One was some sort of fan club for actor Errol Flynn (whom Negri has apparently been using as a role model these many years for her delusional deeds of derring do); and the other was connected to a ranch in Nevada, where Negri evidently works.

It seems old Brenda Negri has reinvented herself. No mention of "spooks" or "mole hunts." No more of those preposterous fabrications, at least not that I saw. Brenda Negri, it appears, is now in the dog-breeding business.

But I do wonder if Negri's new employers might be interested to know that they have a criminal whackjob working for them. Hopefully, they'll come across this report.

Here's the listing: 

CINCO DESEOS RANCH, Brenda M. Negri  80 Youngberg Rd., Winnemucca, NV 89445. 775-931-0038. Spanish Mastiffs. Imported top Spanish & Czech bloodlines. Also Maremma, Anatolian, Kangal, Pyrenees crosses.

Brenda Negri may have left TSA in ignominy, but unfortunately, there are many more criminals and whackjobs of her ilk who are still out there, screening baggage, harassing travelers and getting a cheap thrill from the government sanctioned sexual harassment and assaults on their fellow citizens.

Personally, I have refused to fly on commercial airlines since this whole police state crackdown after 9-11.  I will not be harassed by the goons at TSA; I will not be searched by the goons at TSA; I will not have assaults on my person by the goons at TSA; I will not have my rights violated or my privacy invaded by the goons at TSA.  And if one of these predatory bastards ever dared to try a sexual assault on my person, he would find himself writhing in pain on the airport terminal floor, in short order.

This outrageous treatment of Americans is downright UN-American and it is way past time for ALL Americans to stop tolerating it. 

Barbara Hartwell Percival

Targeted by Criminally Insane Government Hirelings

December 1, 2010

ADDENDUM: ACCOMPLICES OF BRENDA NEGRI

This report wouldn't be complete without a listing of the accomplices of Brenda Negri.  For as you may have surmised by now, Negri wasn't working alone while perpetrating her scams and criminal harassment. No indeed, there are many others of her ilk, G-Man wannabes, intelligence and law enforcement groupies, name droppers, gate crashers, scandal mongers, government stooges, most of whom are amateurs, but also part of a criminal network that traces straight back to corrupt government officials, operatives and other assorted hirelings.

The government is exploiting these individuals as part of COINTELPRO, an operation that officially began in 1956 under J. Edgar Hoover, but which has expanded far beyond its original parameters, especially since the advent of the Internet.

COINTELPRO is notorious for using amateurs to do their dirty work, many of whom are criminals, psychopaths, or both.

I have listed here not only the actual accomplices of Brenda Negri, but also those who have subsequently participated in the libel campaign against legitimate whistleblowers by disseminating the disinformation, some of which originated with Negri. Names of known accomplices who have been directly connected to Negri are marked with an asterisk*. Known government agents are identified as such.

Timothy Patrick White*; Todd Brendan Fahey*; Shirley Anderson*; Larry Lawson*; Pamela Schuffert*; Ted Gunderson* (FBI COINTELPRO Kingpin); Don Stacey (CIA); Ken Adachi*; Don Nicoloff; Doug Millar; D'Anne Burley; Sherry Shriner; Alex McGowin Studer; Aaron James; Clarence Malcolm; James F. Marino; "Xena Carpenter"; Michelle Ray; Craig Oxley; Ronald and Mary Ann Cerra* (CIA).

This is far from a complete list. There are many more government stooges involved, but all of those named here have been exposed on this website, so check my reports for further information.  

Barbara Hartwell: CIA/ FBI Plant?

Here is a letter which arrived by post and I'll take this opportunity to answer it, especially since it addresses a particularly important issue: targeting whistleblowers and patriots for libel campaigns.

 

To protect the writer's privacy, I'll identitfy him only by an initial, S.

 

"Dear Barbara,

 

I found your website while looking for some other research. I am inquiring if you might have a DVD testimonial shot live?

 

If so where can I get it and how much is it.

 

I see on the comments about you are very negative -most feel you are a CIA or FBI plant.

 

Being in the Patriot movement over 20 years I've found out if you have a lot of critics, you're probably on the right track.

 

Awaiting To Hear From You,

 

S."

 

Dear S,

 

Thank you for your letter. I see that it was mailed in September, but due to the mail being forwarded, I only received it last week.

 

No, I don't have any DVDs for sale. Mostly, I stick to writing reports, although I occasionally do a radio program, and if you're interested, you may find several of my broadcasts posted on my website.

 

Unfortunately, the only video I know of which contains any of my testimony  does not accurately  represent me, but has been posted on various Internet  sites by my enemies, along with malicious lies ("Barbara Hartwell, CIA plant", etc.) for the purpose of attempting to discredit me.

 

This particular video was made in 1998, at a conference in Daytona Beach, Florida. This was a bootleg copy of an interview taped for Chicago Health Televsion, which followed a seminar called Insider Secrets of Government Corruption, presented by four of the speakers at the conference, namely myself, former CIA agent Chip Tatum, former FBI chief Ted Gunderson, and Sue Ford aka Brice Taylor, a woman claiming to have been a "sex slave" to politicians in connection with the so-called "Monarch project". (Which, by the way, was never a CIA operation, nor a sub-project of MK Ultra, but a smokescreen used in attempts to obfuscate the truth being exposed by survivors of the real black operations.)

 

At the time, I was still working with Ted Gunderson and had not yet gone public exposing what I later learned: that Gunderson was still involved in counterintelligence operations, specifically targeting former intelligence agents/whistleblowers (including myself) for containment operations; disseminating disinformation, and running massive cover-ups of the very crimes he claims to be investigating and exposing.

 

This interview was simultaneously taped by one of Ted Gunderson's lackeys, Jon Gentry, and later incorporated into a video called Mind Control Goes Public, by Susan Ford. She and Gunderson raked in the cash, selling the pirated video through various venues, complete with copyright violations --as the only release I (or Chip Tatum) ever signed was from Chicago Health Television. They never aired the interview because the content was deemed too incendiary by the station, who received some kind of "friendly warnings" (read: threats) by the government.

 

And speaking of being a "CIA/FBI plant", yes, that seems to be the primary libelous falsehood disseminated in the smear campaign against Barbara Hartwell. Ted Gunderson, my former friend and professional colleague, has had this to say about Barbara Hartwell:

 

"Once a CIA agent, always a CIA agent. If you attempt to get out, or expose them, you either go to jail or you die."

 

--from an open letter to Barbara Hartwell

 

This malicious lie, originating  with COINTELPRO Kingpin Ted Gunderson, has been promoted far and wide, and taken up by all sorts of loudmouthed, sleazy COINTELPRO minions and government stooges, many of whom are criminals, including blackmailers, extortionists, psycho stalkers, forgers, identity thieves, and child sex predators/porno freaks. (Which tells you exactly what kind of persons the government exploits to do their dirty work!)

 

But I certainly agree with you about the negative comments (by many critics) against those who are "on the right track".  The bad guys don't bother to engineer massive smear campaigns against their own kind --only against those who are exposing the truth about government crimes and corruption, and who defend Liberty and the God-given, unalienable rights of the Individual, are targeted.

 

Thanks again for your interest in my work and for taking the time to write to me by post.

 

Barbara Hartwell Percival

November 24, 2010

 

 

Barbara Hartwell Percival
Legal Defense & Research Trust

Barbara Hartwell Vs. CIA 

http://www.barbarahartwellvscia.blogspot.com

HANNAFORD: Moronic Minions of the Police State

A lot has changed since 1883 – the year Arthur Hannaford began selling high-quality fruits & vegetables from a produce cart on the Portland, Maine, waterfront. That one-horse cart became Hannaford Supermarkets, a leading grocer serving customers throughout Northern New England and New York.

Times change, but our customers still expect the highest-quality produce, meat and deli products; good prices and great value; and first-class customer service.

-- Promotion from the Hannaford website

"First class customer service"? Say what? Far from it...

This is the second report I have found it necessary to write, exposing the moronic minions who are employees of the Hannaford supermarket in Saco, Maine, and for the same reason: targeting customers for the police state tactics of harassment and invasions of privacy.

 

The legal age to purchase alcoholic beverages in Maine is twenty-one (21). So, is there any reason at all why it should present a problem for a person who reached that age more than THIRTY-EIGHT (38) years ago, to make such a purchase?  

 

Not in the mind of any rational person. But according to the hirelings of  Hannaford, it is "company policy" to target any customer who "appears to be under the age of forty-five (45)" for harassment, in the form of demanding that the customer produce government-issued I.D.

 

Today, it happened once again, to me --a grandmother of three, just a few months shy of my sixtieth birthday.

 

At the Hannaford checkout, the groceries I placed on the conveyer belt included two bottles of wine. And, in the true fashion of idiocy run amok, it all went downhill from there.....

 

HANNAFORD CLERK: (squinting her eyes, scrutinizes me and announces in a smug tone) I need to see some I.D.

 

GRANDMA HARTWELL: For what reason?

 

HANNAFORD CLERK: I need to see your I.D. before I can ring up the wine.

 

GRANDMA HARTWELL: I don't care what you need, your demand is absurd and I won't be showing you any I.D., so please just ring up my purchases and I'll be on my way.

 

HANNAFORD CLERK: (crossing her arms, chin jutting out) I can't do that, not until I see some I.D.

 

GRANDMA HARTWELL: Can't, or won't?  What in the hell is wrong with you? Are you suggesting  that you actually believe I could be UNDER the age of twenty-one?  Since I am nearly 60 years old, your demand is not only absurd, but moronic. Please just ring up my purchases, you're wasting my time.

 

HANNAFORD CLERK: (with a panicked look, calls over a manager) We have a problem here. She (cocking her head in my direction) refuses to let me see her I.D.!

 

MANAGER: (training his eyes on me and giving me the once-over) Ma'am, we need to see some I.D. Anyone who appears to be under forty-five years of age needs to give us I.D. before they can purchase alcoholic beverages. It's company policy.

 

GRANDMA HARTWELL: Company policy?  In case you are not aware, the legal age to purchase alcoholic beverages is twenty one, NOT forty-five.  And I don't give a damn about your 'company policy', I don't answer to you, and you're not going to get any I.D. from me. This is beyond ridiculous! You people have a hell of a nerve, trying to force your police state tactics on customers,  and I will not be harassed, nor will I allow you to invade my privacy.

 

MANAGER: (looking around nervously at others waiting on the line behind me) Well, unless we see some I.D., you won't be able to buy this wine. It's company policy.

 

CLERK: (chiming in and whining, now) We HAVE to check your I.D.! It's company policy! I could lose my job!

 

GRANDMA HARTWELL: (to CLERK and MANAGER) I have been a customer of this store for almost twenty-five years.  I was shopping here --including for wine-- long before Hannaford took it over, and I must say this place has seen better days --especially as regards customer service. 

 

CLERK: But I could lose my job!

 

GRANDMA HARTWELL: (to CLERK) Your job is not my concern. My only concern here is my right to shop in peace, without being harassed because of idiotic policies.  If you choose to be a minion of the police state by harassing the customers, just because it is 'company policy', you will have to take the consequences.  I will defend my rights against anyone who attempts to violate them. That includes you.  And that is MY policy.

 

GRANDMA HARTWELL (to MANAGER): As for you, you have chosen to be an enforcer for the police state.  So enforce your idiotic 'company policy' when and where you can get away with it. But that will not be happening here, today, not with me.

 

Forget the wine. I'll buy it from a store that treats the customers with respect and appreciates their business. I will not be accosted by grocery clerks and treated as if I am a potential criminal. And you've just a lost a good customer, as this is the last time I'll be shopping here --for anything.

 

CLERK: (huffy now) So then, you don't want the wine?

 

GRANDMA HARTWELL: That's what I said. Please just ring up the other items. I just want to get out of here.

 

CLERK: (responding to me as I disdainfully tossed some bills on the counter) Don't throw the money at me!

 

GRANDMA HARTWELL: I did no such thing. There is the money, on the counter, right in front of you. Now, stop wasting my time with your nonsense. 

 

CLERK: Well, you don't have to be rude!

 

GRANDMA HARTWELL:  Rude? How dare you! If you consider it 'rude' for a customer to express her righteous outrage and disgust with your harassment, it's your problem, not mine.

 

CLERK: (handing me my change and a receipt, plastering on a phony smile) Have a nice day!

 

GRANDMA HARTWELL (to CLERK and MANAGER): Enjoy the police state! You earned it and you sure as hell deserve it!

 

As I wheeled my shopping cart out the door, I heard the idiot clerk whining to the next customer,  "Well, she didn't have to be rude, I was only doing my job......"

 

Only doing my job....just following orders....where have we heard all this before?

 

That's right.... if you want to keep your job, just become a mindless moronic  minion, and just do what you're told, no questions asked, no thinking allowed. Harass the customers and treat them like criminal suspects.  Don't worry, it's just 'company policy'.

 

As regards the preposterous 'policy' of  targeting anyone who "appears to be under the age of forty-five", that is a government police state policy which has been implemented in increments over a period of decades. I remember when they first started all this, some time around the mid-90s. A clerk would ask for I.D. from anyone who "appeared to be under thirty." Now, the age has been drastically raised by another fifteen years.

 

What will be next on the agenda?  Demanding I.D. from anyone who "appears" to be under the age of fifty? Under the age of seventy? Demanding proof of residence in a nursing home? Where will it end?

 

Hannaford and many other stores who sell alcoholic beverages have adopted this moronic  'policy'  but there is absolutely no law which requires them to do so.  As usual, it's all about Big Government Control.  Surveillance, invasions of privacy, interrogations, "Your papers, please"...

 

And who decides which persons will be targeted?  Who decides who "appears" to be under thirty, or under forty-five?  Are clerks given the discretionary power to decide?  Apparently, but certainly not under any law.  And what could possibly qualify these robotic hirelings to make such a judgment?

 

Should the subjective perceptions, beliefs, biases and opinions of a grocery store clerk, living in fear of losing a job, determine who shall --and who shall not-- be able to make a purchase? Hell, no!

 

The truth is, this is harassment, plain and simple.  Anyone who engages in such behavior --for whatever reason--should be confronted, told in no uncertain terms that their behavior is wrongful. Their demands should be absolutely  refused.  No self-respecting person would tolerate such aggressive,  disrespectful and intrusive treatment.

 

Yet it amazes me how many people are simply willing to comply with these abominable policies, to allow their rights to be trampled, to 'go along to get along'.  As for those who do, they are only enabling the government violators and their moronic minions and should also be held accountable.

 

And remember this: No one can FORCE you to comply. These government minions can only get away with these violations of your rights if you allow it. It is very simple: JUST SAY NO!

 

If everyone adopted a ZERO TOLERANCE policy and refused to be harassed,  refused to patronize businesses whose 'company policy' involves such  violations of a person's rights, these minions of the police state would be stopped dead in their tracks.

 

And that is the ONLY way to stop them.

 

Make them sweat. Refuse to spend your hard-earned money at any store whose 'company policy' involves police state tactics, invasions of privacy and  harassment of customers. Give your business instead to establishments who value the customers and treat them with respect.

 

But don't stop there. Take a stand and make your outrage public. Tell your family, friends and neighbors. Hold a demonstration outside of the offending establishments, or pass out flyers to shoppers.

 

Shame on you, Hannaford Minions of the Police State.

 

Barbara Hartwell Percival

aka GRANDMA HARTWELL

Mad as Hell and Boycotting Hannaford

November 15, 2010

 

ADDENDUM:

 

Hannaford faced a lawsuit for discriminating against the handicapped. In 1999, employees of the store in Gardiner, Maine, mistook a man with a disability for being drunk, refusing him the sale of alcohol. The court found that Hannaford's policy of not allowing management to countermand the initial decision of the sales clerk, even in the light of credible evidence of disability, was a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the company was ordered to pay damages.

 

Hannaford

532 Main Street
Saco, ME 04072-1526
(207) 282-4152

 

********************

Barbara Hartwell Percival
Legal Defense & Research Trust

Barbara Hartwell Vs. CIA 

http://www.barbarahartwellvscia.blogspot.com

 

 

Response to a Needy Reader: Setting the Record Straight

 

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

 

-- Communist ideology of Karl Marx

 

Recently I received a letter (given below) from a reader of my website. Although he seemed to attribute some degree of value/credibility to the site, his attitude was presumptuous in the extreme. Specifically, it was all about his  "need", which he was clearly and inappropriately projecting onto me (and possibly others), and which he  mistakenly believed it was my obligation to accommodate. 

 

So, it's that time again...time to set the record straight in regard to the misguided notions and opinions of certain of my readers: about my professional background and work, and the purpose of my website, Barbara Hartwell Vs. CIA.

 

For the past fifteen (15) years, I have been publishing my reports on the World Wide Web. For most of that time, I have had my own websites. I have always posted prominent "disclaimer" notices which clearly state that all reports, articles, radio broadcasts, etc. published on my sites are FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY.

 

That is a very simple phrase which, at least to me, says exactly what it means. But just to be certain I make my position crystal clear (once again), let me  define my use of the phrase, FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY. On my website, I reserve all rights to determine the content. Material is posted for my own reasons (personal, professional or otherwise); this is my prerogative, and I owe no one an explanation. What is there, is posted there by me, at my discretion, and that is all there is. FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY. Period. Case closed. 

 

Again, it is all very simple: the readers may make of the information what they will. They may agree or disagree, they may like or dislike, they may love or hate, they may be totally indifferent, they may decide to dismiss it all, they may find the information credible --or not. Each person is free to use his own intellectual and/or spiritual  discernment (to the extent of his capabilities), make his own assessments, draw his own conclusions. I bear no responsibility for the opinions, feelings or "need" of others, nor does it concern me what the readers think, what they believe, or what they may THINK they know, about Barbara Hartwell, the issues I address, or the material published on my site.

 

My position has always been, when addressing my readers: Please, don't take it from me. I do not present myself as the "authority" for anyone, on any subject.  The only way to get to the truth about any issue is to do your own research, use your own discernment, make your own assessments, draw your own conclusions. Think for yourself! If you won't do that, you have no one but yourself to blame for being misguided or ignorant.

 

There is no charge to view my website. If people do not like what I publish, they are free to simply hit the DELETE button and opt out. No loss, no problem, for them, or for me.

 

In fact, the only time I would be concerned about the beliefs, opinions or "need" of others is when, as a result of those beliefs, opinions, or "need", they try to force their views on ME, violate MY Individual God-given rights, obstruct  MY Liberty, invade MY privacy or threaten MY life. In that case, I will defend myself (and mine) by any and every lawful means necessary. That is the nature of Individual Liberty: No one has the right to deprive another of his Unalienable Rights. Amen and amen.

 

There is also another important issue: I have been targeted for a massive  smear/neutralization campaign by agents of the U.S. government and their minions and stooges, in attempts to discredit me; so, if someone chooses to PUBLISH a commentary about me, I may well become concerned, depending on its nature. In fact, the libelous falsehoods about Barbara Hartwell are so pervasive on the Internet that it would be a full time job just attempting to refute them all. 

 

So I do the best I can. When I find articles containing wild speculation,  misinformation, disinformation, malicious lies, forgery, identity theft (any or all of such), I will refute the false information in as many cases as possible,  for the public record, and expose the author of the smear piece as a busybody, an ignoramus, a liar, a government stooge, a pretentious fool, etc. etc.

 

(Please see my reports exposing names of malicious liars, character assassins,  government stooges, etc.) 

 

I have also clearly and repeatedly stated in notices on my sites that I am not interested in "feedback" from readers in the form of comments, suggestions/unsolicited advice or questions. I do not wish to engage in  discussions, arguments or debates. I realize that many others (whistleblowers, journalists, expositors of government crimes/corruption) may hold a different view, being that they welcome interactions with their reading/listening audiences. That is their decision, their prerogative, these individuals are entitled to do as they wish --but it has nothing whatsoever to do with me.

 

So, I am hard-pressed to understand why so many readers of my website persist in disregarding my clearly stated wishes and policies. What is wrong with these people?! Have they no respect for the rights and personal boundaries of others?  Apparently not.  These individuals seem to believe that just because I have a public website, I am "obligated" to accommodate them in various ways:  answer their questions (some of which are extremely intrusive); respond to their comments; offer pro bono professional services; provide  assistance for their problems, etc. etc. Wrong!

 

Although there was a time when I had a public e-mail address, and regularly  published selected  "letters to the editor", that time is long gone. Most of the letters I received from readers were benign and sincere, complimenting my work; thanking me for my truthful, accurate information, for exposing criminals in government, for my  activism for Liberty, human rights, etc., or expressing their support. I did not have the time to answer them all, but I appreciated each and every one of them. 

 

A smaller portion of the e-mails consisted of hate mail, harassment, and in some cases, threats. To those, I did not respond. However, rather than posting the supportive letters, my tendency was to publish the hate mail  --which I saw as an opportunity to expose the ignorance, foolishness and malice of my adversaries. Aside from that, the letters were often so absurd that they had a certain entertainment value. But when it came to the threats,  my policy was to publish them all, along with the names of the criminals who  made the threats. I also reported all threats to the appropriate  authorities.

 

Then, there were many persons who e-mailed me with their personal testimony about various abuses, harassment  or persecution by the government, who  requested that I investigate their cases. Others requested that I take on their legal cases, pro bono, in the mistaken idea that I am an attorney. I am no such thing, nor have ever claimed to be.

 

All this, once again, despite the fact that I had clearly and repeatedly stated in notices on my website: 

 

PLEASE DO NOT SEND ME YOUR PERSONAL TESTIMONY OR INFORMATION REGARDING LEGAL CASES. I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY. AS FOR OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, I AM NOT AVAILABLE FOR CONSULTATIONS. I DO NOT HAVE THE TIME, THE RESOURCES, OR THE WHEREWITHAL TO ASSIST YOU.

 

Could I have made it any more clear? 

 

Yet, to this day, no matter how many notices I publish, I am still receiving this type of mail, by post, on a regular basis. Unbelievable.

 

I no longer have a public e-mail address, for what by now should be obvious reasons. Additionally, I am a true recluse.  As such, I have no interest in corresponding or interacting with the general public, nor in any form of socializing or "networking."  I do not wish to receive unsolicited e-mail from strangers. As well, I don't have the time or inclination to sort through hundreds of e-mails a week, much less read and answer them. 

 

But of greatest concern to me was stopping the criminal harassment, by e-mail,  for which I have been targeted. Until I finally expunged the last e-mail address by which these perps could send harassing and threatening e-mail, I was assaulted with their trash mail on a daily basis. 

 

(See numerous reports on this site which expose names of these criminal  offenders and their accomplices.) 

 

Having said all this, having once again made my position crystal clear, now  back to the issue of the misguided notions of some of my readers, and one in particular. A few days ago I received a letter by post from a Canadian reader of my website. I don't often publish or comment on letters I receive,  but  occasionally I make an exception, especially, as in this case, if it presents an opportunity to address important issues and to set the record straight. 

 

Out of respect for the writer's privacy, I will not give his name. Here is the letter in its entirety. My response follows.

 

[NOTE: The original letter was handwritten, in all capital letters. I have copied it exactly.]

 

"BARBARA,

 

I CAME ACROSS YOUR INFORMATION THESE LAST COUPLE WEEKS AND WAS AMAZED.

 

FIRST OF ALL, I AM A VICTIM OF "ABUSE". (I HATE CALLNG IT THAT BECAUSE I AM A SINNER SAVED BY GOD'S GRACE AND DESERVING HELL.) I KNOW ALL THE SYMPTOMS AND YOU HAVE THEM. I KNOW ABOUT MIND CONTROL, SEXUAL ABUSE, SATANIC ABUSE, ETC. WE HAVE A LOT IN COMMON AND EVEN MORE THAN MOST PEOPLE BECAUSE A FEW YEARS (15 YEARS AGO) I MADE THE DECISION NEVER TO DEPEND ON THE GOVERNMENT. WOW!  IN CANADA? PEOPLE THINK I'M ON DRUGS OR FROM MARS. THEY CAN'T BELIEVE SOMEONE WOULD PAY FOR THEIR OWN MEDICARE IN A FREE SYSTEM. I HAVE FELT VERY ALONE.

 

UNTIL I CAME ACROSS YOUR WEBSITE. WOW!

 

I COULD HARDLY BELIEVE IT.

 

AFTER READING YOUR STUFF THOUGH I NEED TO ASK YOU TO DO SOMETHING ON YOUR WEBSITE. GIVE EVIDENCE. YOU NEED TO DO THIS. YOU SAID YOU DID BLACK OPS --WHERE? DID YOU RUN DRUGS, NEARLY KILL NORIEGA, INFILTRATE THE KREMLIN -WHAT? WERE YOU A SEX SLAVE -TO WHOM? DON'T GET SALACIOUS BUT WE NEED EVIDENCE, NAMES, PLACES, ARMY BASES.

 

PLEASE.

 

I WANT TO SEND MONEY BUT I MUST MAKE SURE. IT NEEDS TO BE ON YOUR WEBSITE.

 

[READER]

IN CHRIST"

 

BARBARA HARTWELL RESPONDS TO READER

 

Dear Reader,

 

I must begin with this: You have made several assumptions about me which have absolutely no basis in fact, and which could not be further from the truth. Perhaps you are engaging in wild speculation, and/or accepting as truth the disinformation promoted by those who wish to discredit Barbara Hartwell. Possibly, you have confused my identity with that of someone else.

 

But whatever the case may be, if you have in fact taken the time to peruse the information on my website, you would know that I have never, at any time, in any of my writings, stated that I was a victim of "sexual abuse" or "satanic abuse."  On the contrary, you would have seen that I have found it necessary to repeatedly REFUTE these falsehoods when they were promoted by ignorant and/or malicious individuals, in their attempts to misrepresent me, my professional background and my experiences, and to lump me into a category where I do not belong. So I will state, once again, for the public record, that I have never been a victim of, nor involved in any way, shape or form in, such abuses as described in your letter.

 

As for your statement, "I know all the symptoms and you have them", where in hell does that come from?  I have no idea to what "symptoms" you refer, since you don't specify. Symptoms?  In relation to what?  Again, you don't make your meaning clear.  And if, as seems obvious, you have started with false premises, you will certainly end up drawing false conclusions.  In any case, since you do not know me, you would have no reasonable way of arriving at any such  conclusions. How could you, a total stranger to me, possibly presume to offer  any such "diagnosis"?

 

To put it bluntly, you don't know what you are talking about, and it is clear you know little or nothing about Barbara Hartwell.

 

But the most presumptuous comments in your letter relate to your repeated use of the word "need".

 

"I need"..."YOU need"..."WE need"..."IT needs".....

 

Let's start with what you say YOU "need". Why you believe that your personal "need" would be any concern of mine, I have no idea. Contrary to your misguided notion, I am not required to accommodate you, or your "need", in any way.

 

But then, as if this is not intrusive enough, you have the audacity to tell me what I "need"?  Aside from God Almighty, I am the ONLY one who knows that, or has the right to decide it. And that is nobody's business but my own.

 

Next, you move on to stating what WE "need." Who, pray tell, is "WE"?  For whom do you presume to speak? A collective of some sort? The general public?  Since you don't specify, I am once again left to wonder. But then again, it is not my concern, as I don't answer to you, nor to any group or collective.   

 

Lastly, you insist that IT "needs". By whose decree? YOURS?  The unidentified persons described as "WE"?  Who, then? And again, why would it be of any concern to me? 

 

You finish your letter with: "I want to send money, but I must make sure. It needs to be on your website."  

 

So apparently, you have yet another mistaken and misguided notion: That I will accept a donation from someone who thinks it is his prerogative to make demands, tell me what I "need" to do, and thus attach conditions to his donation. Wrong! 

 

It may surprise you to learn that I do not accept donations with any strings attached. A donation does not "buy" the donor any special favors or consideration; there is no quid pro quo. But unfortunately (for me), you are not alone in subscribing to this misguided notion. Certain others (thankfully only a few) have attempted to meddle in my personal/professional business, invade my privacy, make demands, in the false and unwarranted belief that this is the "price" a recipient of their donations must pay. Wrong! 

 

FYI: I accept ONLY donations given with no conditions attached, no questions asked, given in the spirit of "Christian charity" or "love gifts".  People have donated for all sorts of reasons, but most often because they value my work, because they stand with me in the causes for which I fight,  because they love their Liberty more than their lives, because they want to defeat the bad guys, the evildoers who are destroying this country.

 

To these wonderful and honorable supporters, I say: God bless you, each and every one! 

 

Believe me, I don't want your money. Please, send it to a truly worthy cause, or to someone who is willing to jump through hoops to comply with your conditions and to serve your "need".

 

Because the truth is, the purpose of my website is not to cater to the "need" of the readers, the general public or anyone else. The purpose of my website is not to seek approval, to please the  people reading it, nor to win a popularity contest. It is certainly not to solicit donations by telling the readers what they want to hear.

 

In fact, the most important information presented on this website is not "all about Barbara Hartwell." It is not about my personal or professional background, nor the related details. It is not about "proving" anything to anyone. 

 

My website, first and foremost, is about DEFENDING LIBERTY AND THE GOD-GIVEN  UNALIENABLE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL.  That is by far the most important issue I address, not only in my own writings, but also in the material I publish which is written/broadcasted by other authors/talk show hosts who share my principles and my passion for Individual Liberty.

 

If in fact you have found some value in my website, which you seemed to indicate, then I can be glad for that. But please, take it (or leave it) for what it is, and don't expect or demand that it serve your  "need."

 

May God give you a Love of the Truth.

 

Barbara Hartwell Percival

November 5, 2010

 

 

Barbara Hartwell Percival
Legal Defense & Research Trust

Barbara Hartwell Vs. CIA

http://www.barbarahartwellvscia.blogspot.com

The Trouble with Leftists

 

 

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities."
    

--Ayn Rand

 

The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.

 

Ecclesiastes 10:2 

 

No doubt about it, leftists are trouble. Maybe that's because they're looking for trouble --and they  always find it.

 

Leftists make trouble where none previously existed --they lobby for trouble, picket for trouble, crusade for trouble, campaign for trouble. Wherever they go, trouble follows.

 

Leftists may call themselves by various names. The more flagrant among them may designate themselves as socialists or even communists; others may call themselves liberals or progressives. Some leftists may masquerade as conservatives, but their actions tell another story.

 

However they may describe themselves, there is one very simple reason why leftists are troublemakers: They do not respect --nor even recognize-- the rights, liberties, privacy, personal boundaries or sovereignty of the Individual.  

 

And that is where the trouble always begins.

 

Each and every Individual is born with unalienable rights. Why unalienable?  Because these rights are bestowed by the Creator, God Almighty, NOT by men nor by the societies or governments of men. What God has given, no man, nor collective of men, has the right to take away. 

 

Trouble is, leftists just don't get it.  Leftists hold the false and asinine belief that "rights" are negotiable, that they are to be determined and doled out by the discretionary power of the collective.

 

As deniers of Individual rights, leftists will intrude, invade, trespass, stalk and harass. They are everywhere, always in places where they are not wanted and where they have no right to be.

 

If you post a NO TRESPASSING sign on your private property, the leftist will pull up the stake and use it as a battering ram to break down your door. If you put up a privacy fence, the leftist will vault over it with impunity. If you build a reinforced concrete wall, the leftist will go out and rent a bulldozer, then send you the bill.

 

Leftists do not think for themselves (if they think at all); lacking intellectual and spiritual discernment, they look to others to form their opinions and make their decisions. But in the world of the leftists, it doesn't stop there, for they feel threatened by anyone who strays from the herd, who engages in independent, critical thought, who decides for himself, who exercises his God-given rights, who seizes his Individual liberty, who refuses to defer to the collective.

 

When a leftist has a problem, rather than solving it on his own, or perhaps  seeking expert advice from a reliable source, he will use the scattershot approach, consulting every Tom, Dick and Harry who comes down the pike. He will make numerous phone calls, hammer out e-mails, go from house to house, taking surveys. Let's vote on it!, the leftist will proclaim. For the leftist, the majority rules, no matter how idiotic the consensus may be.

 

If you have a problem, don't ever confide in a leftist. He will not keep your confidence, but will drag everybody and his brother into your private business, soliciting opinions without your knowledge or consent. Then, you will be subjected to a long-winded harangue, as the leftist spouts off the unwanted  advice of this so-and-so, and that so-and-so...the butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker.  According to the leftist, YOUR business is everybody's business.

 

Leftists are nitpickers who will waste their time and energy (and yours, if you let them) in endless discussions of minutiae, rather than getting straight to the point.  A leftist can't see the forest for the trees.

 

A leftist will take an insupportable position which violates the rights and personal boundaries of the Individual, but when confronted with his offenses,  he will not acknowledge his wrongdoing, even when proved wrong. Like a caged mouse on a wheel, the leftist will just keep going round and round, just keep on defending the indefensible.

 

Leftists are social animals who will eagerly join all sorts of groups, associations, societies, coalitions and committees. Since they don't trust their own perceptions, and since discernment and discretion are absent from their thought processes, leftists everywhere can be found parroting and advocating the consensus of the majority.  

 

Leftists are the ultimate team players. According to the skewed philosophy of leftists, everyone must fall into line, march in lockstep and, come hell or high water, agree with the prevailing trends of the collective, on every issue.

 

With leftists, there is no possibility of "agreeing to disagree". Rather than leaving others in peace and privacy to live as they see fit, leftists will  always  attempt to force their views, opinions, ideology and policies on others.  

 

For leftists, compromise is the order of the day. Those who refuse to compromise their principles for the "common good" of the collective are  deemed stubborn, difficult, recalcitrant, uncooperative --or, the favorite  insult hurled by leftists, "selfish".

 

Those who refuse to conform, to comply with the rules and regulations of the  collective, are viewed as a threat and treated as pariahs.

 

"You always have to have things your way!", or, "You always have to win!", the leftist will exclaim. This, when the issue at hand involves ONLY the private  business of an Individual, in which the leftist and his comrades have no right to interfere.

 

Many leftists, in their delusional mindset, consider themselves do-gooders, altruists, humanitarians. They vociferously tout the virtues of 'doing for others', 'social welfare', compassion, tolerance and charity.  But their  'charity' comes with a hefty price tag attached  --they will always interfere in the affairs of others, smugly claiming they know what is best, for the "good of all."

 

When an Individual draws his line in the sand, the leftist feels compelled to cross it. Leftists, by their very nature, are compulsive aggressors.  They are gate-crashers, snoops, meddlers.  Leftists are micro-managers of other people's business --with a vengeance!

 

Leftists just won't leave others alone --that's because leftists are the worst sort of busybodies.  Hovering over you, breathing down your neck, they're continually handing out unsolicited advice, "checking in", tracking your every move, invading your privacy. 

 

Leftists are ruled not by reason, principle, or spiritual integrity; rather, they are wishy-washy  weather vanes, swayed by every wind of doctrine.  And in fact, contrary to their boasts of "tolerance", leftists are the least tolerant people imaginable, as they simply will not tolerate anyone who tells them, in no uncertain terms, to mind their own business and leave others to tend to theirs!

 

Leftists are mobsters. Advocating mob rule, they operate in groups, packs and herds. Lacking respect for the rights of the Individual, rather than acting on moral absolutes, leftists will use deception, manipulation, social engineering to pursue their agenda.

 

The agenda? Make no mistake: It's all about control.

 

Leftists are cowards, and like all cowards, they seek safety and security in numbers. Leftists want to grab your guns, to leave you defenseless, to force you into compliance with the edicts of the collective.  After all, they whine, we know what is best for you, it's for your own good.

 

But at the end of the day, the do-gooder mask of tolerance, altruism and charity falls away, leaving only the sinister face of evil. Leftists will ultimately resort to the use of deadly force against anyone and everyone who stands up for the liberties, rights, privacy and personal boundaries of the Individual. 

 

Failing all else, they will send men with guns to neutralize dissenters. Leftism is a slippery slope which ALWAYS ends in communist tyranny, a fact well-proven by history. 

 

Such is the trouble with leftists.

 

Barbara Hartwell Percival

October 15, 2010