Fw: Hi, I'm from the government and I'm here to screw you

[Jim Bell]

    I agree with your assessment.  But, of the many mistakes they made, the big one is that they underestimated my ability to observe and deduce what was going on at the time.  Shortly after the time I was first arrested in mid-April 1997, I concluded that they must have been spying on me from 7302 Corregidor.  I had a right to have any such evidence admitted in court, and they couldn't allow that to happen.  They had to exercise the collusion of corrupt lawyer Avenia to see that stopped.  Then, when I continued to demand evidence in July 1998, they had to further use the next corrupt lawyer, Judith Mandel, to ensure that I could not have evidence entered into the record.  Then, when I demanded the appeal that I didn't know I already had (99-30210) they had to employ yet another corrupt lawyer, Jonathan Solovy, to continue to conceal facts from me.  Etc.  It was an ongoing battle that still isn't over, and won't be over until I have completely
 won.  

      A major place in the "Hall of Shame" must go to Declan McCullagh, who failed and refused to work with me to expose this material in 2001 and 2002.  Indeed, I sent a "visitor's form" to him about March 2002, as he said he was visiting San Francisco for some event, and he said that he would visit me at Atwater California.  (USP Atwater).  In fact, he lied to me:  Weeks later, when he  hadn't shown up, I called him and he said he couldn't find the time to visit.  But I pointed out that in order for him to visit me, he would have had to fill out and mail in the visitor's form at least two weeks prior to the visit.  In other words, by failing to fill out the form, that proved that he didn't intend to visit me at all:  Therefore, his claim that he "couldn't find the time to visit" wasn't really true.  At THAT point, he got really upset!  He didn't respond to any of my letters after that.
      Another place in the "Hall of Shame" should go to a "60 Minutes" producer named Adam Ciralsky.  (He was ex-CIA in 1999, and in fact had a lawsuit against the CIA for religious discrimination   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Ciralsky   ).  Ciralsky sent me an Express Mail letter in December 2000, claiming to want to interview me on video.  I smelled a rat, and it turned out I was right.  He tried to lure me by saying that Mike Wallace wanted to talk to me.  Ciralsky's downfall was the fact that I had been watching "60 Minutes", on and off, since its beginning in 1970.  I knew, from his failure to ask questions, that his only interest in getting video was to do a sabotage piece on me.  I took advantage of the fact that Seatac FDC had a policy apparently denying video media visits, and basically told Ciralsky, "Put as many questions as you'd like on paper; I will answer all of them".   That would appear to be a very friendly
 position on my part, right?  Not the typical hard-to-interview behavior usually displayed by the 'bad guys' when '60 Minutes' cameramen drop by.    But, think about it:  If they had put such questions on paper, that would have been analogous to giving them a 'Rorshach test':  That would have exposed the position from which they were coming.  I wanted to take advantage of this written communication to, in effect, force them to actually investigate the story, rather than put on a hit-piece.  Turns out that I never got as many as a single question from Ciralsky!  
          Jim Bell



________________________________
 From: brian carroll <electromagnetize at gmail.com>
To: cypherpunks at cpunks.org 
Sent: Thursday, January 2, 2014 5:25 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: Hi, I'm from the government and I'm here to screw you
 

Jim, correct me if i am wrong, what happened sounds like
a criminal or conspiratorial prosecution occurring outside or
beyond known law, a secret operation perhaps, that was a
precursor to rolling-out this type of prosecution program at
the larger scale in the present day, perhaps tied into NSA
surveillance of populations- a canary in coalmine situation;
same tactics, more empowered, nothing to stop it legally,
and removing dissidents and unwanted viewpoints bit by bit

i think you said this already though wanted to reiterate it
in the expanded context, to see if it is an accurate summary

(the mental illness trap ubiquitous, if not own families turning
on children or each other, then teachers on students, etc.
a different approach to forced censorship, silencing, and of
reeducation, retraining, reprogramming. the perfect setup
for takedown in unaccounted for parameters. labeled crazy
without recourse to logically reason viewpoints: doomed.)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 6617 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20140103/2576e54c/attachment-0001.txt>