1. Have you thought further about the FBI's alleged use of falsified victim statements to implicate "targets of interest" of crimes they never committed?
Answer: I have, because this development is so manipulative on the part of the FBI, and, reportedly, so convincing. If the agency has engaged in this crime, it demonstrates a level of falsified reporting that is conscienceless, devoid of all ethics. The last time the world saw something like this organized, calculated deceit was when the Jews were slandered and defamed leading up to the Nazis' atrocities during World War II.
2. Why do you characterize falsified victim statements as worse than other types of falsified law enforcement reporting?
Answer: All falsified law enforcement reporting is unlawful, abhorrent and inimical to any democratic society. And all of it is intended to cause devastating harms to its victims. So, that needs to be stated. However, falsified victim statements are particularly manipulative of the public trust in law enforcement agencies. People of compassion are going to respond to victim statements with understandable empathy, dismay, and anger toward the alleged perpetrators. The FBI may subsequently wield the anger of the public in order to commit unjustified harms toward innocent "targets of interest" they have falsely implicated. So, the process is exceptionally cunning on the part of far right members of the FBI. And it's exceptionally dangerous as well. As Voltaire observed, "He who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."
3. You believe the actions of the far right within the FBI represent a bid for totalitarianism. Is that correct?
Answer: I do. Because there is a concern that the FBI may be discrediting real victims, such as the USA gymnasts, in order to fabricate false victims providing falsified victim statements. Similarly, the agency may be protecting real perpetrators such as Larry Nassar and my stalker, in order to invent fake perpetrators among law-abiding "targets of interest."
4. Why would the far right segments of the FBI be motivated to do that? It doesn't seem logical.
Answer: It doesn't seem logical until you consider the possible financial and political objectives of the agency. The far right is strongly associated with human trafficking within the United States. Whether we're assessing someone like Enrique Tarrio or my stalker, we see this link between the so-called "commerce" of human trafficking and the far right.
5. Do you believe certain far right segments of the FBI may be profiting from human trafficking proceeds that are generated within the United States?
Answer: I think it's possible, yes. I'm concerned about the nature of this link. When we look at the ways in which the FBI protected child predator Larry Nassar, and when I consider the ways in which the FBI has protected my stalker as well, it's necessary to ask about agents' links to human trafficking and remuneration from human trafficking.
6. Let's hypothesize for a moment that certain agents within the FBI are receiving remuneration from human trafficking within the U.S. How might that translate to certain institutional predation toward "targets of interest"?
Answer: Well, again, the fundamental problems arise with incentives for individual agents to lie. If agents are creating false criminal cases against law-abiding "targets of interest," complete with falsified victim statements, AI-generated video co-opting the likeness of targets to depict crimes that never occurred, falsified DNA "evidence," that power truly grants dishonest agents a totalitarian control over the American population.
7. How so?
Answer: If an American citizen declines to comply with an unlawful or unethical directive from an FBI agent, the FBI can simply add him or her to the "target of interest" list.
8. In fact, the FBI appears to have threatened to "ruin the lives" of witness informants if they don't comply with the FBI's demands.
Answer: Yes, agents appear to threaten this quite commonly. Ahmad Chebli documented this in his testament to the ACLU, included here: https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/i-refused-to-become-an-fbi-informant-and-the-government-put-me-on-the-no-fly-list
9. You have said that the "target of interest" list may be disproportionately filled with Democrats and journalists.
Answer: So, I have been told, yes. And this brings me to my second point, which is that individual FBI agents may have an institutional incentive to lie for political objectives. The content of the the FBI's target of interest list should be objectively assessed with an awareness of the stated political objectives of the far right to discredit Democrats and journalists.
No one should be subjected to falsified law enforcement reporting on the part of the FBI, no matter what their political preferences may be.
But we need to be open to the possibility that the FBI may possess both financial and political incentives when it wrongfully adds the names of law-abiding American citizens to this list.
The far right has close ties to Russian-affiliated organized crime within this country, and my stalker appears to demonstrate these associations. Yet, we don't want Vladimir Putin to be exercising control over even a small portion of the national security apparatus of our nation. As such, these links should be thoroughly assessed by those with an investigative capacity at the appropriate time.
No comments:
Post a Comment