1. Your stalker has suggested that your son Duncan may be under the impression that he has protected you from physical harm by defaming you in witness statements demanded by his FBI handler.
Answer: Yes. I have observed posts by my stalker that seem to indicate this perspective. Here's an example:
2. How does this post translate to that perspective?
Answer: I think there's an argument to be made that serious character defamation destroys the freedom enjoyed by a virtuous person within society. If a good person cannot be known as good, then her identity, her freedom, her voice -- all of these are taken from her.
3. Do you think it's possible that Duncan was somehow convinced that you were going to be physically harmed if you continued to attempt to speak the truth about the FBI's unconstitutional predation toward law-abiding "targets of interest"?
Answer: It seems that there were trained special forces personnel on the upper deck of my home at 4:30 a.m. on the morning of December 2, 2022. I think it's reasonable for anyone in those circumstances to understand that physical harm could be imminent.
4. You yourself have realized that you could be killed.
Answer: Clearly. Yes.
5. So, why have you persisted in attempting to speak the truth about the FBI's unlawful actions toward the law-abiding American public?
Answer: Because our democracy matters that much to me.
If I leave my children a world that protects disinformation and the despots who purvey it, a world that preys upon innocent "targets" for the sake of profit and power, a world that has abandoned the truth in the process of defaming the most virtuous among us -- what is the worth of my legacy?
What is the measure of the inheritance I leave behind?
6. You care about the truth of this matter more than you care about your own life.
Answer: The truth is my life. There is no distance between them. I have embraced a way of living that requires the spoken truth. And I have done that because the principles that create a life worth living -- freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of thought, freedom of the press -- are all anchored by the truth.
7. Yet, you believe it's possible that your son Duncan has discredited you with knowing lies at the direct instruction of his FBI handler.
Answer: I can only convey the information I have received from my stalker, who seems to be stating that this has happened.
8. What if Duncan does in fact believe he has saved the lives of your family members by lying about you?
Answer: By calling us child abusers? What is the worth of a life impacted by lies of that magnitude? And beyond this, what about the millions of others also being held hostage to false accusations by the FBI's programs of knowingly falsified law enforcement reporting for anti-democratic objectives? What happens to them?
9. You don't believe anything can justify defamation of this kind.
Answer: I don't.
10. Can you think of other instances from history in which family members have been forced to denounce one another for their purported good?
Answer: I watched a film last week entitled Argentina 1985, which describes in rather harrowing detail the human atrocities committed by the military junta in Argentina between 1976 and 1983. One of the most astonishing stories told within this film -- all true to real-life events -- depicts the way in which a teenage girl was told by police that, by denouncing her fifteen-year-old sister, she would be protecting her from harm. The police told her that her sister would only be taken into custody for questioning, and then released. In reality, the fifteen-year-old was arrested and "disappeared." She was never heard from again. The police apparently tortured and killed her, leaving the sister who had denounced her to carry a lifetime of guilt over that loss.
11. So, systems of torture can coerce denunciations with false promises that family members will experience "lesser harms."
Answer: Yes, they can. And this is the way in which a confused young man like Duncan can denounce his parents in the mistaken belief that he is protecting their lives.
12. Your point is that liars are liars, even when they carry FBI badges. It's highly unlikely that untruthful witness statements coerced from Duncan are saving anyone.
Answer: Exactly so. The FBI doesn't want the truth spoken publicly about its programs of falsified law enforcement reporting toward the law-abiding American public. The agency is not going to stop preying upon an articulate whistleblower because she has been -- at least for this moment -- discredited. The fears of exposure for this organization are too great.
And I would further assert that, if the FBI successfully silences me as a whistleblower, all my family members and friends who know about this circumstance could be endangered as well.
13. How can the FBI's falsehoods concerning these allegation best be exposed?
Answer: I think the most rigorous investigative techniques need to be applied to this situation. Certainly investigators know more about this than I do. But the files of Duncan's FBI handler should be opened wide to investigators' scrutiny. All the messaging between Duncan and his handler should be reviewed with a fine-tooth comb. And beyond this, all the communications between Duncan's FBI handler and others regarding this particular case should be reviewed. If every communications regarding this matter is provided to investigators', I think there will be clues as to the origins of these falsehoods.
14. Your stalker has said recently that "we play to win." Do you take that to mean that the far right within the FBI and elsewhere refuses to be separated from the instruments of its conspiracy theories, including QAnon?
Answer: I do. I think the agency is in the process of doubling down on its lies by coercing informants with yet more severe threats. My stalker often sends me the message that "the threat is always the target."
Answer: It's no comfort at all.
But again, it's critical that we not lose sight of the FBI's overall objectives in perpetrating this slander and defamation toward "targets of interest." What the agency is really seeking is social, economic and political control.
Note that QAnon appears to have been a central part of the far right political conspiracy in Germany, in which hundreds of co-conspirators engaged in a seditious plan to overthrow the democratically elected government. https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/qanon-germany-arrests-coup-rcna60550
And recall that, within the United States, prior to the 2020 Presidential election, QAnon organizers were forecasting something called "the night of the Storm," in which many thousands of Democrats were to have been arrested on charges of child abuse. I quote here from an NPR interview with a QAnon expert:
The storm is the moment where Trump will, as a sort of savior figure, come in and initiate mass arrests or otherwise sort of comeuppance for this evil cabal and that on the other side of the storm is a great awakening for society and to sort of put the country back on track in Q's terms. (https://www.npr.org/2020/08/20/904237192/journalist-enters-the-world-of-qanon-it-s-almost-like-a-bad-spy-novel)
Fortunately, Trump was not re-elected and the "storm" as referenced here did not manifest in reality.
But we need to question the basis for those anticipated mass arrests of Democrats and journalists. Were there AI-generated films of pre-selected "targets of interest" who were going to comprise this first group of QAnon's public victims? Were there false denunciations that were coerced from family members and others by predatory means?
16. Your contention is that far right segments of the FBI may be knowingly feeding QAnon conspiracy theory with a view toward taking overt political control, of the sort that was being planned in Germany.
Answer: This possibility must be considered in my view. There are missing texts pertaining to January 6, 2021, exchanged by the Secret Service, the DHS, the DOD and the FBI. If that doesn't alarm the American electorate, it should.
17. Why is that particularly alarming?
Answer: The "device replacement program" initiated by the DHS after the January 6 Committee requested texts from DHS staff -- rendering many of these communications inaccessible to the Committee -- raises the real possibility of an active cover up.
The critical takeaway for the American electorate should be that the events of January 6, 2021 were not "a lark," although right-wing propaganda has long asserted otherwise.
18. You think that January 6, 2021 represented a coup attempt. And you think the missing texts from within the Secret Service, the DHS, the DOD and the FBI may have revealed coup conspirators.
Answer: The possibility should be foremost in the minds of the American electorate. Donald Trump did not conceive of January 6. But it's possible that far right segments of the FBI did. And it's necessary for the future of our democracy to discover the truth of that matter.
19. You think the coup planning in Germany may be related to the far right insurrectionists within our own country.
Answer: Both groups demonstrate ongoing ties to QAnon conspiracy theory. Both groups demonstrate communications with Russia. I think we need to ask whether anti-democratic movements may be internationally linked, yes.
20. In the meantime, can the truth of Duncan's coercion be revealed?
Answer: I have every faith that OIG Hotline investigators can track down the communications within the FBI and with Duncan's handler leading up to this crime of defamation against my family.
21. You have repeatedly stated that President Biden understands this "insider threat" to our democracy with a degree of insight that has given the preservation of freedom a chance.
Answer: He does. His efforts have made the investigation of the FBI's lies possible. The American people need to understand how faithfully he is defending their liberty, and they need to join him in that effort.
*************************************************************************************
At the end of my posts regarding the unlawful actions of far-right personnel within the FBI, I will be adding the following statement. The FBI is a deeply divided agency. There are many FBI employees who view their vows to the Constitution with the utmost seriousness and honor, and who strive to defend the fundamentals of our democracy with courage, fortitude and commitment. The fact that some segments of the FBI appear to have embraced a lawless course is not a justification to assail the FBI in general. The safety of FBI agents should be protected, just as the safety of the American citizenry should be protected. As President Joseph R. Biden has so rightly expressed, violence is never justified in any circumstance. The rule of law must always be honored and upheld. It is our shared determination to preserve the civil liberties and human rights of ALL AMERICANS that renders the United States a democracy. We must never abandon this promise. All of our most cherished freedoms depend upon it.
No comments:
Post a Comment