1. What are your greatest concerns at the current time?
Answer: My greatest concerns involve the threatened transmission of a deadly alteration to my family's foundational health.
2. Who approved this conveyance?
Answer: Well, once again, we have a circumstance in which, at least for the last year, the tail has been wagging the dog with regard to our governance, which is to say that the intelligence agencies have had control over the President. This is not to excuse his responsibility to lead, by any means. It's simply to say that he ceded control of the nation, and, in fact, international governance, to others.
3. So who is responsible for this latest threat to kill your family through non-conventional means?
Answer: It's almost certainly the same three men who have been responsible for the aggressive harms to my family all along. So, the Executive branch, the FBI, and organized crime are all represented.
4. Are you seeing tangible harms to your family's health?
Answer: Most definitely. Our foundational health has been radically altered. My older son, at 31 years old, is demonstrating plaque psoriasis, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, heart disease, deafness and many other problems -- none of which reflect his original health. Previously, the FBI threatened to convey to him plaque psoriasis, heart disease, kidney failure, autoimmune disease, deafness, and diabetes, among other illnesses -- so the overlap appears to be nearly complete.
5. In the meantime, are your family's personal health records being withheld from you improperly and unlawfully by a public company about which you have communicated to investigators?
Answer: Yes, they are.
6. Should the President and his corrupt political cohort be allowed to take your lives in order to evade accountability for their crimes against both your family and the American public?
Answer: I don't believe so, and I don't believe the American public will believe so either.
7. Can Congress help you at this time? Can President Trump help you at this time?
Answer: I believe they can, and I hope they will take action on reading this post.
8. You would ask that your family members, MX, and you yourself, be restored to full health at this time.
Answer: Yes, I do request this.
9. The FBI and organized crime would be likely to demand a restoration of your health as a quid pro quo regarding other matters, isn't that so?
Answer: Almost certainly, so it's important that ethical people take charge of this situation to demonstrate that blackmail will not be tolerated.
10. You're not in the mood to tolerate blackmail?
Answer: I need to express that blackmail is not an acceptable way for the current administration to be running the nation. If the FBI has dispensation to kill my family through causing targeted harms to our health, while at the same time demanding funds about which I have never been lawfully notified, then our country has lost its credible governance altogether. I don't believe that's acceptable in any way, shape or form.
11. How do you feel about the fact that this is exactly the approach the Biden administration has been demonstrating?
Answer: Again, there's an abdication of power, which does not serve as an excuse for the failure to lead.
12. Can the Republican-led Congress now remove your family and you from your position as effective hostages to the Biden administration? Can they restore your health, appoint a Special Prosecutor, and insist on accountability for President Biden's choices?
Answer: I certainly hope they can.
13. In addition to the Republican-led Congress, might the Supreme Court be able to assist you in directing that your family's robust health, alongside MX's and your own, be restored to all of you?
Answer: I believe so, yes. The Supreme Court has apparently had an ongoing view into developments in this case, and I believe the Court has ruled overwhelmingly in my family's favor. The Highest Court does not seem to believe that the family of a whistleblower of FBI malfeasance, or the whistleblower herself, should perish due to FBI retaliation or retaliation by any of its cohort. Rather, the Supreme Court appears to believe the First Amendment to the Constitution is still valid, and that a whistleblower of FBI malfeasance may be saying something of importance for all Americans -- in which case, her survival may be important.
14. You have recently said that certain provisions within the Espionage Act and the Patriot Act belong under the auspices of martial law, not civilian Constitutional governance. Why do you feel that way?
Answer: Because outside of overt war that has been formally declared by Congress or martial law that has been invoked by the President due to emergency, we don't want to be trying and convicting honorable Americans through concealed proceedings of which they have no awareness.
Even Stalin lined up prisoners by the hundreds in order to proclaim to them their mass sentences. That's not happening here.
The Espionage Act and the Patriot Act represent extremely powerful tools which the FBI has been wielding to deprive Americans of their civil liberties and human rights. And, at the very least within the context of civilian governance, this power must be withheld.
The Constitution states that Americans are entitled to know the charges against them, to face their accusers in an open trial, to examine the evidence presented by their accuser, and to be judged by a jury of their peers.
Concealed proceedings are the very antithesis of these Constitutional protections. They will not long co-exist within a single government.
15. You have said we're heading toward martial law in the short term.
Answer: I think that's clear. But in the longer term, we need civilian governance that is relevant and viable -- representative of the best of human society and enforceable at the same time.
16. What is missing from the Constitution as it currently stands?
Answer: A balanced budget amendment is necessary for civilian freedoms to endure over the long term, so this needs to be added. Deficits do matter, and they will always matter -- and any grade school student of economics will be able to explain the reasons why. But fundamentally, no one government should be able to mortgage the future for short term expedience or the illusion of prosperity.
In addition to this, we need to address the fact that the military/intelligence/industrial complex now forms a fourth branch of government not accounted for by Constitutional provisions at all. We need to capture it within our Constitutional framework, and not only that, we need to incorporate it with certain checks and balances to its power that do not currently exist.
There will be some serious challenges to solve, given that the technological capabilities of the DoD have leapt so far ahead of civilian awareness. The gap between military capability and civilian governance of that capability is wide and widening, and that chasm may no longer be bridgeable.
Even so, the American public of the future is deserving of as many protections to their freedom and quality of life as we can extend to them. We need to prevent unconsented military experimentation on the public as a whole, for example -- and this protection needs to be established on obvious humanitarian grounds.
Right now, the "non-investigative subjects" program is violating that requirement in every conceivable way.
So, this has to be remedied for the freedom of mankind to endure in any meaningful form.
17. Why does the freedom of mankind matter?
Answer: Because the meaning of the human endeavor -- the fact that we need to stumble before we can walk, the fact that we need to walk before we can run, the fact that we need to run before we can fly -- is predicated on our ability to try and fail on the way to our success.
Our most meaningful gifts -- that of insight, wisdom, epiphany, discovery, ways of knowing, transcendence of obstacles, deep bonds to one another, our capacity for compassion, love, forgiveness, growth, spirituality, creation of worthy works -- all depend upon our ability to be free, to explore ideas, to reach beyond our immediate grasp in insisting on self-determination, self-governance, individual sovereignty and human dignity.
If we lose the freedom of mankind, we lose our greatest potential as human beings. If we leave our sovereignty behind us, we abandon our most magnificent gifts, many of which are as yet unrealized.
So we cannot afford to be short-sighted about this.
We need to preserve our most profound and far-reaching capacities as human beings. That's what is at stake here. That's why it matters.
18. Can your own family's sovereignty be rescued?
Answer: I know it can. And that's what I'm asking both the Supreme Court and Republican leadership to support me in accomplishing on the most immediate basis.
19. After that, would you like to contribute to the long term freedom of mankind through addressing the architecture of our Constitutional governance with the support of others?
Answer: That's what would render my family's journey most worthwhile. Yes, I would like to engage with these long term considerations that are so critical to humanity.
What form that will take, I don't know. But I hope I have that opportunity in some way.
20. Why do you feel that, after a period of martial law, there will be an opportunity to return to civilian governance?
Answer: There will be a hunger for peace, for beauty, for trust, for stability, for virtue, for goodness, for integrity. And it will happen. So we need to prepare now for that opportunity by addressing the larger questions that pertain to human sovereignty.
21. Thank you for sharing your thoughts this morning.
Answer: You're quite welcome.
Lane MacWilliams
P.S. -- Please allow me to once again extend the disclaimer that some threats received by me and extended by the FBI are unsubstantiated by me at this time. I regret that I am unable to assess the credibility of every threat extended by this agency or its affiliates, and also that I am not in a position to judge the likelihood of manifestation. Having said that, many of the FBI's threats toward my family in the past have manifested in real-world harms. As a result, I believe that FBI threats extended to me must be viewed as potentially substantive.
No comments:
Post a Comment