Copyright 2013. Slee Canine Training & Security. All rights reserved.

                                 Declaration of Personal Independence



This is a declaration of my own independence from a monstrosity which may have once been primarily a good thing as a whole. I am referring mainly to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, including it's government and civilian subsidiaries. One of it's auxiliaries, to an extent, is the C.I.A. and another is the conglomerate, a huge one, of the F.B.I. informants and private and other government investigators that entity employs and uses, which is associated to a much larger extent than the Central Intelligence Agency.

It has long been said that the F.B.I. is functioning as not much more than an extension of whatever presidential administration happens to be in power at any given time, not only perpetuating the administration's policies but silencing those who dissent. That illicit practice was apparently evident during Woodrow Wilson's time, when he sent personnel forth to silence, at times permanently, anyone who dared speak openly against him and his edicts. That was tyranny, much like the "brown shirts" of Hitler's reign, and the totalitarian practice is still being conducted, howbeit usually employing more passive processes, resulting in the same end.

Touching on silence, while operating as a commissioned, acting F.B.I. street agent by the Colorado Springs, Colorado field agency, I never once have taken an oath of secrecy, which nearly all government investigators, officers, operative and informants do. I protested respectfully, citing a possibility of circumstances resembling those which existed in Wabash County previously, repeating themselves, and the superiors conceded.

Those circumstances involved a degree of indirect crimes that were so intricately intertwined with government people and civilians, that law enforcement was powerless to do much about it at that time, largely due to corruption among federal personnel in the C.I.A. and the U.S. Marshalls' Service. The F.B.I. successfully dealt with a substantial portion of the crime throughout the nineties, but only enough so that they could implement the support of many original culprits, adapting particular methods of the criminal organization to the F.B.I.'s agenda, thereby gaining undue power.

I had left Indiana, once becoming aware that an attempt was about to be made to arraign me for a crime which I didn't commit, and which likely never even occurred. I would have been charged and tried under circumstantial evidence based upon a misuse and misrepresentation of personal identity. A police informant was sent to me by his handler, and I departed Indiana before any papers had been drawn up, but not before talking to the alleged victim and her fiance'. The young woman revealed in an outright statement that certain people in official positions in the county were forcing her to make false reports.

The attempt to frame me was in reprisal for my aggressive investigating of the workings of a rather complex, though primarily loose-knit, organization of subversives who, under a guise of freedom and liberty, in reality effectually impaired the true essence and purpose of law enforcement, causing it's mission statement to be construed in a manner so as to negate constitutional, civil, ethical and moral precepts. They bilked a great many good people and were likely responsible for several county citizens being placed on the list of missing persons, some of which fell prey to the corrupt officers within the U.S. Marshalls' Witness Protection Program.

Criminal misuse of that protection program was later verified by the F.B.I. and C.I.A. It was determined that people were intentionally being endangered and placed into "protection" in order to passively take out of action those who gained enough information with which to greatly impair criminal relationships between law enforcement personnel and civilians involved in illegal enterprises and undertakings. Most, if any, of the victims of abuse of authority were not aware that they could simply have refused to have allowed themselves to be placed in such a program.

If you take a glance back at the history of dictatorships, one of the first steps in creating a totalitarian regime has always been to silence dissenters speaking against undesirable policies and outright crime in government, noncomformists including honest cops and true patriots (1), if not by force at first, then by intimidation and coercion, thus eventually destroying what Americans know as the First Amendment. Targets have always been those who adhere to and promote ethical values.

The same thing is happening now, in the United States, not only by subtle intimidation and often excessive use of force and arrests under pretext, but largely via subversive, white collar tactics: those in power are seemingly adhering to Constitutional precepts, redefining what those edicts mean and how they are to be construed and implemented, adding what appears to be rational interpretations of what is and is not allowed. For example, they say that because of a particular religious belief and practice, if it offends someone simply by not condoning what the person's faith says is wrong activity, then that belief's custom is a crime and is not allowed. In it's end orchestration, those types of edicts and mandates are a covertly blatant violation of naturally inherent human rights, the alleged violation of law springing from logical fallacies, which the current administration is filled with.

The F.B.I., and at times select personnel of the Wabash City and County and Indiana State Police Departments have delved into attempts to enforce silence by intimidation, at other times via an implied threat of manipulation of reputation bearing qualities contrasted with what is considered to be ethically acceptable, the entire situation at any given time being strongly influenced by misconceptions about a particular person's character due to the complete representation of pertinent activities being withheld, being fueled by a series of negations of actual context, as well as innuendos suggesting loss of financial sources for failure to comply, various implications later instituted in order to carry out the implied threats.

In lieu of jeopardizing their careers by oppressing those innocent of crime, or instead of exposing the heavy-handed misuse of authority by the federal government, most officers I confided in have chosen to remain silent, being guilty of treason and tyranny by consent, of inflicting patriotic people with injustices, rewarding those who defer to "Big Brother": As Dietrich Bonhoffer once proclaimed, "Silence in the face of evil is evil itself". A townsman recently revealed to me that they had been paid not to talk about or tell of surreptitious activity by F.B.I. personnel, and others, initiated against those whom promote truly patriotic values and refuse to assent to the policies of those who are stifling the guaranteed immunity from tyranny inherent in this nation's established justification for separating from the iron-fisted reign of England under King John and other monarchical despots.

There are many people who, rather than chance having their business blackballed and losing revenue, will refrain from patriotic activity and even allow their establishment to be used as a partial front for law enforcement or some entity of the D.O.J. Employees in some companies are terminated from their chosen career because they openly speak against despots who promise to take his supporters on a "magic carpet ride" to the land of enchantment and, once in office, begins pulling the rug out from under the main populace of America, up to and including many of the very voters who got them into their official position to begin with.

My immediate F.B.I. superior in Colorado Springs, who at one time was all for staying the trend of the infiltration of far left and far right supporters who were committing crime, into prominent positions within law enforcement and other areas of government and corporate management, did, during the 2000s, and more vehemently once becoming grounded in his own investigative business after retirement, appear to perform a 180 degree maneuver.

He told me in or around 2003 that he had invested the $1,000 required for joining some type of civilian watchdog group that was a spinoff of law enforcement, members aiding officers of the law in more than a quasi-public manner, participating in ride alongs with officers and more in-depth involvement all around, that program originating in probably Arizona. The subversive group operating in Wabash County was of the same fashion, but law and order was not a part of their actual function.

As though not bad enough that the very agenda of subverting Constitutional government can be realized by means of passive and supposedly legal means, due to the erroneously deduced opinion that Constitutional rights infer a discarding of certain Godly principles and restraint, the F.B.I. (some agents) has honored even protocols concocted by renegade managers of informant networks, which postulations are based upon the thesis advanced by lecturers who, beginning around 100 years ago, began to initiate, institute and propel the theories that it should not remain in the choice of each individual to govern themselves, within certain ethical borders, but instead that obeisance of both action and will should be entirely subject to a collective body of individuals who are responsible for making the ethical, economic, financial, practical and religious preferences and selections for all.

I knew in 1994 that working etiquette of the F.B.I. stood in contrast to the aura created by their stated mission. Three events in particular stand out as indicative of what that agency has been transformed into, if not based upon a deceptive supposition to begin with on the part of it's founders who, in all actuality, were supposedly deceived by a notorious gangster, who cajoled them into enlisting his aid in the apprehension of alleged culprits who had committed an act of stateside espionage which the gangster himself had secretly given orders to orchestrate, for the very purpose of gaining release from prison for previous crimes.

The recently formed bureau of investigation had originally blamed the bombing of a docked ship on German espionage agents. Once it was discovered that ______ had actually concocted the whole plan, knowing that the feds would have to ask him for help, seeing as how he controlled everything that happened on the docks, even from prison, he was deported out of America and told to never return.

Sometime during the late nineties or early to mid 2000s, my former superior from Colorado Springs informed me, probably because he figured I'd eventually make, at the very least, an investigative surmising and protest by reporting, that he and some other investigators were enlisting the aid of the mafia to further uncover and quench, if not destroy, the efforts of the "underground" group, that we had before investigated. That group of insurgents sought to overthrow lawful investigations that even legitimate militia groups would condone and the F.B.I. likely continued investigating in order to satisfy inquiry of the U.S. State Department.

It is possible that a repeat performance of Lansky's plot was hatched, as some of the primary troublemakers from the nineties were associated with the mob at the time, though in my opinion not likely. It is more feasible to suspect that the C.I.A., in conjunction with my old superior and some mob people, are behind it. The "old school" mobsters use to send thugs around to terrorize store owners, nobody knowing that those thugs were a part of the mob, and then a mob representative would go around, having heard of the plight, offering protection in exchange for a certain amount of financial proceeds per week or month. Could the mafia fool even the government to such an extent? I'd have to say yes, considering that one mobster gained the endorsement of former President Jimmy Carter while he was in office, Carter being an unwitting advocate of a scam which appeared to have been an upright program.

None of this is to say that the F.B.I. doesn't do a lot of good, though they have now, as a bureau, consented to terrorists activities in America by Muslim extremists by virtue of no longer considering devoted adherents of Islam to be a potential threat, due to policy changes pushed by an avowed Muslim, that is, Obama. But mainstream America's mistrust of the agency is not entirely unfounded, as the reader will have already discovered while reading my expose´ of the three episodes mentioned several paragraphs back. What I did to remedy the unjust proposals would ordinarily have landed anyone under investigative authority, being either with or against that authority, in jail. Under the circumstances, all they could do was to yield to Constitutional precepts. Since I was in good standing with at least certain people in the State Department, and they were monitoring the entire situation, it became much easier to do the right thing and push stricter adherence to the Constitution.

Once it was determined and documented that my initial reports concerning informant and police corruption to the F.B.I. were true and accurate, a dilemma arose. The hierarchy of the underground group was not very definitive, the highest leaders remaining well hidden. But by that time, enough federal resources, namely manpower and thus money as well as time, had been spent that unless arrests were made and the case properly closed, somebody above myself and my immediate superior, or mentor, was not likely to be up for promotion anytime soon, and other repercussions were probably imminent. Someone had to be arraigned.

Ironically, there was at least a handful of culprits at lower levels who could have been arrested and charged, including one who had conspired to have an investigator murdered, but none of them ever were to my knowledge, though some were later rolled into federal informants, actually employing the same criminally-minded tactics for the Bureau.

I was told by a concerned agent, my mentor, that a portion of a tribe of Native Americans were going to be blamed and apprehended. Later, due to legal conflict, one of the groups of the mob were up for incarceration over the matter. As a matter of fact, neither of those two assemblages were involved, which the feds well knew. So in order to thwart that intended negligence of Constitutional procedure, I simply went to members of each of the two associations, as each situation arose, identified myself and relayed to them what was about to happen. Neither process of false arrest occurred.

Later on during the summer of '94, two fully commissioned F.B.I. street agents approached me and disclosed that they and other officers were being forced, via an overbearing of authority, to participate in a very unconstitutional sting against a local militia, it being quite questionable whether any of them should be arrested to begin with. I went protesting up the chain of command a ways, but to no avail. Higher ups than the field agency were bound and determined to bite that patriot organization, and that was that.

Disappointed but not without a medium of blockade, I located the militia's headquarters and drove out to it. I chatted with two members once telling them who I am and of what status I then was, making them aware of an upcoming, ominous event in their future. They were appreciative and the sting was delayed for a while, and the severity of it softened considerably once it did occur.

I did get called on the carpet for that one, being told that I better be able to present a workable, secondary plan, because come hell or high water, they were going to conduct that sting. So, rather reluctantly, I outlined a plan which could help achieve their intended goal, while remaining well within Constitutional guidelines. Since I had to know certain details in order to successfully devise such a blueprint for the operation, I was able to, indirectly, cause a few more militia members to escape prosecution, which the extended time frame also helped do. For the most part, everything remained constitutional, and a few members later thanked me. I was glad that I didn't have to help conduct the sting, though the feds threatened to make me so do.

These incidents were portents of the transgressions of indigenous power to come. Ironically, while once in good enough standing to have been offered employment with the F.B.I., I later became a victim of individual agents in their zeal for performing what is, in their eyes, a continuation of the agency's mission fulfillment. My own former mentor has cost me one job another another, which has usually been jobs through temporary employments agencies, which has hampered my personal goals, but thankfully my mainstay has been felling trees and cutting them into logs or firewood to sell, so I haven't been marooned.

I first discovered proof beyond the shadow of a doubt that some unjust terminations were due to Hoener's (or Blackjack, a proxy) finagling in December of 2008, shortly before being unjustly fired from CMS in Huntington, IN, now gone out, located at the former site of Majestic. When I called him on it, I learned that he was attempting to press me back into investigative service. I outright accused him of it, and his first response was "So!", as in so what, when accusing him of having me fired. As the conversation ensued, I then learned that it was indeed because he hoped to give me no option but to return to investigative service.

When you are familiar with some person's or entity's protocols and methods of doing something, deducing by process of elimination and reasoning who would be conducting any given enterprise, it's not all that hard to pinpoint who or what agency or company it is. You simply determine who all or what all entities would benefit from or for some reason be involved in any given activity, and by process of elimination eventually, or sometimes quickly, conclude who or what department it is.

I was told upon quitting the F.B.I., which I was able to do at will in between investigations, especially since my entire tenure was unpaid, financial obligation from the bureau being contingent upon case closure criteria being met according to imposed standards, which it was not, that once you have been commissioned, that you are technically always an agent. That means, the way in which I understood the explanation, two main things: that one can intervene authoritatively if the need arises in a clear and concise manner, and; that one in that disposition can be recalled. Since I never went to any schooling and was likely barely on record, and since I have both religious and Constitutional reasons to forbear, they really can't legally force me to. Thus the behind the scenes manipulating.

After leaving Colorado and returning to Indiana, I have been commissioned twice, being verbally told so, once for an hour and another time for a few hours, for specific purposes, those time frames being periods in which I didn't have to do anything except go about my normal, daily routines, noting any irregularities in the actions of possible offenders of the law as pertaining to my, and certain others', well being. There have been occasions otherwise during which I have been accused of negligence of duty, the presumption being at the given intervals that I was then currently commissioned, which I was not, or at least was not told that I was. I highly suspect that people had been told as such, and that I was used as a sort of pawn or scapegoat.

One factory out of many, from which I was wrongfully discharged, had one employee, in management, who in a straightforward way enlightened me as to what was happening: the F.B.I., sometimes through the Indiana State Police, were telling employers that I was only there for purposes of undercover work and that, after a certain amount of time, it didn't matter whether or not I remained there, it evidently being strongly implied that it would be in the best interests of the case, for me to be let go. A couple of other places' employees conveyed to me that I was being let go for reporting suspicious activity, whereas prior to that another place related to me that I was out the door for not reporting questionable actions.

Most would never say exactly who, but, again, once you have learned the modus operandi of various entities or specific individuals, it's not difficult to make conclusive determinations. And when you talk to the suspected perpetrator of the civil or Constitutional infringements, it usually becomes quite apparent, even if you can't prove it to the extent that a court of law would agree. However, there's always someone who is honest and in a position of authority. As a note of inspiration, in 'The Obama Deception', KRS1 emphasized that George Washington, while General of the Continental army, rarely won a battle but, because he endured, he won the war.

Interestingly enough, two conflicting modes of operation are often conducted simultaneously by law enforcement and the DOJ, which reveal pertinent personnel's hypocrisy. To sum up the previous paragraph, there are frequently things that you know but can't prove. In that situation, of course a person shouldn't be arrested, much less convicted. However, sub-entities within both broad organizations just mentioned are often investigating people on circumstantial evidence, yet, making evaluations on whether or not to investigate government personnel, including informants and especially high level ones and officers or agents, the reply to a respondent who reports them is almost always the same: "we don't have enough to warrant an investigation", or, as my old immediate superior was always fond of saying, "it's just coincidental".

I can't help but wonder if it's coincidental to government investigators that there is only one person who is intimately familiar with the cases I was working and who specializes in fraud investigations, and which cases a great many have delved into since, that one person being enabled to make use of select individuals possessing certain skills and attributes, prestige gained from many years of government service, and loads of vital information, having ties with numerous businesses and individuals both government and private, some law abiding and other not, and which individual could financially benefit by manipulating people and situations, covertly, once contracted to use his business as the primary, if not only, company with which to investigate cases which had before been designated as cold cases, for the most part, lacking full evidence to prosecute. And would it still be coincidental to them, once they learned that the same individual had, while still an agent for the F.B.I., stored much of the content from reports at his own home, intending to use it later, when it should have been turned into his superiors?

And would they persevere in their charade depicting ignorance of the facts, once gaining the knowledge that the same investigator was building the foundation for his own business, some of those construction "blocks" being information that was directed to the government, while he was still an agent? Apparently, because they do in fact know all of this. If that individual was pro Constitution and all of the other agents were corrupt, his activity would be understandable. But when talking to him about the Constitution, it became clear to me in 1994 throughout 2004, that Socialism was an idea he preferred and didn't much regard the Constitution, holding it in disdain. In other words, he does, to a large degree, look down his nose at civil and constitutional rights of the people.

I can't help but wonder how many government investigators are personally profiting by purposely throwing cases, throwing opportunity to help make society more advantageous to individual folk, to the wind, excusing themselves by claiming lack of proof, when in fact they have sufficient proof right before their eyes, choosing instead to provide additional cover for those in their employ or list of confidants who deviate from standards of ethics and constitutionality? There is a lot of money in crime, especially infringements which are instigated and perpetuated by means of chiefly white collar methodology.

I wonder how many civilians in the know are advancing themselves monetarily by not only keeping silent, but having demurred just enough to raise the alarm among the cons, implying that the semblance of justice doesn't necessarily have to be known any further? Does anyone suppose that constitutionality is being interpreted by many as the right to engage in immoral activity such as drug use and prostitution , claiming to be against it's depravity, yet conceding because they are reaping the gains from it? What about those who wouldn't pick something up not theirs and take it, yet will systematically deprive others of opportunity for advancement, is that not a form of theft?

I've seen scores of people who mention that there's nothing we can do about oppressive proceedings of our government and corrupt practices of corporations. If our founders would all have thought that way, America would now be under a monarchy, which has almost happened now, bordering on a dictatorship ready to happen. Less than a third of this nation's inhabitants took part in the Revolution, but they established the U.S.A. What if the 500 U.S. Army Rangers who scaled the cliffs and silenced the German guns on D-day would have lived and trained with that mindset? Thousands more of our troops would have died and a key region would have stayed in operation, possibly changing the outcome of the war. What if the original twelve apostles would have claimed that it was hopeless, being constantly persecuted, most dying tragic deaths at the hand of the Roman Empire? Even unbelievers and atheists can't rightfully claim that Christianity, when practiced sincerely and purely, hasn't made society a better place to be.

It's a sad day in America when the most relevant, and only, issues that are discussed are the weather, the gas or cattle prices, or the latest movie. A lot of people refuse to engage in discussions involving politics, choosing to defer to the excuse that it's a personal issue. What the hell is that? They won't talk political issues but I hear all kinds of people openly discussing, in mixed company, preferences which are far more personal than that.

I think a lot of people are guilty of engaging in the full extent of apathy and indifference in perpetuating a smooth flow of life, rather than rocking the boat in any way, church people especially leaning on a series of false notions of the theology of dispensation. Included in that is some heretical notions of John Calvin and others, who thought that only certain people could be righteous before God Almighty, veering far from what 'The Book' teaches. Because of that "devil's doctrine", a good many folks have become hardened to the misfortunes and plights of others, begging off of the occasions in which they could lend a hand to others, sometimes simply by listening or backing another. They always claim, with an air of knowledge that they alone possess, "it's just the way it's meant to be". Oh really? Sounds like the same thing the priest and Levite thought, but thankfully for the injured man, the Samaritan didn't think so. What if people who have invented life saving medical techniques and devices would have believed that illness and injury is just the way it's meant to be?

There are a lot of people who give to one charity or mission or another, and it's undoubtably true that more overseas Christian or Christian-oriented missions are supported by funding from the U.S. than from any other country. But when it comes to giving of themselves, seems much of society is completely "me" oriented, particularly the younger generations, conveyed in their normal, everyday attitudes and demeanor. People are not very friendly these days. It's not that they're unfriendly, but an aura of apathy and self-centeredness has permeated American culture. I believe that much of that comes from twisted Biblical doctrines finding their way into government policies, which I will explain shortly.

Maybe much of the church and secular society are wary of going out of their way to be a moral supporter to others due to all of the scams and hoaxes being perpetrated. God only knows how many of them there are. But a smile or a kindly word costs nothing at all. I think the problem lies more in the newer definition of indigenous power, which is the power of the individual. The right to believe, think and act for ourselves as individuals. Collectively, as a whole, our government can only wield the power which each individual, usually in concert with large numbers of other individuals, allows it to have (15). Once enough people realize that our nation was founded on that solid premise, we can begin to make it right once more.

When the founders starting constructing this country, based upon indigenous power, they intended also for part of that indigenous power to include remaining within a certain boundary of moral and ethical precepts, part of which is having respect, compassion and regard for others. But the temperament, now taught by schools, is relayed throughout the unseen realm as a reflection of an innermost thought of, "as long as I'm doing okay, nothing else matters".

Perhaps people are turned off by Obama's assertion that everyone ought to engage in public service. Are the masses so insecure as to not be able to distinguish between voluntarily helping others of their own accord, and being pushed into something which is mandated government service? It could be that, like during the era when out of the tactics of F.B.I. Director Hoover and Senator McCarthy emanated the conception that there was "a Communist behind every door", now the public is terrified because, due to connotations derived from newly installed edicts and explanations of laws, there is now thought to be a terrorist behind every door, which signification includes Christians and other patriots. And since the R.I.C.O. law covers a broad array of alleged accomplices, nobody wants to be even remotely numbered with anyone who could be conceived as a terrorist, which does not exclude those who dissent, even peaceably.

I think that, as much of the church as disdains government intrusion of any kind, that many are guilty of making their "sons and daughters" to "pass through the fire", figuratively, a spiritual reviving of an ancient pagan practice for which babies were sacrificed in a fire to a false deity. There are churches which send members who cause "trouble" through a series of tormentingly trying circumstances and "testings", behind a guise of purifying them. The reason? It is often because of, not misbehaving, but because the recreant questions some of church doctrine or practice, once discerning that it is in contrast to what the Bible teaches. And evidence at least suggests, that during the past few decades, certain government entities have become a part of that. A far cry from pastoral counseling.

I have even seen such a gross misinterpretation of scripture, that people are remanded in that way, parts of congregations agreeing with government people, to socially ostracize the supposed rogue, having them unwittingly pressed into government service, unofficially. The distortion of scripture comes into play when the privately declared apostate is said to be being sacrificed in the name of God and therefore likened to suffering and giving themselves such as Christ did. Apparently they forget that Christ not only voluntarily gave Himself, but the service to others was in the form of up front ministry work. Why would parishioners do that to someone? Because so much false doctrine has been introduced into and practiced by the church, resulting in a lot of pockets lined with money and overinflated egos being fed excessive amounts of secular prestige.

Many church congregations have evolved into social cliques of the well-to-do, adulterating true dogma to suit themselves, unduly mingling and making secret deals with the very same people who are paving the way for the stripping away of all civil and constitutional rights of we the people, making themselves believe that since only certain people can be righteous before God (pre-determinism), that they will remain in an advantageous position throughout their entire life. This way of thinking falls into line with the popular "health and wealth" teaching, which is a very perverted doctrine which is perpetrated by the devil himself, through hucksters and charlatans.

That doctrine is in concord with some of the false aspects of the dispensation theology. Since it presumes that only certain people can be saved, likening themselves to ancient Israel, who was chosen out of all the people on earth to be a treasure unto God, they wrongly assume that it is that way now, and thus they are entitled to all of the best of the material world. In reality the doctrine has done nothing more than to spawn a system of a group of people "scratching each other's backs", which congregations include business owners who help assure that like-minded people have good jobs and do not do without. The government, especially the F.B.I., does the very same thing within the civilian world, hoping to destroy those who dare speak against the corrupt tactics they employ.

Because people believe in pre-determinism, and believe that the "chosen ones" are entitled to the best, and that pre-determinism means that certain people are excluded automatically, they also believe that it is okay to afflict, downgrade, harass and/or torment those who are not in line with their way of thinking. That doctrine is similar to beliefs that kings' and rulers' authority to reign was passed down from generation to generation, or otherwise to whomever they appointed.

I used to confer fairly often with I.S.P. Trooper Lonnie Slisher, discussing current events and Bible. At one point in time, he mentioned, during a conversation, two key things: that I needed to read the book of Job, implying that I was going to be afflicted with misfortune, and; that even as a Christian believer, a person may sometimes stumble and get drunk, if one partakes of alcohol. Instead of dishonoring an unjust secrecy oath, which he should have done, Slisher let me know in a roundabout manner that someone was about to subject me to problems. That conversation was sometime around 2002 or '03. Who could have been making preparations with which to cast me down (and has cast many down)?

During the late nineties, Hoener upbraided me for confiding in the I.S.P. at Peru, because I suspected Hoener of abusing authority. Sometime between 2003-06, Hoener confided that he was going to release reports from myself to him to the I.S.P., having wanted to several years before, but I had objected strongly, so much had been relayed to them. But what did occur?

While working undercover, the F.B.I. put me into a factory in Colorado Springs to check out a culprit who they were investigating. He needed to be arrested for some infractions of the law, but Hoener wanted me to perform psychological warfare on him, that is, serious mind games. I refused, told the guy about it, and that he was going to be arrested pretty soon. It is clearly wrong to cause a psychosis in anyone, which is a lot of what the F.B.I., and law enforcement, does, which is a major reason why so many people abuse drugs and alcohol.

So to sum it up, piecing together events and statements from the last three paragraphs, as well as figuring in innuendos, implications, insinuations and statements made by Hoener, and a few other people involved in investigating, I finally concluded that Hoener had initiated a program of instigating anguish, anxiety, worry and other problems upon people who dissent. There are investigators in other entities who know this, because for one thing, I conferred with some while an acting agent, never having trusted the F.B.I. all that far, even complaining to the United State's president about Hoener and others, in a handwritten latter. Strangely, it didn't affect my standing with the Colorado Springs agency nor with Hoener himself. I was later offered more authority, a firearm and later still, employment, all of which I turned down, for reasons with which the feds agreed with.

This way of thinking falls right into line with how I have seen many F.B.I. operators function. So long as everything is smooth and orderly, they couldn't care less how anybody believes, so they honor anything which causes people to be docile, passive and peaceful, never making waves about anything. And a large majority of Americans have become so self centered and indifferent, that so long as they are fed and have what they need and want, they will never raise an alarm about anything, their environment being inundated with an aura of a false security.

Because the church has become so complacent, approving of the health and wealth idea, believing that they're pre-determined to be well off and that it's God's will that the unfortunate are so, they also believe that it's okay to confer with government people in the capacity of informants and confidants, in order that their realm may be safeguarded. There are many more informants who are church members than anybody would imagine. They are clearly out of line with scripture, but most don't care, choosing rather to maintain the social clique that the church has largely evolved into.

Because our government is filled with people who have been raised or otherwise taught a variety of erroneous interpretations of scripture, which usually follows a logical or rational line of thought to the extent of being unBiblical, policies and actual implementations of edicts are stifling and strangling the Constitutional rights of the people. Having a professed Muslim in office just makes the matter much worse, because devoted adherents to Islam are willful enemies of Christianity, it's precepts and concepts, and America. And since most Muslims are probably better acquainted with the Bible than are most professing Christians, including those who regularly attend church, it's easy for them to downplay Christianity, as well as make church people think that the same God is being worshipped.

The Muslims don't really need to seek to destroy the organized church, because the organized church is doing an effective job of that themselves, by how church members treat one another and those who don't attend. Apathy and indifference reign with many, as do falsely and erroneously applied doctrines, some of which are faulty to begin with, having been contrived and perpetuated during the last 100 years or so, being based upon a system of Freudian thought, and other psychologists' train of thought. Those very theologies have created and given rise to Marxism, Socialism and Communism, which didn't exist much further back than 100 years or so.

Fellowship between denominations hardly exists, but most members have no idea why, because they don't study the 'Book' at all, much less in depth. Everyone has the thought pattern that if the church is very united at all, that it would be a one-world order church, a church of the antichrist, which is happening now and will happen, likely being sponsored and controlled by the government, once it reaches the apex of evil, which will come about once this nation becomes a full, functioning part of the new world order that Obama is promoting.

There are two key concepts the church mostly overlooks here: the apostles themselves never agreed fully on everything, and there was always some disagreement, yet they fellowshipped. Incidentally, we do not, as some assert, have more knowledge as pertaining to things Biblical than those more ancient cultures. Half of the Bible scholars now try to disprove much of what Bible teaches, including the existence of certain people mentioned and places described. For several hundred years after the crucifixion, most of those places were still visible and it was evident that the people mentioned in the Bible did live and do what is listed. Thus, the validity of the Bibl's events were fairly self-evident, the visibility of the ancient sites giving credence to what the 'Book' depicts.

Constantine and his mother did the most harm to the organized church, even though outright physical persecution of Christians was stopped by that Roman emperor. The emperor's mother caused everyone, including modern day believers, to think that Mt. Sinai is in the Sinai Peninsula, south of Egypt. That is utterly ridiculous, for a number of reasons, including the stated fact that the Bible states that the Hebrews crossed the Red Sea before going to the mountain, and Paul also plainly stated that Mt. Sinai is in Arabia. There are multitudes of falsities that the modern church believes, seemingly justifying mistreating select people and merging with secular organizations, far different than associating with and befriending any who will receive the kindness.

I've seen entire congregations harassing and castigating people within and without their respective denominations who make known errors in doctrine, even if slight, and uphold the whole truth of any given matter. I've witnessed believers who are preparing to enter the ministry fall under a barrage of insult, temptation and provocations, orchestrated secretly by church members, behind a guise of testing and proving the prospect, which is extremely anti-God, against scripture in it's entirety.

As if that isn't bad enough, government investigators have documented those very things occurring at the hands of law enforcement and other official personnel, which makes it an extreme violation of separation of church and state, an abomination. Those people all think they're right, but in reality, they possess the same spirit and debate skills that many hard core atheists have, the thought and belief that they are right being so deeply rooted that sometimes they can make a devout believer appear a fool.

To reiterate a bit, falsehoods gained from the dispensation theologies result in purported believers believing that only certain people can have a relationship with the Almighty (predeterminism), leading to the notion that they, and they alone, deserve the best of all things (health and wealth frauds), and that others do not. Since they believe that, they deduce that it is okay to afflict those who are not in their clique, and prohibit them from obtaining improvements in the station of life. It is overall a form of Aryanism, and our government has many of the people with those thoughts I've just described, rubbing elbows with civilians of like mind, resulting in a variety of laws and edicts which benefit only certain types of people.

Scores of people realize these things, though most probably don't link the destruction of our free society with false doctrine derived from misinterpreted and wrongly applied scripture. They're discernment of things like that culminated in 2008, so they voted a man in for president who promised to right those, and many other, wrongs. Problem is, he is destroying the moral and ethical fabric of America, riding on ulterior motive, and the end result will be even worse. There is no liberty and freedom without moral and ethical restraint, which includes religions whose adherents punish, starve and kill people who refuse to accept that religion.

Some of these things are part of why I delved into investigating to begin with, in 1993, thinking to make a difference. In the end, it's all the same, no real justice, no genuine Biblical practices, no authentic constitutionality, very little of any. Most people are out for self and they don't care how they get there, so long as they can project enough of a righteous veneer to prevent any real scrutiny.

The investigative entities of the United States, and to an extent the police forces, are not much more than political enforcement tools of devious politicians. As historian and author Webster Tarpley and trend forecaster Gerald Celente have shown, all of Obama's appointees are "Wall Streeters", being of Wall Street, by Wall Street and for, Wall Street. The world bankers own Wall Street and control them. They are all of an Aryan mindset as well, on a much bigger scale, reflected in good laws the administration has altered, bad laws it has implemented, and wholesome sounding schemes which are based on scientific fallacies, such as Al Gore's global warming hoax.

Seeing as how Aryanist thought is in concord with a misconstrued, millennial reign depicted in the Bible, popular thought being that it will be a man made utopian era, intertwined also is the desired end of what the prosperity preachers and teachers teach: that God is initiating a world of perfect beings upon this earth, casting down all others now, and here, rather than in the next world (in a nutshell).

Because of a broad misunderstanding of Christ's doctrine, much of the church is supporting policies which are ill founded, further enabling the eugenicists to propagandize the public and propagate a series of unconstitutional mandates which, once having reached maturity, will usher in such a state of totalitarian rule that Adolph Hitler's Third Reich will look like an episode of 'Beavis amd Butthead" in comparison.

People do not realize how much Biblical doctrine, both just and mistaken, affect America, it's government and even the world. The truly evil people of the world, some evil by virtue of being blind to the truth, such as the value and necessity of Constitutional precepts, do not operate with a theme of atheists, who claim that God doesn't exist. Instead, they deceive the people with false concepts of foundations in which people believe, and I'd dare say that the majority of Americans give at least a considerable amount of credence to the Bible.

Hitler himself was no atheist, at all. He thought that what he was doing was sanctioned by Divine Providence, the Maker favoring him and his war against the Jews. It was only sanctioned, yet not approved as being Godly, in the same sense as were the actions of other pagan rulers, such as Sennacherib and Nebuchadnezzar. They were not in God's good graces, but were merely used by God as puppets in order to punish Israel for turning away from worshipping Him, hoping to bring them back into His fold. When a nation is punished, the innocent suffer as well as the guilty.

It has always been that way, and if you view God of the Bible as just some other [as compared or contrasted with deities of other religions] manifestation of some kind of supernatural or extraterrestrial power, the same concept can, by examining history, be inferred via rational and logical explanations. Ask any Christian Jew who knows their Bible and they will agree. America is following in those footsteps. There is a reason for separation of church and state, although now, that concept has been twisted, the interpretation being that there should be no Biblical precepts involved in the functioning of government, that idea yet to see maturity. As Pastor Doug Batchelor has taught, we don't want a government that will not uphold the last six commandments, nor one that enforces the first four.

For a short while in 1993, I was caught up in the delusion that law enforcement and other investigative entities would be able to be the main player in reinstating Constitutional rule, and even thought that it was everyone's responsibility. I was wrong on both counts. At best, government at it's best can keep law and order intact and prevent infiltration of espionage agents into prominent positions, which it has failed to do, proven by taking a close look at who is filling what seats in the current administration, all the way up to the highest one.

Government service is not everyone's responsibility, and the Founding Fathers full well knew that. They also never intended for government service in the arena of politics to be a source of and means to financial success. They attended sessions, did their duties, then went home to their farms and shops. The fact that members of congress can now engage in insider trading is a clear exemplification of abuse of political power. Matter of fact, it's a crime, and a blatantly ethical transgression at that, always was a crime, and should still be considered a crime, and breeds corruption.

It's a rationally good idea for Christians to enter investigative areas of government service and law enforcement, and it's a good thing that some are. However, because of the ravishing of the Constitution, outright rape in some cases, it's becoming harder and harder for employees to maintain the practice of certain beliefs connected with the faith, even such up front careers as straight leg police officers. Undercover work automatically violates some Christian precepts because of what it is. We try to justify it by looking at it from more of an intelligence, rather than an investigative, lens, but in the end, a violation is a violation. Investigative and intelligence work is a two-headed monster.

There is some justification to it, in one sense: a lot of lawbreakers are, when proper procedures and ethics are followed, straightened up to the extent that they have a better opportunity and probability of adhering to Christian values. And we'd be in more trouble as a nation if no Christians were in the employ of government. In retrospect, I've often seen more Christian virtue and tolerance from many employed by government than from many who are active in the church and have no dealings with government. It is truly paradoxical, and all we can do reasonably do is to engage in whatever calling each one of us has. In short, there is an abundance of abuse of authority from the government, the corporate world and the organized church.

There are a variety of reasons why I decided to forgo a career in investigating, the bottom line being that it's simply too corrupt to perform much real justice in the end. My former supervisor, or mentor, could have seen things through and contributed greatly to our government, especially the D.O.J. and law enforcement, adhering to Constitutional precepts, instead of operating beneath a Constitutional guise. Instead, he, and others, has taken advantage of well meaning people, I believe for personal gain and to further the Socialist agenda. Maybe they truly think it's good, maybe they, like many others throughout history, are only using that system to play God and benefit self, not realizing that it will ultimately destroy them. I don't suppose that despots would engage in their totalitarian activity if they didn't have a heart felt belief in it.

It can't be emphasized enough, the words of Pastor Doug Batchelor, "...we don't want a government that will try to enforce the first four commandments. But we also don't want a government that won't uphold the last six". The pastor is showing us the difference between civil law and what is a matter of personal choice. I fully agree with him, and I'm sure most people do as well.

Some of the reports I submitted to the F.B.I. or the concept of them, made their way to the desk of then F.B.I. Director Louis Freeh, who tried to get the seriousness of the matters resolved, but to no avail. Higher ups than him just quenched his efforts. I believe that it was because they saw a very clever, rather ingenious and nearly foolproof plan that the government could adopt and use to help subjugate the masses, by their own participation and assent.

To describe what they're doing in a few words, this is the only way I can think of: It's like craftily causing Americans to enter a labyrinth, at the end of which is full Constitutional liberty, thus the means to avail oneself of opportunity for prosperity, well being, advancement, etc. But the maze has some doorways which are really the throat of a trojan horse, which participants walk into unwittingly, snapping shut as one enters. By the time a person gets to the end, all semblance of Constitutional, and thus, true ethical, value has been banned from the game, and all that is waiting is a ball and chain to submit to before diving into the belly of the beast.

Sometime around 2,000, Hoener went to Washington, D.C. to discuss a variety of business, including some of what the main gist of my reports concerned. Two main statements to me from him previously, plus his unethical actions towards myself and others since, solidify my belief that there was never a chance that misuse of authority would be corrected by government. Hoener told me in 1995 that there was going to be some major changes in America, beginning about ten years or so from then, and; that there wasn't much difference anymore between the federal agencies, state and local agencies eventually following suit (the federalization of state and local government entities).

The whole investigation was transformed from a game of charades to musical informants to pin the tail on the culprit, until finally it resulted in a roomful of blindfolded people with clubs, all trying to hit the pinata. Just a quagmire of redundant repetitions within one guise or another and in and out of multiple trojan horses, all of the participants being controlled like puppets on a string, many of the puppets in turn controlling other puppets. One huge mass of subdued mayhem.

There are several reasons why I turned down employment with the F.B.I. and finally quit doing any type of investigating altogether: agencies engage in what they term "artificial aging" upon people; they've done what amounts to unlawful conscription of people I had named simply as material witness, not having committed crime, sometimes informing those people that I had reported them for some crime; the F.B.I. has changed dates and times on my reports; the F.B.I. rewrote some of my earlier reports in their entirety, because back then I wrote like I talked, that is, with profanity. I had no problem with vulgar words being omitted, but changes were so drastic that complete contexts and intended meanings were altered so as to contain no original idea; Hoener was kind of taken aback when I told him I would never engage in undercover activity which might require taking part in bisexual activity, such as making cocaine buys (even though he said that he wouldn't, either, but as though we should be willing to as part of undercover duty. I didn't care too much about the drug issues anyway, believing then, as now, that adherence to Biblical precepts is the only way to remedy drug use); at least two people I named to Hoener while in Colorado, as suspects in crime, disappeared, and the F.B.I. was mum about it (neither appeared to have committed a major crime, and may not have at all, simply being patriotic dissenters or protesters);

someone at one time or another submitted an application for employment to one of the federal agencies, as though from me, the feds never really doing much about it; refusal of the F.B.I. to ever completely eradicate the problem of U.S. Marshalls' personnel purposely endangering select people, and pressuring them unjustly to accept admittance into the U.S.M. Witness Protection Program, the F.B.I. sometimes doing that as well for their own protection program (more to silence dissenters without murdering them); refusing to apprehend several key culprits who were a part of all of that, including the blonde female who once worked at Video Unlimited in Wabash, and whom I've observed in company with an F.B.I. special agent from the Indianapolis office, having been assigned to the Wabash County Sheriff's Department, one of two; Hoener lying to authorities, denying not only that I had never been connected with the Colorado Springs F.B.I., but even saying at times that he had never even heard of me (at least one state agency verified my commission with them, through agents other than Hoener); several times I've tried to start a small business, and once telling Hoener all possibilities vanished; the F.B.I. shut down Eagle Picher in Huntington, IN, due to a stolen firearms and auto parts crime ring (they could have just eliminated the crime); the F.B.I. has, directly and through the Indiana State Police, the Wabash City and County Police Departments, perpetuated "recruitment" by deception.

Many reasons there are why I decided against pursuing a career with the D.O.J., many other irregularities of sound ethics existing in protocols of the D.O.J. and law enforcement, a lot of which even drug dealers have been appalled at. My main reason now are all of those reasons, and that it is against my religious beliefs. My calling is not in that type of work. For people whose calling includes that, they can knock themselves out. I am expending my energy in other pursuits.



Note: I have never taken an oath of secrecy, which has also been lied about at one time or another, and some years ago, Hoener gave me permission to use his name if need be, in order to help fulfill proper case closure.

Special recognition is deserved for former F.B.I. Agent Ted Gunderson, who has publicly disclosed a great many transgressions of Constitutional mandate, by the F.B.I.

Of special interest also is liberty-tree.ca, which lists thousands of quotes by notable people, including quotes by our Founding Fathers. By studying those quotes, most of which are documented as authentic, we can determine exactly what the Constitution was intended to mean.

15. Anonymous author, Common Sense Revisited. © 2009 Common Sense Revisited.

19. Amazing Facts or Doug Batchelor, USA in Bible Prophecy.

OUR NUMBER ONE GUIDELINE IS BASED UPON AND INHERENTLY GROUNDED IN THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AS INTENDED BY THE FOUNDING FATHERS AND REVOLUTIONARY WAR SUPPORTERS. INTERESTINGLY, THE AUTHOR OF 'COMMON SENSE REVISITED' [WWW.COMMONSENSEREVISITED.COM] PUT IT QUITE WELL WHEN HE WROTE THAT "...THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT CREATE ANY RIGHTS...IT MERELY STATES IN WRITING WHAT RIGHTS WE NATURALLY HAVE AT BIRTH BY NATURE AND GOD". WHAT THAT MEANS IN "LAYMAN'S" TERMS, IS THAT IF SOMEONE TRIES TO TAKE AWAY THOSE NATURALLY INHERENT RIGHTS, IT IS SIMILAR TO THAT SAME PERSON(S) OR ENTITY TRYING TO RIP THE NOSE OFF OF SOMEONE'S FACE. WHEN THAT OCCURS, WE THE PERSON (PEOPLE) MAINTAIN THE NATURAL RIGHT TO BREAK THAT HOSTILE HAND AS NEED BE!

Below Is Our Stated Policy

_____________________

Lead for Liberty


We the people need to positively assert, that we will speak and publish our minds, bearing in mind that it is expedient for the utterances or writings be morally seasoned. But we will convey what we ourselves are thinking, not what one or another of the propaganda machine's attempts to dictate what we think, believe, say and write are trying to force, or quench. Our thoughts and beliefs will be communicated by lead; it would behoove would be oppressors of the First Amendment, as well as all the rest of our sacred principles, to concede to that realm which makes it conducive for the authors and readers who promote liberty to maintain "pencil lead" as that means of communication.

POLICY FOR 'SPECIAL SECURITY NEWS & RESEARCH'