Anarchist to Abolitionist: A Bad Quaker's Journey


Appendix

How Could It Be Done?

In discussing the murder of Michael Hastings, I gave a basic overview of what likely happened to his car, which ended in his death. However, I didn't explain any of the other numerous cases where a government agent could or has murdered people. I thought I should touch on a few here.

Let's start with the topic of suicide. First, let me point out that, when a member of a family commits suicide, generally the last thing the family wants to do is drag the deceased through the mud and analyze every aspect of their life to make sure it was suicide. After all, their loved one is dead. Digging through their life and death for months or years won't make them less dead, it only stretches out the grieving process for those left alive. Because of this, most of the time the family just wants the case closed so they can move on with their lives. Also, if the government did murder their loved one and staged it as a suicide, the family likely doesn't want to risk another death in the family for uncovering the murder. It's exactly why police often can't find a witness to testify to a gang killing that happened within the clear view of neighbors. The witnesses don't want to anger other gang members.

That said, the government of The United States of America has been shown to be guilty in its own courts of law, of murdering people and then staging it as suicide. Many other cases are clearly murder, but the law now protects the US government from prosecution, if it can be shown the act was intentional on the part of a governmental agency and not an accident. One example of many is the case of Frank Olsen, who in 1953, was murdered by being thrown out of a ten-story window. Police investigated and the coroner ruled it a suicide, of course. After documents were uncovered in 1975, stating Olsen had been the victim of a CIA drugging, his son began an investigation that eventually resulted in the body being exhumed and a private forensic team doing an autopsy. They found Olsen had been bashed in the head prior to being tossed out of the window.

Bashing someone in the head and throwing them out the window is usually not what comes to mind when we think of the way the CIA kills people. We imagine they are more elegant in their approach. More like James Bond or some other Hollywood hero spy. But, in fact, a bash to the head and a toss out a window is literally straight out of the CIA's assassination manual, written coincidentally in 1953.

Sometimes a 10th floor window is not readily available and some other method must be employed. For example, consider the case of journalist Gary Webb. After exposing the CIA as a major player in the distribution of illicit drugs, Webb's reputation and career were systematically destroyed by both the US government and the government puppets in the main stream media. Then, as a final warning to other journalists, Webb was executed by two gunshots to the head. The coroner ruled it suicide, of course.

I've known some pretty tough dudes, but I've never known anyone tough enough to shoot themselves in the head, and live to do it again. That's hardcore.

Consider the following "suicides" in regards to Frank Olsen mentioned above:

  • Laurence Duggan: December 20, 1948, plunged from a 16th floor window, ruled as suicide.
  • James Forrestal: May 22, 1949, plunged from a 16th floor window, ruled as suicide.
  • James Speyer Kronthal: March 31 or April 1, 1953, death by unknown substance, ruled as suicide.
  • John C. Montgomery: January 24, 1953, death by strangulation, ruled as suicide.

Each "suicide" listed had documented CIA involvement. Look them up if you don't believe me.

There are many other suicides that could be listed here, but for those who understand the nature of governments, it would be redundant to list page after page of cases where government agents murdered someone and then staged it to look like suicide. However, for those who refuse to believe the obvious, that people with power will kill to maintain power, no amount of reason or logic, and no list of proven cases will shake their love and faith in their god, the State.

In the case of Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the level of hate that was focused on him by the media gave a free pass to the police to murder him in a vicious and public way. He may or may not have been the Boston Bomber, but even if he was, the government has still refused to address what the witnesses of his death and even film records have shown, namely that he was alive and surrounded by police. He was made to strip naked because the cops were terrified he had a bomb strapped to his body. Then he was placed on the ground and handcuffed, naked. Then, he was put inside a police car, all on film. Then, sometime later, he was taken out of the police car, beaten and shot, then run over and almost cut in half. And we are to believe his brother did it.

It's important to realize that you don't have to be famous to be murdered by a government agent. Eric Garner wasn't famous, he was just a guy in the wrong place at the wrong time, who angered the wrong government paid murderer. The same with Kelly Thomas. Once the pigs began to swarm on him, they couldn't stop themselves. It was more desirable to beat him to death, rather than process him into the system and hold him in jail overnight.

Consider the personality type of a guy who would be a professional killer for a government or for some other body of criminals. The ability to murder is not the kind of thing a person turns on and off. It's very different from killing under battle or war time circumstances, however I would argue that morally they are no different. But the mindset that is required to murder is very different from the mindset required to fight under military circumstances. A person who is accustomed to murder, is a person who has adapted their mind to do the worst thing a human can do to another human, short of torture. But, then again, it's no surprise that the CIA is accused of managing some of the worst torture camps in recent history.

Keep in mind, once the government has created a murderer, that option will always be available to that government agent in whatever situation he finds himself. Then, if you consider that this government murderer may have a new toy to play with, say a microwave gun that can shoot through buildings and cause heart failure, you can bet he'll be looking for an excuse to use it.

If the existence of a microwave gun is a new concept to you, then you should read “Bioeffects of Selected Nonlethal Weapons, Addendum to the Nonlethal Technologies Worldwide Study” (NGIC-1147-101-98), authored by the Department of the Army, 1998. As you do so, remember that document is over twenty years old. What was your phone like twenty years ago? Also, read between the lines to see what these weapons can be used for when "nonlethal" is not the desired effect. Notice that with this technology, a person can be made to hear voices in their head. There's nothing nefarious about that, right?

Consider the case of filmmaker, David Crowley, his wife, and their child, who were murdered just before Christmas 2014. They were found dead in their home and the police quickly ruled it a murder/suicide, with David Crowley being the culprit. There was a very good documentary on their deaths by a film maker named Erik Nelson, who almost stumbled upon the truth, then missed it altogether.

David Crowley had produced an anti-government movie trailer and had just confirmed funding to make his movie into a full length feature film. He was well on the way to doing just that. His movie could have possibly shifted a major portion of the American Right away from the radical patriotism that they had adopted since 9/11/2001, and back to the anti-government stance they had in 1993 after the Siege of Waco. Elements in the government couldn't allow that to happen.

As revealed in Nelson's documentary, in the final months of the Crowley family's lives, a strange thing was happening to them. Starting with the wife and then the child, they began hearing voices that they thought were some kind of spirit guide. Eventually, David Crowley began hearing these voices. Then, we are told David went crazy and murdered his family and himself. And maybe he did. Or maybe he didn't.

So, my question would be, if there were an agent assigned to watch the Crowley family, and that agent had a microwave gun at his disposal, which could throw voices into a person's head, why wouldn't he use the microwave gun to cause the Crowley family, and David specifically, to act in a way that would discredit them? And, if it worked good enough to make the father kill his wife and child, then himself, wouldn't that be a desirable outcome for that government agent?

Let's take this thought experiment a step farther. Once it was well documented in diaries and private journals, and noted by friends and family, that the Crowley family had isolated themselves and were essentially having mental breakdowns simultaneously (By the way, what are the odds of that?), then would it be easier to:

(1) Continue the process of driving them insane with voices in their heads, hoping they would discredit themselves, or (2) would it be easier to just go in one day, kill them, and stage it as a murder suicide? By doing so, the agent could walk away from the Crowley family and go home to spend Christmas with his, rather than waste more time on David Crowley, a proven subversive and enemy of the State. Think about it, why would the agent just sit there, waiting for David to do something stupid? Why not just kill them and go home for the holidays? If he's already a government paid killer, why not use that option and make life easier on himself?

Often times, the easiest solution to a mystery is the correct solution. So, which is easier to believe? That a man who deeply loved his family would simultaneously, at the same time as his wife, go insane and start hearing voices, which ended in him murdering his family and himself, or that a government agent wanted to get home for the holidays and just “took care of them”?

Consider the aforementioned TWA Flight 800. Which is easier to believe? Could it be that an extremely low voltage instrument wire, designed to be inside of an airplane fuel tank, which had never before nor since, caused a spark that started a fire in a fuel tank, resulted in a massive explosion? Or is it easier to believe that two surface-to-air missiles were, either intentionally or unintentionally, fired, causing the explosion? Keep in mind that literally hundreds of eye witnesses saw rockets travel up from the ocean and cause the explosion. Should we believe the thing that is almost impossible, or the hundreds of eye witnesses?

Which is easier to believe? That one of the safest automobiles ever produced to date had massive, multiple, simultaneous safety system failures that allowed a journalist, who happened to be investigating FBI, CIA, and Army misbehavior, to suddenly burn to death? Or that a government agent murdered a man perceived to be an active enemy of the State?

If the argument on any of these cases is simply, “Oh, they wouldn’t do that,” then you should read about the Tuskegee Experiments, where healthy black men, along with black men who had syphilis, were experimented on for over forty years by U.S. government doctors collaborating with Tuskegee University. Even when a proven cure was known and available, the government doctors didn’t tell the men they had or were given syphilis, and the government doctors refused to cure them. The lack of knowledge of their illness allowed those men to spread syphilis to their community and to their loved ones. This is what we know government agents did, so don’t tell me you know what a government agent won’t do.

Next: Of Suicide And Afterlife

First post & table of contents


If you would like to read the book in its entirety, you can purchase it with cryptocurrency at Liberty Under Attack Publications or find it on Amazon. We also invite you to visit BadQuaker.com, and, as always, thank you for reading.

FrontCover.jpg

Comments 2


I believe it's an error to consider government anything other than a gang, and murders committed by that gang any less criminal than any other gang murder. That government is an exceedingly powerful gang does not make it less criminal, and that we depend on courts that gang provides only worsens the effects of that innate criminality.

Indeed, my research into Roy Cohn has revealed that what most folks separate into different categories of murderous abuse, between gangs like the Mafia et al, and government, are artificial. The both are essentially one and the same thing.

Thanks!

22.01.2020 22:20
0