Recorded-DefenseNews Story by Joe Pitts ELECTROMAGNETIC Weapons and Founder of The Electronic Warfare Working Group For Securing Weapons of The Future July 7, 2008 With Karen Stewart

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania
https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/Dispatch.pl?103475611115222
Other Documents
5:15-cv-03984-JCJ CATERBONE
v. LANCASTER BEHAVIORAL
HEALTH/ CRISIS
INTERVENTION et al CASE
CLOSED on 08/25/2015
CLOSED,APPEAL,HABEAS,A/R
United States District Court
Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Notice of Electronic Filing
The following transaction was entered on 5/23/2016 at 9:10 AM EDT and filed on 5/23/2016
Case Name:
CATERBONE v. LANCASTER BEHAVIORAL HEALTH/ CRISIS INTERVENTION et al
Case Number:
5:15-cv-03984-JCJ
Filer:
STANLEY J. CATERBONE
WARNING: CASE CLOSED on 08/25/2015
Document Number: 54
Docket Text:
Statement DefenseNews Story by Joe Pitts ELECTROMAGNETIC Weapons and Founder of the Electronic Warfare
Working Group for Securing Weapons of the Future July 7, 2008 With Karen Stewart by STANLEY J. CATERBONE.
(CATERBONE, STANLEY)
5:15-cv-03984-JCJ Notice has been electronically mailed to:

STANLEY J. CATERBONE
scaterbone@live.com, stan.caterbone@yahoo.com
5:15-cv-03984-JCJ Notice will not be electronically mailed to:

The following document(s) are associated with this transaction:
Document description:Main Document
Original filename:n/a
Electronic document Stamp:
[STAMP dcecfStamp_ID=1001600548 [Date=5/23/2016] [FileNumber=141313370] [53c1c08cc3309fee5c4ded5c7be710d769acd8f28b1aab2620611eefb7fc52cde8
8e1af9298f6667a6b57b3794de895369dbf9a7e6e070658526805de793533e]]
1 of 1
5/23/2016 9:14 AM
Log
Electroni
HOME
AIR
Features
LAND
NAVAL
Technology Watch
EUROPE
AMERICAS
Business Watch
ASIA & PACIFIC RIM
Interview
Cover Story
MIDDLE EAST & AFRICA
Commentary
FEATURES
Special Report
Top 100
Online Show Daily
ADVERTISEMENT
Securing EW's Future

Create Single Leader To Direct Planning, Training
By REP. JOE PITTS
Published: 7 July 2008
PRINT |
EMAIL
As a veteran of the U.S. Air Force who served three tours of duty in Vietnam
as a navigator and electronic warfare (EW) officer on board B-52s, I learned
the absolute necessity of brandishing a dominant EW capability. However, I
continue to watch as EW faces neglect in the doctrine, investment and
leadership of our armed forces.
We cannot afford to wait until the fighting starts to think about EW. By
consolidating leadership within the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD)
and the services, creating more effective investment strategies and better
training our troops to utilize EW, I believe the future of EW will be
strengthened to the benefit of our armed forces.
In response to glaring shortfalls in EW realized
RELATED TOPICS
Asia & Pacific Rim

Land Warfare
during Operation Allied Force over Kosovo in 1999, I

founded the congressional EW Working Group
(EWWG), intended to be a resource to Congress, the
Department of Defense and the defense community
at large about the need to invest in EW technology and capabilities.
MULTIMEDIA
Future Combat
The Army's Futur
program is ready
soldiers may hav
Watch
C4ISR JOURNAL
Stopping IEDs
aming, training co
Full story | Related
The current operations in Iraq and Afghanistan again have highlighted the
need to strengthen U.S. superiority in the electromagnetic spectrum. EW
continues to save hundreds of lives by defeating improvised explosive
devices that use electronic triggering devices, such as cell phones and car
key fobs. But our adversaries are becoming more adept at operating in the
spectrum by identifying where we are vulnerable, and we must continually
learn to counter rapidly advancing technology.
However, despite the success in Iraq and Afghanistan, history suggests that
ARMED FORCES
Saving Afghanis
Why the Iraq stra
TSJ ONLINE
Defusing a shift
Counter-IED train
firms
our EW capabilities will again face a period of neglect once current

operations slow down or the United States enters a period of relative peace.
this year, the
EWWG
held1 aofseries
of panel discussions with key
Congressman Joe Pitts &Earlier
Electromagnetic
Weapons
Page
63
Sunday, May 22, 2016
people from our armed forces' research labs, EW chiefs from each branch of
the military and industry representatives to discuss the future of electronic
warfare.
In addition, the Association of Old Crows (AOC), an organization of EW
professionals, in a recent report, "Electronic Warfare: The Changing Face of
Combat," offered several recommendations to improve EW capabilities.
On the whole, EW leadership within OSD and the services is fragmented,
hurting EW budgets and creating inefficient planning and sometimes
duplicative EW programs. Unlike many other mission areas, EW must be a
truly joint capability. Yet, there is no single individual within the Pentagon who
oversees or coordinates funding, acquisition, training and planning for EW.
Likewise, within each service, there is no flag or general officer with
appropriate authority who can provide leadership for service EW programs.
To remedy this, an office within OSD tasked to guide joint EW plans, policies
and procurement should be established, along with the appointments of
experienced EW flag or general officers within each service. Leaders
understanding the value of EW is not the same as leadership, which is
necessary for effective EW practices.
The streamlining of EW leadership will then lead to more efficient investment
in present and future capabilities. Operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have
taken a further toll on EW systems and platforms, and many need to not only
be restored but modernized. To this end, the creation of a joint EW
modernization program, as espoused by the AOC report, would help identify
and prioritize modernization efforts and inject necessary funding for nextgeneration EW capability.
The Defense Department should also authorize an EW Critical Technologies
List, which would help coordinate EW investment strategy, maximize limited
resources and stabilize funding streams for next-generation systems. This list
should be submitted to Congress on a regular basis.
We have seen that our enemies are able to quickly adapt and field deadly
assets; the United States must meet and exceed these challenges by
implementing proper investment strategies.
Our troops also need adequate knowledge and training. While each branch
of the military must provide its own EW expertise and capabilities, current
operations have highlighted the need for joint interaction and readiness. The
AOC has recommended, and I agree, that a joint services coordination cell
should be established to serve the combatant commands. The coordination
cell would work directly with combatant commanders and be ready to deploy
to help us control the spectrum from the first day of conflict.
Furthermore, just as there is high-level specialized training, such as Navy
TOPGUN and Air Force Fighter Weapons School for our fighter pilots, there
should be a similar joint EW training program so our war fighters know what
they need to know about EW before being deployed. Effective training and a
Congressman Joe Pitts & Electromagnetic Weapons
Page 2 of 63
projected career path will help sustain the EW community for many years to
come.
EW saves lives, and we must not allow our EW capabilities to continue
eroding. Now is the time for the United States to capitalize on numerous
opportunities to improve and strengthen our edge in the electromagnetic
spectrum. These recommendations can secure the future of EW, keeping the
members of our armed forces safe and effective in conflict.
Rep. Joe Pitts,R-Pa.,is founder, Electronic Warfare Working Group.
Services: Help | About | Contact Us | Site Map | E-Newsletters | Current Issue | Register | Subscribe | Renew | Advertising
User Agreement: Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
All content 2009, Army Times Publishing Company

Page 3 of 63
Joe Pitts recognized as conservative 'inspiration' at GOP gathering in La...
1 of 3
http://lancasteronline.com/news/politics/joe-pitts-recognized-as-conserva...

Page 4 of 63

5/22/2016 1:03 AM
2 of 3

Page 5 of 63

5/22/2016 1:03 AM
3 of 3

Page 6 of 63

5/22/2016 1:03 AM
!" #
$
&&'
%%%
( )
'
&
*+
+
&
. * /
"*0
1 *2
3'
+ )
!" #
&
&
' 3
'
4 5
3.
67"
)
+ &
' .
&
3 '
4
3 6
'
' 3 *
..
.
(* '
3'
4*
' '
' 3 @#"
@7
&
8
7! %* * .
% &
8
(*
C
%
'
% 3'
'' & &
' 3
%
*
.0 .
*
&
3 '
*
%
7!
3
'
'
'
'
3 '
'
'
'
&
4
'
3
'
* 4%
'& ' 3 .
=
<
.
%
3 '
*
9
+
'
& *
*
A
% '' '
* '
?
'3 .
3
.
&
0
3
3'
&
&
*
0
&
/
. *
3
' .
*
& ?..
&
' .
'
*
*
.
8
4*
'
3B ?..
:
% * *
&
& 3
%* * '' &
*
*
F
3
'
3
7
(C+>?1C
& * 4
%*
3 '.
% '' .
* %
G *
% %
%* *
'
% ''
'
. 3 5
*
, 4D 7D ##!#- . '
*
0
* . * 0 '
'
&
<
& *
.
* =
.
'
3'
'8 &
.
.
'
'.
* .0
8
'
' 8 '3 ' 8
&
'
&
> '
'
'
>
A
4 '
.
.
&
'
3 '
#
*
*
'
&
*
&
&
%
*
&
'
' '8
. *
*
3 .
&
&
% '
.
'
.
*
*
'
4%
&
*
8
* '
% '
@7#
& 3
* /
'
*
&
*
.1
&
3
* 3
'
'
'
*3
'7
. *
'
' 8
% '' .
'
'
%
% *
..
*
. *
B % * '
4*
(*
& 3
*
.
3
.
'
4
'
4*
.
'
. * .
*
:
&
'' &
=
*
3 '
(C+>?1C
0 8
>
4. 3
% *
'
'
& . 3. *
*
3
9
'
'
' .
'.
*
0 9
F
'' & & %
&. '
3
&
*
(*
0
.
* C
.
'3 (*
(C+>?1C
.
'
9*
.
'
3
* .
*
*
'
= %
'
% 8
% '
#
3
4. 3
* 4
.
3
3
* '
.
4 :0
; / (+ < %* * . 3
*
4*
3'
&
,+-
&
3
% ''
3
; / (+
3 6
4*
'
3%
&. '
* '
. 3
3
'
* /
&. '
* '
3
'
. *
.
'

Page 7 of 63
&
&
.
'
''3
..
''3
& * . '' % &
..
(*
''
'
'
'
3>
(*
''
'
'
'
3>
3.
# (*
6 (*
(*
:
:
3 '
''
''
.
'
'
*
*
'
'
.
.
4*
'
'
3
4
3 '
' 3
3)
4%
5
'3
' 3
.
3
' *
'
'
3
..
'
*
.
%
.
*
*
..
H
H
3
>
>
.
.
.
.
3
3.
. * %* * *
. ''3 % ''
* *
'
3
.
3
..
% *
3
3
.3
..
'
'
'
'
..
* H
. *
% * *
3
* '.
''3
!" #
%%%

Page 8 of 63
$
&&'
'
&
January 23, 1997

Mr. St an J. Cat erbone
220 St one Hill Road
Conest oga, PA 17516
Ms. Christ ina Rainville

1300 Market St reet
Philadelphia, PA 19103
RE: Previously discussed m at t ers.
Dear Ms. Rainville:
I t hank you for your help regarding t he enclosed m at erials. As I have discussed
previously, I would appreciat e your legal opinion as t o t he ext ent of m y legal right s
concerning t he following circum st ances.
I will at t em pt t o describe t he m any legal issues t hat are cont ained herein, and I have
provided docum ent at ion subst ant iat ing m y claim s. Due t o t he com plexit y and
sensit ive nat ure of t hese issues, I have t ried t o reduce t he paper t o it s sim plest
form , while also prot ect ing t he int egrit y of m y claim s. I have also provided aut hent ic
conversat ions, which I recorded m erely in m y defense as an accurat e account of t he
act ivit ies surrounding m y sudden dem ise. I possess m any m ore form s of evidence,
including over 9000 paper im ages t hat I had m icrofilm ed in Novem ber of 1987.
I realize t hat you offered t o review only a few docum ent s, however it was necessary
t o form ulat e t he docum ent s in a way t hat was sufficient t o challenge t he legal issues
t hat I am quest ioning. Docum ent s 1 & 2 would provide a glim pse int o t he legal
m erit s of m y claim s. The following is an at t em pt t o provide you wit h a brief
descript ion of t he act ivit ies and act ions cont ained in t hese m at t ers. Please
underst and t hat I have not included any relat ed act ivit ies t hat cont inued during
1991, especially concerning I SC and t he Cent ral I nt elligence Agency ( CI A) .
The following is a legend of t he conversat ions cont ained on t he Com pact Disc:
2. 09/ 29/ 87 - A segm ent of t he int erview wit h t he PA Securit ies and Exchange
Com m ission, Agent Howard Eisler, At t orney Robert Beyer, Client
Millard Johnson, and m yself, present .
3. 02/ 24/ 88 - Meet ing wit h At t orney Sandra Gray, of San Diego, California.
4. 07/ 10/ 87 - Phone conversat ion wit h Chuck Sm it h, President of Lancast er
Aviat ion.
5. 07/ 07/ 87 - Phone conversat ion wit h At t orney David Drubner.
6. 07/ 21/ 87 - Meet ing in Hollywood California wit h t he owner of Gam illion Film
St udios, who was seeking m y help t o secure financing. Also present is
Marcia Silen, a producer of t he Digit al Movie .
7. 10/ 27/ 87 - Telephone conversat ion wit h Pennsylvania Securit ies & Exchange

Page 9 of 63
Com m ission Agent , Howard Eisler.

8. 10/ 26/ 87 - Det ect ive Boden, of t he Pennsylvania At t orney Generals office.
9. 02/ 24/ 97 - ABC News 20/ 20 segm ent on I nt ernat ional Signal & Cont rol, and
Arm s t o I raq.
Please forgive t he form of t he following narrat ive, however it is especially draining t o
prepare t hese m at erials. This is t he first t im e t hat I have at t em pt ed t his t ask, wit h
t he except ion of various effort s which were int ended t o m erely defend m yself, m y
person, m y charact er, m y reput at ion, or m y asset s. You will event ually discover t hat
t he quest ion of m y m ent al condit ion is of grave im port ance t o m y perpet rat ors. For
t he record, I do suffer from Bi Polar Mood Disorder, however, no where during all of
t hese act ivit ies can anyone prove t hat I have act ed irrat ionally or insane, t he t rut h t o
m y act ions are well recorded, however t he m assive at t ack on m y m ent al condit ion is
proven t o be cent ered around lies and hearsay.
Any help pert aining t o t hese m at t ers, no m at t er how sm all, will be great ly
appreciat ed. Please invoice m e accordingly.
Th e Ba ck gr ou nd.
Ten years ago I had built a financial firm , Financial Managem ent Group, Lt d., ( FMG) .
I n 1985 I had conduct ed a m arket ing st udy t hat included int erviewing m ore t han 5
local physicians, all of subst ant ial wealt h or incom e. I had m erely described m y
st rat egic plan for FMG, and t hey gave m e feedback, all posit ive and ent husiast ic. I n
1986 I incorporat ed 11 different corporat ions, all under t he ownership of FMG. To
at t ract local t alent , FMG was owned by not only t he 3 principals, but st ock was
offered t o every professional in t he organizat ion, including sat ellit e offices. I had
raised approxim at ely $400,000 of capit al t o st art t he com pany, and I did it in
com pliance of t he PA SEC Rule 144 Regulat ion D public offering.
I n one year, we had phenom enal growt h. By June of 1987 we had invest ed
approxim at ely $50 m illion of client funds. We provided relat ively m ost of t he financial
services necessary during ones lifet im e. On t he st reet s our organizat ion was wort h
approxim at ely $4 m illion, which is st rict ly correlat ed t o t he com m issions paid out .
We had at least 10 sat ellit e offices, and covered 5 st at es. We also owned an int erest
in t he PSG Broker Dealer, which was wort h anot her $1.5 m illion.
I was Execut ive Vice President and Secret ary of FMG. I was President and Secret ary
of FMG Advisory, which was our Regist ered I nvest m ent Advisor ( RI A) . I had been
pushing t hrough t he approval process wit h t he Pennsylvania Securit ies and Exchange
Com m ission for m ore t han 6 m ont hs, concerning t he RI A.
I n early 1987 I had developed a m ort gage banking operat ion. I had negot iat ed wit h
a large Sout hwest ern m ort gage firm t o provide m ort gages for East ern Pennsylvania.
Our lending capacit y ranged from a m inim um of $3 m illion and as high as $100
m illion. Even m ore im port ant was t he fact t hat t his lending capacit y was very and
som et im es m ore com pet it ive t han ot her area lending inst it ut ions, I had short ly
developed a very large list of client s for whom I was t rying t o secure financing for
various t ypes of proj ect s.
Com bining t he m ort gage banking services wit h t he abilit y of FMG t o secure financing

Page 10 of 63
t hrough equit y invest m ent program s, I was very at t ract ive t he real est at e
com m unit y t hat had deals t o finance. My second cousin, in Houst on, TX, provided m e
wit h t his opport unit y. I n t he m at er of 2 m ont hs, we had m et not only wit h several
large local developers, I had also begun business wit h com panies locat ed in m ore
t han 5 ot her st at es. I had provided a com m it m ent let t er for $5 m illion m ort gage for
Norris Boyd, of Boyd Wilson, for t he Village of Old Hickory. Norris Boyd had
personally inform ed m e t hat I had a bet t er deal t han t he Com m onwealt h Nat ional
Bank ( who will lat er illegally reposes m y airplane) , where t he loan was current ly
secured.
I n February of 1987, because of our abilit y t o raise capit al, Scot t Robert son
request ed t hat I assist him in visit ing Power St at ion St udio, who was t rying t o secure
financing for a m ovie. Reluct ant ly, due t o t he risk involved wit h m ot ion pict ure
invest m ent s, I went t o Power St at ion St udios, in Manhat t an. Tony Bongiovi built
Power St at ion St udios t o be am ong of an elit e few. The nam es of st ars t hat recorded
t here was very im pressive. Tony also produced t he sound t rack for St ar Wars, which
was very profit able, and st ill is. Anot her proj ect , alt hough cont roversial, was his
cousin, Jon Bon Jovi. Power St at ion is where Jon Bon Jovi began his am azing career,
under early developm ent of Tony, his cousin. Cont ract ual disput es ruined t he
relat ionship, which put large sum s of m oney t o risk. Jon Bon Jovi is one of t he
leading all t im e m usicians, in t erm s of revenues.
Tony described his proj ect , which was not m erely j ust a m ovie. Tony want ed t o
develop t he first Digit al Movie . Given m y t hirst for t echnology, along wit h a
dem onst rat ed knowledge, I becam e infat uat ed wit h t he concept , t he concept of
providing t he highest qualit y of sound, along wit h t he highest qualit y of video. I had
researched t he m erit s of t he t echnology, which com plim ent ed m y own vision, and
found a t rem endously feasible proj ect , one which would have t he pot ent ial t o have a
m aj or im pact int o t he film and video indust ries. I had always personally believed t hat
sound was as im port ant as t he pict ure for t he t ruest sense of ent ert ainm ent . The
following docum ent s will dem onst rat e m y invest m ent int o t his t echnology, along wit h
m y keen sense of percept ion. Today we call t his Direct Broadcast Sat ellit e DSS,
which is current ly causing t he cable indust ry great pains. The consequences of digit al
t echnologies t o t he world of inform at ion is what now gives us t he I nform at ion
Highway, and all of it s peripheral com ponent s.
The following docum ent s will easily confirm m y int erest s t o t he preceding t hree
businesses, FMG, t he m ort gage banking operat ion, and t he Digit al Movie proj ect .
The relat ionship t o m y part ners was less t han am icable. I n developing FMG I agreed
t o let Mr. Robert Kauffm an ( Kauffm an) act as President , upon t he condit ion t hat we
each own t he sam e am ount of st ock. Mr. Michael Hart let t ( Hart let t ) did cont ribut e t o
t he early developm ent of FMG. Since Kauffm an could not cont rol m e, Kauffm an and
Hart let t would of at t em pt t o buy m e out , well aft er I creat ed and incurred t he m ost
risk, and aft er t he proven success of t he organizat ion. I n t he Spring of 1987, I had t o
personally t ake cont rol of t he Board of Direct ors t o undue a m erger t hat present ed
great risk t o t he com pany, and m y invest m ent . As part of our st rat egic plan, we
agreed t o purchase an int erest in a Broker Dealer, rat her t han spending t he capit al
and hum an resources in which it would require. I had personally t raveled t o
Washingt on D.C., t o visit t his com pany, which was Kauffm ans idea, and I lit erally
found an em pt y shell. I found offices full of em pt y cart ons, em py file cabinet s, and
t his was t he com pany t hat was responsible for processing all of t he securit ies
business t hat our brokers t ransact . This process was vit al t o our organizat ion.

Page 11 of 63
I im m ediat ely flew t o At lant a, GA, t o visit anot her com pany, PSC, which had been
court ing our com pany for a relat ionship for alm ost a year. I t was a com pany t hat
provided t echnology, service, affiliat es which account ed for several of t he past
president s I nt ernat ional Associat ion for Financial Planners, of which I served as Vice
President t he Cent ral Pennsylvania Chapt er. ( This associat ion provided m e wit h t he
nat ional exposure t o develop FMG.) I n May of 1987, while t raveling t o a conference
in Palm Springs, CA, t he FMG Board of Direct ors approve t he m erger of PSG, I had
vot ed via t elephone from an airport in Chicago.
The would be t he last t im e t hat I would vot e at an FMG Board of Direct ors m eet ing.
This is when I loose virt ually everyt hing t hat is vit al t o a businessm an, m y asset s,
excellent credit rat ing and m y spot less reput at ion, m y professional designat ions and
licenses, t he opport unit y t o cont inue t he vast business opport unit ies t hat I have
developed, and m ost painfully, m y dignit y - - - all wit hout m erit or reasonable cause.
June 2 3 , 1 9 8 7
10: 30 am . I have a schedule m eet ing wit h Mr. Larry Resch and Mr. Carl
Jacobson,bot h of I nt ernat ional Signal & Cont rol, ( I SC) and Unit ed Chem Con. The
m eet ing was t o discuss different financial deals. Upon arriving, Mr. Resch disclosed
t o m e t hat t hey had t o fly Carl out of t he count ry t his m orning, he will not be here.
I rem em ber t hat t here was a lot of nam es and places, all over t he world, t hat
m ent ioned.
During our discussions, I had becom e annoyed at som et hing, so I began m aking
assert ions t hat I SC and Mr. Jam es Guerin was involved wit h fraudulent act ivit ies. I
furt her described som e of t hose act ivit ies.
I did not know t hat Mr. Resch was as close t o Mr. Jam es Guerin as you could get .
At approxim at ely 3: 00 t hat sam e aft ernoon, I had Russell Locksm it h com pany
change t he locks t o m y office door. Bet ween m y part ners and I SC, I apparent ly
becam e concerned.
2 Days lat er, on June 25t h, via t elephone, Mr. Kauffm an carelessly report ed t hat 2
st ock cert ificat es were issued, wit hout m y aut horizat ion.
First , I , act ing as Secret ary ,I m ust aut horize and issue st ock cert ificat es, in
accordance t o t he Art icles of I ncorporat ion.
Secondly, Kauffm an and com pany m ust have burglarized m y office t o gain access t o
t he corporat e records, which were under m y cust ody, as defined in t he Art icles.
Several days lat er, during t he night , I had went int o m y office and rem oved all of m y
files, and upon finding a forged st ock cert ificat e wit h anot her Board of Direct or
signing as m yself and as Secret ary, which violat ed several bylaws of t he Art icles of
I ncorporat ion.
The next day I went t o t he office of m y at t orney, Mr. Joseph, who advised m e t o
ret urn all of t he corporat e files, and essent ially suggest ed t hat I go hom e and get

Page 12 of 63
som e rest . Mr. Roda would lat er represent Mr. William Clark, corporat e legal counsel
for I SC against Mr. Jam es Guerin in cont ract disput e for several m illion dollars.
That aft ernoon, I loaded all of m y files int o m y airplane, t o t ransport t o St one Harbor
NJ, where I was rent ing anot her house for t he Digit al Movie proj ect . I had secured
pilot s from Rom ar Aviat ion t o t ransport t he files early t he next m orning. I had driven
t o New Jersey t hat evening.
That next m orning, t he pilot t hat I had hired t o fly m y plane, t elephoned m e and
inform ed m e t hat m y plane was repossessed and locked in a hanger, and he would
not be able t o deliver m y files.
Those files were t he only m eans of subst ant iat ing t he t rut h in order t o prot ect m yself
from what ever was happening.
My first paym ent t o Com m onwealt h Nat ional Bank, was not due for anot her m ont h.
I n short , I finally found a pilot at t he Cape May Airport t o fly t o Lancast er t o m y
files.He ret urned hours lat er wit h m y files, and would only m ent ion som e incident
involving a gun. Lat er I would be t old t hat he died a m yst erious deat h t he next
m ont h.
Not knowing t hat Com m onwealt h Nat ional Bank, t he sam e bank t hat I was about t o
t ransfer $5 Million m ort gage t o m y m ort gage operat ions, had act ually repossessed
m y t it led airplane in t he m iddle of t he night . And convenient ly wit h all of m y files
aboard. What bank repossesses legit im at e possessions in t he m iddle of t he night ?
This will be t he end of m y life as I know it , I had dem onst rat ed m y success, m y
reput at ion was exem plified t hrough m y abilit y t o develop FMG, and m y financial
credit was flawless. I n t he following m ont hs, I will suspiciously loose everyt hing;
including m y asset s, m y business int erest s, m y reput at ion, m y credit , and t he m ost
valuable of all, m y opport unit y; and ult im at ely, m y dignit y. I n realit y, I was never
even given t he chance t o fail.
I will cont end, and prove, t hat all of t he act ions were wit hout m erit and m any of
which were fraudulent t hem selves, and I know t hat I can subst ant iat e t hat
st at em ent .
According t he Art icles of I ncorporat ion, I was never legally rem oved as Secret ary, or
any ot her official dut ies. Because, t here cant be a Board of Direct ors Meet ing
wit hout m e, t he Secret ary. The record in t he prelim inary hearing t ranscript clearly
proves t hat t here was no legal Board of Direct ors Meet ing t hat rem oved m e.
I never resigned from any posit ions or official dut ies of FMG, nor was I ever officially
and legally rem oved from t he sam e.
I was a Tenant , wit h a $500,000 personal guarant ee at t ached t o t he lease of FMG,
Lt d.
The forgery of st ock cert ificat es violat ed t he bylaws of t he Art icles of I ncorporat ion,
t hus, as Secret ary, m y dut ies were t o safeguard t he corporat e records.
The evidence indicat es t hat all of t he arrest s were fabricat ed, t he airplane
repossession was illegal, and all of t he allegat ions of insanit y were m alicious.

Page 13 of 63
I n Sept em ber of 1987, in t he Report t o t he Board of Direct ors of Ferrant i

I nt ernat ional, raised a quest ion of subst ant ial risk, unlike t hat of which Ferrant i was
accust om ed. The report caut ioned any alliance due t o t he relat ed CI A act ivit ies
connect ed t o I SC, and t he lack of st abilit y of t he cust om ers ( I raq?) . At t hat sam e
t im e, I was m aking public allegat ions against I SC. My conversat ions posed
considerable risk t o t hose connect ed wit h t he pending deal wit h Farrant i.
I can subst ant iat e m y claim t hat ; everyt hing t hat t ranspired during t he days
im m ediat ely following t he forged st ock cert ificat e, of FMG, Lt d., st ock on June 25,
1987 was illegal and violat ed several of t he bylaws of t he Art icles of I ncorporat ion I
was t he only officer t hat was in com pliance wit h t he bylaws of t he Art icles of
I ncorporat ion, and t he only officer t hat did not violat e crim inal codes.
I can subst ant iat e m y claim t hat I had an int erest in Digit al Technologies , including
pat ent research from Mr Joel Goldham m er, of t he law firm of Seidel, Gonda,
Goldham m er & Abbot t , P.C. of Philadelphia, which violat ed several st at ut es of
int ellect ual propert y right s. I can subst ant iat e m y claim s t hat all of t he arrest s and
hospit alizat ions were m alicious and illegal, violat ing several of m y civil right s.
I can subst ant iat e m y claim t hat m y allegat ions of fraud wit hin I nt ernat ional Signal &
Cont rol, Plc., were m ot ive for m any of m y perpet rat ors.
I can subst ant iat e m y claim t hat t he Pennsylvania At t orney Generals Office, and t he
Pennsylvania Securit ies and Exchange Com m ission; aided and abet t ed in t he sale of
Arm s and Technologies t o I raq, by virt ue of t he fact t hat I m ade form al com plaint s
involving t he sam e, and bot h agencies violat ed m y const it ut ional right s t o suppress
t he t rut h of m y com plaint s.
I can subst ant iat e t he legal validit y of t he recorded conversat ions for m y defense.
My int erest s in Digit al Technologies , and m y dem and t o be rest ored t o whole, is
t he m at t er at hand.
I Rem ain,
St an J. Cat erbone
Enclosure CD- ROM

Page 14 of 63
Court tightens rules in whistle-blower cases : National-World : Albuque...
2 of 3
National-World
http://www.abqtrib.com/news/2007/mar/28/court-tightens-rules-whistle-...
search abqtrib.com
Home Business National/World Business
Court tightens rules in whistle-blower cases

Mark Sherman/Associated Press
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
WASHINGTON The Supreme Court made it harder

Tuesday for federal whistle-blowers to share in the
proceeds from fraud lawsuits against government
contractors.
STORY TOOLS
E-mail story
Comments
iPod friendly
Printer friendly
MORE NATIONAL/WORLD
BUSINESS
Intel CEO gets $6.18M in 2006
compensation
New Mexico, Virgin Galactic
reach agreement on lease for
space tourism base
Union, suit factory working hand
in glove
The court ruled 6-3 that James Stone, an 81-year-old

retired engineer, may not collect a penny for his role in
exposing fraud at the now-closed Department of Energy's
Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant, northwest of Denver.
Writing for the court, Justice Antonin Scalia said Stone
was not an original source of the information that resulted
in the ordering of Rockwell International, now part of
aerospace giant Boeing Co., to pay the government
nearly $4.2 million for fraud connected with environmental
cleanup at the Rocky Flats plant.
SHARE THIS STORY [?]
Rockwell must pay the entire penalty anyway. The only

question before the court was whether Stone would get
his cut.
The company, backed by defense, energy and pharmaceutical interests, wanted the justices to
restrict when an individual can collect for suing on the government's behalf.
The Bush administration backed Stone, arguing that it was in the government's interest to
encourage whistle-blowers, even though the government keeps more money now that Stone has
lost.
Ten most e-mailed stories from abqtrib.com:

1. Editorial: Lobos coach has to win big to justify pay
2. Can Northeast Heights neighborhood embrace new
urbanism?
3. The loopy legislation of 2007
4. Red-light cameras linked to fee drop
5. Communities start cleanup after twisters
6. New Lobos coach tells Giddens to get on board, stay
there
7. The man behind Mesa del Sol is no stranger to getting
things done
8. Sculptor Glenna Goodacre regains consciousness
9. Kate Nash: Legislators had reason to be fed up with
governor
10. N.M. Medicaid changes worry hospitals
The False Claims Act allows individuals, acting on the government's behalf, to file fraud suits
against companies that do business with the government.
If they prevail, they receive a portion of what the contractor must pay the government. Lower federal
courts ruled in Stone's favor.
This site does not necessarily agree with posted comments, they are the sole responsibility of the person
posting them. Readers will be banned for posting defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of
privacy comments. Read our privacy agreement.
Add your comments

(Requires free registration.)
Username:
Today's Headlines
Richardson's Quest
LoboZone
TribVid
Events Calendar
Restaurant Guide
Podcasts
Alerts
Comics
Bill Richardson Log

Roundhouse Report
Food City
ABQ AV Club
Be all you can bee
Trib Sports Extra
Wolf Tracks
Split Personality
No harm, no Fowler
High School Sports
The Flip Side
Password:
(Forgotten your password?)
Comment:

Page 15 of 63
3/28/2007 8:35 PM
Los Angeles Times: Archives
1 of 19
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/22547542.html?MAC=2e836ead823c7c1440fb92de137c...
ARCHIVES
NEWS
ENTERTAINMENT
JOBS
CARS
HOMES
RENTALS
MORE CLASSIFIEDS
SALES & DEALS
BUSINESS DIRECTORY
Coupons | Newspaper Ads
PLACE AN AD
ARCHIVES
Basic Search
Advanced Search
Saved Search
Logout
Account & Purchases
Knowledge Center
Archives Trouble
Report
latimes.com Site
Services
ARCHIVES HELP &
INFO
OTHER SECTIONS
MEMBER SERVICES SIGN UP

HOME | HELP
CLASSIFIEDS
Join now!
JOBS CARS HOMES
RENTALS
SHOPPING
search
i
j
k
l
m
n
Site
j
k
l
m
n
Web
Go
Start a New Search | Back to Results

Printer-Friendly Format
COLUMN ONE; A Bitter Lesson for Lancaster County; Judge says Pennsylvania community 'lost its soul'
in push to convict woman of murder. Residents claim he, not they, are mocking justice. Right or wrong,
his ruling challenges U.S. court system's balance of power. Series: * Second of two parts; [Home Edition]
BARRY SIEGEL. Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles, Calif.: Nov 10, 1997. pg. 1
Full Text (8866 words)
About the Archive

Pricing
Terms of Service
Search Tips
FAQ
Stories Prior to 1985
Obituaries
Rights and Permissions
OTHER SERVICES
Prof. Research Service
Back Issues
Front Page Reprints
Commem. Front Pages
Books
Page 16 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
2 of 19
Custom Reprints
Photos
OTHER RESOURCES
(Copyright, The Times Mirror Company; Los Angeles Times 1997 all Rights reserved)
Other Archives
Microfilm
By midmorning on the first day of Lisa Michelle Lambert's federal habeas corpus hearing, U.S. District Judge Stewart Dalzell
already could be seen displaying alarm over what he was hearing.
From the lawyers' briefs alone, he'd read enough to persuade him to grant Lisa's request for this uncommon federal review of a
state murder conviction. He'd read enough to suspect that just possibly,Lisa Lambert, although sentenced to life without parole,
hadn't killed Laurie Show over a teenage romantic rivalry. He'd read enough to surmise that just maybe, Lisa's boyfriend,
Lawrence "Butch" Yunkin, along with a girl named Tabitha Buck, had killed Laurie.
Now, he was listening to evidence that served only to deepen his concerns regarding Lancaster County's prosecution of Lisa.
It was March 31. Computers, boxes of documents and piles of papers filled the small hearing room on the fifth floor of the
federal courthouse in downtown Philadelphia. Lisa's parents sat in the first row, Laurie Show's behind them. Reporters and
court personnel occupied the jury box. On the stand, an expert witness for Lisa's side, Northwestern University speech
professor Charles Larson, was testifying.
Contrary to the autopsy report, Larson believed--as did three emergency medical technicians and the Philadelphia medical
examiner--that Laurie Show's left carotid artery had been severed by whoever slashed her throat. This, he explained, left her
unable to say "Michelle did it," as Laurie's mother, Hazel, had claimed. Her vocal tract was "destroyed," her left brain
hemisphere "dying." She was "totally incapable of speech."
How, asked Lisa's attorney, Christina Rainville, could two doctors have signed an autopsy report saying that the carotid arteries
weren't "involved"?
Those two doctors were both Lancaster County physicians, one the part-time coroner, the other an ear-nose-and-throat
specialist.
"I don't think they were telling the truth," Larson replied.
Dalzell peered over gold wire-rimmed bifocals at the witness. "Oh," he said. "Well, OK."
So it went, hour by hour, for 15 days.
That this hearing was even being held appalled most in Lancaster County, about 75 miles west of Philadelphia. In the 1991
killing of Laurie Show, Lisa had already been found guilty of first-degree murder, Tabitha Buck of second-degree, Butch Yunkin
of third-degree. Now here was Lisa, claiming her innocence, claiming all sorts of prosecutorial abuse. Now here was Lisa,
seeking a federal order freeing her because the state had illegally imprisoned her.
For Lisa to cast herself as an innocent victim was maddening enough. For a federal judge to take her seriously was
unimaginable. Yet that was just what was happening in this Philadelphia courtroom.
The second day of the hearing found Dalzell puzzling over two quite different versions of a videotaped police search of the
Susquehanna River. The one initially provided by the Lancaster County district attorney, eight minutes long, had no soundtrack,
and no images of police finding a pink bag Lisa said she'd thrown there. The second, obtained through discovery only after
Rainville realized she'd been sent an edited tape, was four minutes longer. It had sound. It also had an officer kicking at a pink
Page 17 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
3 of 19
bag while another asked, "What do you got, a bag?"

After watching these tapes, Dalzell removed his glasses and rubbed his eyes, something he'd do more than once during the
three-week hearing. He studied Lisa, also something he'd do more than once, especially in the hearing's early days. Lisa,
sobbing off and on, was staring down at the table where she sat, bent over, her hands between her legs. Dalzell looked as if he
were trying to fathom her character.
The third day found Dalzell puzzling over Lisa's initial statement to the police. He listened to East Lampeter Police Det.
Raymond Solt try to reconcile the typewritten first page, where Lisa says she wore her own clothes at the murder scene, and a
handwritten last page where Lisa says she wore Butch's sweatpants. He listened to Solt explain how he destroyed all his notes
from the interview. By the time Solt stepped down, the judge was referring openly to "Ms. Lambert's alleged statement."
With Det. Ronald Barley on the stand later that afternoon, Dalzell grew even more openly dissatisfied. Barley was a
well-regarded detective in Lancaster County. A "very thorough investigator" is how Ted Darcus, chairman of Lancaster's City
Council, considered him. Barley "dealt well with people in our community accused of crimes." Yet this wasn't apparent to
Dalzell.
Barley, being questioned about the taped interview he helped conduct with Butch Yunkin--a tape full of laughter, clicks and
obvious gaps--kept waffling so much that Dalzell finally snapped: "Answer her question! Yes or no?" Rather than heed the
suggestion, Barley grew even more evasive. Asked about a critical spot where the recorder clicked off, he denied even being in
the interview room at that moment.
Dalzell had heard enough. He called a recess and ordered all the lawyers into his chambers.
"I want to know what is going on here," he told Lancaster County Dist. Atty. Joseph Madenspacher. "I'm hearing perjured
testimony. . . . As we had with Det. Solt, {Barley} is contradicting his own statement. . . . My patience has just run out. . . . I'm
afraid the commonwealth is allowing perjured testimony in federal court. . . . I'm being lied to. . . . This man gives me the
unbelievably fantasti statement that suddenly he 'evaporated.' It's totally incredible, and I'm afraid I'm going to have to refer this,
if this keeps up, to the United States attorney. . . ."
Madenspacher shifted uneasily. This hadn't been his case to try. He'd left the prosecution to his seasoned first assistant, John
Kenneff. "I understand what the court is saying . . .," he replied. "I don't know what I'm going to do, but I'm going to do
something."
Little changed, though, when Barley resumed the stand. He didn't recall his colleague, Det. Ronald "Slick" Savage, turning the
tape recorder on and off. He destroyed his notes after taking Butch's statement.
"No, no . . . please answer her questions. Will you do that?" Dalzell interrupted at one point.
"You knew . . . because you took the statement?" the judge asked later. "Or did you disappear for that part? . . . Oh, do you
have that ability to appear and disappear at will?"
By the time Barley tried to explain how he "completely forgot" they'd found a pink bag during the river search--a pink bag that
Lisa told them contained Butch Yunkin's bloodied sneakers--Dalzell was beside himself. It helped his mood little when, with
Barley still on the stand, Rainville moments later played the segment of unedited videotape that showed an officer kicking the
Page 18 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
4 of 19
pink bag, then waving the camera off.

"No, that's not me," Barley said.
Rainville inched the videotape ahead a moment. "No, no ma'am."
Again she moved the tape forward. Now the man at the river could be seen clearly.
"That is me," Barley allowed. "I don't know why I waved at that point."
Dalzell again peered over his eyeglasses. "Who were you waving to? The record should reflect that the witness definitely waved
directly at the camera. What in the world were you doing, if you weren't waving to the camera?"
Barley looked blank. "I don't recall, sir."
Defendant Alleges Gang Rape
On the seventh day, Dalzell began to hear Lisa Lambert's story of being gang-raped by three policemen six months before
Show's murder.
Lisa--her extravagant eye makeup toned down but still too thick for Rainville's taste--had started testifying the previous day.
Now she described being stalked by an officer named Robin Weaver, of vainly calling his police chief to complain, of receiving
threatening calls after the alleged attack. She explained how fear had kept her from telling this story before. Finally, she
explained why she now was willing to talk.
In a deposition given to Lisa's attorneys before the hearing, Weaver, without being asked, had referred to the gang-rape
accusation. He thought Lisa had cited it in her habeas petition, but she had not. The charge had never been raised publicly. To
Lisa, Weaver's comment, therefore, provided independent proof of her claim: "There is no way that he could have ever known
about that unless he was there and he did it. It was not raised in the petition."
Dalzell interrupted: "Is that true?"
"That is true, your honor," said Rainville, who had been appointed by the judge to represent Lisa on a pro-bono basis.
Dalzell again had heard enough: "We'll take another recess. . . . I want {Weaver} here this afternoon, and I don't want anyone to
say a word about what has come up here. If he resists, please tell me. I will have the marshal arrest him, OK?"
Moments later, Dalzell learned that prosecutor John Kenneff already had discussed the rape allegation with Weaver.
"So he's been coached . . . ," Dalzell exclaimed.
The judge's budding animosity toward Kenneff was palpable. The prosecutor had not yet appeared before him, but the residue
of his work at the Lambert trial was everywhere.
"I'm going to direct that Mr. Kenneff have no further contact with any witness in this case. . . ," Dalzell declared. "And he might
want to consult with counsel. . . . I'm going to want to hear about this, because in the context of this case, Mr. Kenneff, God help
Page 19 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
5 of 19
him, if he coached this witness. God help him. . . . Mr. Kenneff, at his election, should retain counsel for proceedings that may
follow this one."
On the witness stand that afternoon, Weaver absorbed the full brunt of Dalzell's rancor. The judge grilled him: Have you talked
to any human beings? You understand you're in federal court? You understand the laws of the United States apply? You
understand you're under oath?"
Weaver said he did, and then denied any involvement in a rape of Lisa Lambert. Dalzell, though, wasn't finished.
Weaver had been among the first on the murder scene. It was he who'd initially questioned Hazel Show, and it was he who had
written the police report. Yet, nowhere in it had he indicated that Hazel Show heard her daughter make a dying declaration
about Lisa. Nor had he done so in a final report written three weeks later.
"Yes or no," the judge demanded. "Did you hear Hazel Show report a dying declaration?"
"I don't remember. . . . " Weaver replied. "She could have or she may not have."
"Is it your testimony that you would not have put it in a report if Hazel Show had told you about a dying declaration, that you
would not have put it down in that report? Is that your testimony? Yes or no?"
"No."
"So the fact that you don't make reference to a dying declaration, is some evidence that she didn't tell you that. Correct?"
"You can infer that, yes, sir."
"Oh," the judge said. "I could infer it. Could I infer anything else from that?"
Mounting Anger Among Citizenry
Day by day, watching from afar or from a courtroom seat, the citizens of Lancaster County grew ever more amazed and furious
as the Lambert hearing unfolded. This is shocking us, they declared. This is shaking our confidence in the American judicial
system.
What troubled them, though, were not the revelations coming out of Dalzell's courtroom. It was, rather, Dalzell's conduct.
The judge was "making the county look bad." The judge sounds as if he "revels in publicly humiliating Lancaster County."
Most irksome of all was the judge's handling of Lancaster County authorities. He was "discourteous" to the police officers and
John Kenneff. He sighed and rolled his eyes and looked at the ceiling as they testified. He interrupted with his own questions,
as if to assist the defense. He acted as if he didn't believe them.
Many in Lancaster County just couldn't fathom such an attitude. The police and prosecutors were their neighbors, their friends,
their protectors. They couldn't possibly manipulate evidence. They couldn't possibly lie.
By midway through the hearing, a certain tone of frantic fear could be heard in the county's response. Don't believe the "lies and
Page 20 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
6 of 19
untruths" being aimed at our police, urged East Lampeter Supervisor Chairman John Shertzer. Don't "rush to judgment." It's
"unfortunate that so much is being made of such insignificant points."
In his opening statement at the hearing, Madenspacher, the district attorney, had allowed that the investigation hadn't been
"perfect," that maybe they'd been a little "careless," maybe a little "sloppy." Others, though, refused even to acknowledge that
much. All sorts of citizens instead continued to offer glowing tributes to the police and prosecutors.
No one official drew more accolades than did John Kenneff. He is a big, heavyset man with a full, broad Irish face. Growing up
in Lancaster County, Kenneff was considered a fine schoolboy, a high achiever. Not Harvard-level material, but his college,
Villanova University, was nonetheless a good school. Not as good as the University of Pennsylvania, but the next step.
He'd come back after law school, opened a private practice, worked his way up through the D.A.'s office. He came to all the
Fourth of July picnics; he brought his family, he brought his dog. He was known as a committed, persistent prosecutor, one of
the fairest and most reasonable in the county.
Even the defense attorneys who went up against him said as much. Even they called him a decent, honest guy. To Terry
Kauffman, a dairy farmer and chairman of the board of county commissioners, that particularly carried a lot of weight: "A lot of
people I know here, from both sides of the aisle, say he's the best. I know them, and I've known Jack Kenneff for years. I don't
know Stewart Dalzell."
Darcus--the chairman of the Lancaster City Council, a black man from West Virginia who followed a Boys' Club job to Lancaster
30 years ago and happily settled--believed he possessed an especially close take on John Kenneff's character. They'd been
involved together in a "Weed and Seed" anti-crime development program in Lancaster's minority community. So Darcus saw
Kenneff not just as a prosecutor, but a community leader. Also as a father: Kenneff's children went to the same Catholic school
as Darcus' son.
"I've seen how he cares about people," Darcus said. "I've seen him deal with people in my community. I've seen him go beyond
what was needed. Knowing Jack Kenneff, I just can't picture this man doing what the judge says. I wonder how that judge
sleeps at night."
Denials From the Prosecutor
No, John Kenneff insisted. No, he didn't think Butch Yunkin's sweatpants were a critical issue at the murder trial. No, he had no
recollection of looking at the sweatpants the state put into evidence.
It was April 15, the hearing's 11th day. Kenneff had taken the witness stand soon after court convened. Questioning him was
Peter Greenberg, Rainville's husband, a partner at their law firm and one of Philadelphia's most-accomplished litigators.
At the trial, the state's theory of the murder had Lisa wearing Butch's extra-large men's sweatpants, found full of blood in a
dumpster after the attack. Trial judge Lawrence F. Stengel accepted this theory and thought it significant. So Kenneff's answers
now caused Dalzell to lean forward.
"Did you make a conscious judgment at trial as to who was wearing the clothing that you put into evidence?" Greenberg asked.
"It was my understanding that Miss Lambert had admitted to wearing the clothing . . . ," Kenneff replied.
Page 21 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
7 of 19
Dalzell interrupted: "I don't think that's the question he asked you. And I think you ought to listen more carefully to Mr.
Greenberg's questions because I don't think you're answering them. . . . That question can be answered yes or no."
So it went through much of the morning. Lancaster County citizens were right: Dalzell by then couldn't hide his dismay for their
assistant district attorney. The moments when the judge removed his glasses and rubbed his eyes were adding up.
For 10 days he'd been exposed to an ever-more disturbing portrait of how Kenneff had prosecuted Lisa Lambert. He'd listened
to the pathologist Isidore Mihalakis--a defense witness at Lisa's murder trial--describe private conversations with Kenneff that
Dalzell thought constituted witness-tampering. He'd heard how authorities had concealed critical testimony by Hazel Show's
neighbor Kathleen Bayan. He'd been presented evidence that convinced him the state had "lost" an earring of Butch's found on
the victim's body. He'd been presented evidence that convinced him the state had edited critical video and audiotapes.
Now the man who oversaw the state's efforts sat before Dalzell on the witness stand.
No, Kenneff was testifying. He didn't recall looking at the river-search video.
"You didn't think it worthwhile to look at the video?" Greenberg asked.
"I didn't think what happened at the river was a contested issue," Kenneff replied.
This time, Greenberg snapped before the judge could: "You've been in this business long enough to know that when I ask a
question you're supposed to answer it?"
"Right," Kenneff agreed.
Dalzell joined in now: "It would be nice if you would do that. . . . I want to warn you, sir, that, if you don't do that, you are going to
put me into a position where this will have to get unpleasant. Do you understand that? . . . The record should reflect that you
have been consistently unresponsive to the questions. . . . "
Greenberg turned back to the matter of Butch's sweatpants. Now, Kenneff has even resisted saying he based the case on the
theory that Lisa wore Butch's clothing. He no longer, in fact, was sure whether the sweatpants were Butch's.
The pair he'd produced for the habeas hearing, after all, were much smaller than men's extra-large. "The sweatpants would
have looked ridiculous if worn by 6-foot-1-inch-tall Butch," Kenneff had argued in a written response just before the hearing.
"You are the same person . . . " Greenberg asked, "saying that the sweatpants would have looked ridiculous on Butch, who put
Butch on to testify in Lisa's trial . . . that they were his sweatpants, these very same sweatpants that would have looked
ridiculous on him?"
"Correct."
"These are the same sweatpants that Judge Stengel found belonged to Butch?"
"Correct."
Page 22 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
8 of 19
"And if you had your way, Lisa would have been executed based on that evidence, wouldn't she?"
Kenneff hesitated; Dalzell spoke: "Yes or no," the judge ordered.
"That would be correct."
Greenberg erupted: "Do you think this is some kind of game? . . . Do you realize that there is a human being sitting here who is
in jail serving a life sentence based on the evidence you put on . . . that you are now disowning. . . . Not only are you disowning
it, you are committing perjury. . . . Are you sure it is Miss Lambert who is a dangerous person in this courtroom?"
Handling of Letter Infuriated Judge
In the end, the commonwealth's handling of the controversial 29 Question Letter was what most inflamed Dalzell.
Lisa had written Butch from jail, asking a series of questions. The answers Butch had scrawled under each question, the judge
felt, left no doubt that he was the murderer of Laurie, and that his accomplice was Tabitha Buck. That the letter was authentic
seemed equally certain to Dalzell: Both the state and defense experts had affirmed there'd been no alteration.
Yet, Kenneff--after stipulating to the experts' opinions--had let Butch testify at Lambert's trial that the questions were altered.
That the prosecutor knew his witness was committing perjury appeared obvious to Dalzell. At Butch's plea-bargain hearing after
Lisa's conviction, Kenneff wanted to revoke their deal precisely because of this perjury.
Experts had reviewed the 29 Questions Letter and Butch's trial testimony, Kenneff told the judge at that Oct. 10, 1992, hearing.
"They advised us that his testimony . . . regarding that {letter} that was false . . . . It is our opinion that he testified falsely . . . on
that basis we feel we are entitled to withdraw from the original plea agreement."
There just was no ambiguity, Dalzell felt: Kenneff knew that Butch committed perjury on a material issue, regarding a document
that established Lisa's innocence.
Under such circumstances, Dalzell believed Kenneff had an unambiguous ethical obligation to take remedial action with the
court that convicted Lambert. The Pennsylvania Rule of Professional Conduct was clear about this: "A lawyer shall not
knowingly . . . offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer has offered material evidence and comes to know of
its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial steps."
Yet far from complying with this rule, it looked to Dalzell as if Kenneff had encouraged Judge Stengel to accept Butch's perjured
testimony. "I think he's just like any other witness," Kenneff told Stengel when Lisa's attorney moved for a mistrial based on
Butch's perjury. "You can believe some of it, all of it, or none."
It was worse than that, in Dalzell's eyes. For, after obtaining a conviction based partly on this perjured testimony, Kenneff had
coolly proceeded to seek the death penalty for Lisa Lambert.
Now, remarkably, Kenneff at this habeas hearing--and in written responses that looked to Dalzell to be blatantly false--was back
to arguing that some of the 29 questions had been initially written in pencil, then altered. In other words, Kenneff, before Dalzell,
was defending testimony by Butch that he had told two other judges was a lie.
Page 23 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
9 of 19
"Do you want to take remedial actions with Judge Dalzell?" Peter Greenberg asked.
Here the judge interceded: "I was just going to ask that myself. . . ."
It was the morning of April 16, the hearing's 12th day. Kenneff had been on the stand for hours.
"Well, your honor," Kenneff responded. "I think I still feel the same way about the 29 questions. . . . That there is some type of
tampering with it. . . . "
"No, no, no, sir," Dalzell interrupted. "I am going to jump in here. You said in your answer to me that there was pencil. And you
have testified under oath here that your expert and the defense expert said there was no graphite. . . . "
"Judge," Kenneff began.
Dalzell spoke over him: "I want to warn you, sir, you are under oath, and you are subject to the rules of professional
responsibility. . . . Do you retract that statement that you signed . . . as to pencil? Yes or no?"
"I just don't think I can answer that question yes or no, judge."
Dalzell turned to Madenspacher, Kenneff's supervisor. "Does the commonwealth retract it?"
Madenspacher rose. "Yes, your honor. We retract it."
"Thank you," Dalzell said. He turned back to Kenneff. "Your boss just retracted it. Next question."
Their confrontation hadn't peaked yet.
The climax came minutes later, when Greenberg began listing all the pieces of evidence that the district attorney's office kept
from Roy Shirk, Lisa's attorney at her trial. What if Shirk had the names of the emergency medical technicians? What if he knew
the police had found a pink bag? What if he had the unedited river-search video? What if he knew a neighbor had seen Butch at
the crime scene?
"Well," Kenneff tried to answer, "the Pennsylvania Rule provides for certain . . . "
That's as far as he got. Dalzell exploded: "No. Excuse me. We're talking here--let me just make something clear to you. We're
talking here about something called the United States Constitution, and in particular the 14th Amendment thereof, which has a
clause in it that refers to due process of law. OK? Have you heard of that?"
"Yes sir."
"That's what we're talking about. . . . So we're not talking about the Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure. We're talking
about due process of law here. . . . That's what we're talking about here. You got it? Do you understand?"
"Yes," Kenneff replied.
Page 24 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
10 of 19
Biggest Drama Begins to Unfold

As it happened, the confrontation between Dalzell and Kenneff was neither the most dramatic nor revealing sequence to occur
on this 12th day of Lisa's habeas hearing. The event that would eclipse it began only after Kenneff left the witness stand, and
court adjourned for lunch.
Madenspacher, walking toward his hotel, bumped into Hazel Show's brother, who reported that his sister needed to talk to him.
Back at the Holiday Inn in downtown Philadelphia, where both were staying, Madenspacher walked up to Show's room.
Sobbing as she talked, the murder victim's mother told him her story.
During the hearing that morning, she'd suddenly recalled the morning of the murder: As she drove up Black Oak Road to her
condo, on her way to find Laurie's body, a brownish-colored car passed, heading out of the condo complex. It was Butch's car.
She looked at Butch. There was recognition on his face. He pushed down someone with blond hair. There was also a third
person in the back seat, with black hair.
She'd told this to Det. Ron Savage back then. Savage had come to her house saying one of her neighbors had seen Butch's car
leave the complex. She'd started to say she had too. Savage had stopped her, told her not to dwell on that. They had so many
witnesses saying Butch wasn't there. Besides, this neighbor lady was kind of disturbed anyhow. Probably wouldn't be a reliable
witness. We were better to go with Butch not being there.
Hazel was sobbing harder now. She'd forgotten about it, she told Madenspacher. She'd put it aside. Until now.
Madenspacher was reeling. Hazel's story fit exactly with testimony given by that "neighbor lady," Kathleen Bayan, on the
hearing's fourth day. Testimony that Hazel hadn't heard because she'd left the courtroom early that day. Testimony that had
never been produced at Lisa's murder trial. Testimony that Kenneff knew about back then but had never shared with Lambert's
attorney. Testimony that Savage had tried to water down while taking Bayan's initial statement, then dismissed as coming from
a woman with "an emotional problem."
Hazel's story also fit perfectly with something else: Lisa Lambert's testimony at her trial. There she'd told of driving by Hazel
Show, of Butch saying, "Oh . . . it's Hazel," of Butch pushing her head down.
Madenspacher pondered. If true, it seemed to him that this story knocked out the underlying theory of the trial, which was that
Butch wasn't at the condo. It didn't mean Butch was actually inside; it didn't clear Lisa; it could be explained. But it was a new
story. It changed the theory of the case. Madenspacher felt as if he were slipping into shock.
"You sure?" he asked. "Let's hear it again."
Hazel repeated her story.
Madenspacher had no choice: He had to get this to the judge. He couldn't suppress it. The only question was, when and how? It
was going to come out anyway, Madenspacher figured. So let's get the bad news over with.
The conference in Dalzell's chambers began at 1:40 p.m. that day. Present were the judge, the lawyers for all sides, Hazel
Show and Lisa Lambert.
Page 25 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
11 of 19
Hazel Show told her story again, this time before a court reporter: Well, when I was sitting in the courtroom today, I realized that
I had seen Lawrence's {Butch's} car with passengers drive out of our condominium complex. . . . Det. Savage said that I wasn't
to dwell on it. . . . I never thought anymore about it until I was sitting in there. . . . It all just came back.
By now, Lisa was sobbing along with Hazel.
"It's OK, Miss Lambert," Dalzell said. "It's OK."
To Dalzell, this revelation was the final straw. Throughout Lisa's trial the state had been at pains to keep Butch as far from the
Show condo as possible. No doubt that was why the state had never disclosed anything about Hazel's report or Bayan.
To Dalzell, it wasn't just that Hazel's and Bayan's accounts were consistent with Lisa's testimony at trial five years ago: Just
about everything being revealed at this hearing was consistent with Lisa's testimony back then.
From all he'd heard, Dalzell now believed that the commonwealth's misconduct had been so substantive, it had undermined the
state court's ability to find the truth. He believed the commonwealth had committed at least 25 separate instances of
prosecutorial misconduct--all constitutional violations, all violations of the norms of a civilized society.
It seemed clear to him that Laurie Show did not say "Michelle did it." It seemed clear that Butch, in the 29 Questions Letter,
confessed to the murder. It seemed clear Lisa didn't wear Butch's sweatpants on the morning of the murder. It seemed clear the
police had fabricated Lisa's initial statement.
Worse yet, in Dalzell's view, the commonwealth still hadn't stopped its treachery. At this habeas hearing the state had produced
not the extra-large sweatpants of Butch's from the original trial, but a smaller girl's pair. The commonwealth, Dalzell believed,
had perpetrated a fraud on the federal court; the commonwealth had swapped evidence.
At least six state witnesses, by Dalzell's count, had perjured themselves before him. One, Ron Savage--now an elected district
justice in Lancaster County--likely obstructed justice. And now this: now Hazel's revelation, right before his eyes. Hazel had
every reason to want Lisa's petition denied; Hazel sincerely believed Lambert did it. Yet still she'd felt compelled to tell this
story. Dalzell had never seen a more courageous act.
"Well," the judge told those gathered in his chambers. "Now we come to the question of relief. Does the commonwealth intend
to defend this case?"
All eyes turned to Madenspacher.
The Lancaster County district attorney had been looking uncomfortable in recent days. Nothing he'd heard rose to the level of
conscious misconduct or obstruction, he kept insisting. But he had to admit, it hadn't been a perfect trial or investigation. He
wished certain things had been done differently.
In Lancaster County, then as now, there were many who wanted their district attorney to fight ferociously. There were many who
wanted their district attorney to defend their honor, to insist they'd done nothing wrong, to match Lisa's lawyers blow for blow.
Yet, Madenspacher, at this moment, wasn't sure what should be done. Everything, he would say later, was "spinning in my
mind." It was "awful tough" operating away from the office. It "would have been nice" to have known everything from the start.
Page 26 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
12 of 19
"Now, obviously . . . " he finally told the judge. "There is some relief that is justified in this particular case. . . ."
That was all Dalzell needed; he now had the commonwealth's assent. The state hadn't even put on its case yet, but he meant to
get Lisa out of prison. He also meant to get Savage off the bench forever; he didn't see how Savage could hear cases anymore,
and he planned to tell the Pennsylvania Supreme Court just that.
"You can make a choice overnight," Dalzell advised the district attorney, "whether you want to defend this case, put on your own
witnesses. In the meantime, I'm going to release Ms. Lambert into some agreed-upon custody. . . . Because it's quite clear now
that the petitioner is entitled to relief, the only question is how much."
Off to one side, a dismayed Hazel Show tried to interject: "Laurie told me she did it. . . . "
Madenspacher's voice overrode hers. "Yes, I agree relief is warranted, and I think we're talking now. . . . "
"About what relief," the judge said.
"What relief, your honor . . . "
"I can tell you, Mr. Madenspacher, that I've thought about nothing else but this case for over three weeks, and in my experience,
sir, and I invite you to disabuse me of this at oral argument, I want you and I want the Schnader firm to look for any case in any
jurisdiction in the English-speaking world where there has been as much prosecutorial misconduct, because I haven't found it. .
. . So are we agreed that the petitioner will tonight be released into the custody of Ms. Rainville?"
Madenspacher nodded. "I don't see how I can object to that, your honor."
Stunned Response in Lancaster County
In bars and cafes, street corners and living rooms, the citizens of Lancaster County gasped at the news of Lisa's release. Their
district attorney may not have seen reason to object, but they did. Most sounded stunned; many sounded enraged. One man, at
8 a.m. on the morning after her release, anonymously called in a phone threat to the Lancaster Sunday News, saying he would
kill Lambert if she returned to Lancaster.
Maybe there were "mistakes," the more rational by now were willing to allow. Maybe there was "sloppy" police work. Maybe Lisa
even deserves a new trial. Nothing more than that, though. Certainly not her freedom. She was there, she was an accomplice,
she was a co-conspirator. Give her a new trial, remand it elsewhere even. But don't just let her go. You can't just let her go.
"Lambert is not innocent--how could she be?" the Lancaster New Era editorialized the day after Hazel Show's revelation. " . . .
even with newly revealed evidence that supports her claims, Lambert is still irrevocably involved in the events that lead to Laurie
Show's murder. These facts must not be drowned out by the explosive revelations at Lambert's federal appeals hearing. . . . "
As it happened, these thoughts exactly echoed those offered by Judge Stengel, who'd presided at Lisa's murder trial. "Even if
Lambert's story at trial was completely credible," Stengel had declared in his written opinions, "she would still be an accomplice
to the crime of murder. . . . The single most important fact on the issue of guilt is whether Ms. Lambert was present in the Show
condominium at the time of the killing. By her own admission, she was present. . . . "
Page 27 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
13 of 19
Dalzell, however, simply did not accept this notion, at least not in a federal habeas hearing.
On the proceeding's final day, when Madenspacher in his closing argument spoke of Lambert being guilty at least as an
accomplice or conspirator, Dalzell waved him off. "She wasn't charged with conspiracy was she?" he declared. "She was
charged with first-degree murder. So the only issue before me is actual innocence of first-degree murder. That is what she was
convicted of."
In fact, the law is murky on this point. Lisa was actually charged with criminal homicide, which in Pennsylvania encompasses all
degrees of murder. How her conviction for first-degree murder affects her exposure to lesser murder charges is a matter for
debate.
So, Madenspacher tried to argue: "What I am saying here is that charged with criminal homicide, she could be found guilty of
murder in the first degree . . . or she could have been found guilty of second degree . . . or she could be found guilty of third
degree."
That didn't sway Dalzell: "But if one took her testimony, she said that she did everything possible to de-escalate what spun out
of control. . . . By her own testimony she exited when it started spinning out of control. So therefore, it was not 'reasonably
foreseeable' from her point of view, so the argument would go."
The judge then cut things off: "Let's not waste time debating that."
Dalzell had good reason for not wishing to bother further with this issue. By then--after 14 days of testimony covering 3,225
pages of transcript--the judge wasn't thinking only about Lisa's conduct at the Show condo. He was thinking about the 14th
Amendment of the Constitution, and the role of a federal habeas corpus in upholding the unalienable right of due process.
Among other historic cases, Dalzell's mind was on a 1973 opinion by then-Justice William H. Rehnquist, in United States vs.
Russell. There, Rehnquist predicted that "we may some day be presented with a situation in which the conduct of law
enforcement agents is so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking the judicial
processes to obtain a conviction."
That day, Dalzell decided at the close of Lambert's hearing, had come.
While presiding at a habeas hearing, he reminded himself, he effectively sat as a court of equity--a court operating under a
system of law designed to protect rights and deliver remedial justice. He recalled the ancient maxim that "equity delights to do
justice, and not by halves." To give Lisa full relief, it seemed to him imperative that he do nothing to benefit or empower those
who had wronged her.
He would not just release Lisa, Dalzell decided. An outrageous violation of due process required even more severe sanction. He
would bar the state from ever retrying her. He would strip the state of its natural right to adjudicate a murder committed within its
boundaries.
He wrote his 90-page opinion over the weekend, after court adjourned at 4:10 p.m. on Friday, April 18. Before a packed
courtroom late the following Monday morning, he declared Lisa "by clear and convincing evidence" to be "actually innocent of
first-degree murder."
Page 28 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
14 of 19
"If Lisa Lambert's is not the 'situation' to which Chief Justice Rehnquist referred, then there is no prosecutorial malfeasance
outrageous enough to bar a reprosecution. . . ." he proclaimed. "We have now concluded that Ms. Lambert has presented an
extraordinary, indeed, it appears, unprecedented case. We therefore hold that the writ should issue, that Lisa Lambert should
be immediately released, and that she should not be retried."
In scorching language, Dalzell explained just why: "We have found that virtually all of the evidence which the commonwealth
used to convict Lisa Lambert of first-degree murder was either perjured, altered or fabricated. Such total contempt for due
process of law demands serious sanctions. The question we must now answer is whether . . . the commonwealth is entitled to
get another try at convicting Lisa Lambert and sending her to prison for the rest of her life. . . . In short, the question is whether
we may accept a promise from anyone on behalf of the commonwealth that a trial will be fair 'next time.' "
No, Dalzell concluded, we cannot.
"We hold that the due process clause of the 14th Amendment bars the commonwealth from invoking judicial or any other
proceedings against Lisa Lambert for the murder of Laurie Show. . . . Equitable considerations preclude our leaving the decision
whether to retry Lisa Lambert in the hands of those who created this gross injustice. . . . "
As far as legal researchers could tell, there was an accepted basis, but no exact precedent for a federal judge in Dalzell's
situation to take such action. Dalzell did not stop there.
He was, he announced in his opinion, going to refer the matter of Kenneff's "blatantly unethical and unconstitutional" actions to
the Pennsylvania Disciplinary Board. He also was going to refer the whole Lambert prosecution to the U.S. attorney for
investigation of "possible witness intimidation, apparent perjury by at least five witnesses in a federal proceeding, and possible
violations of the federal criminal civil rights laws."
Still, Dalzell wasn't finished. He felt compelled, in the two final pages of his opinion, to address the question of just why all this
had happened in Lancaster County.
"Those who have read this sad history," he wrote, "may well ask themselves, 'How could a place idealized in Peter Weir's
'Witness' become like the world in David Lynch's 'Blue Velvet'?' Because it is so important to that community and indeed to
many others to prevent a recurrence of this nightmare, we offer a few reflections on the record."
Laurie Show's grandfather, Dalzell pointed out, was, in the 1980s, the coroner of Lancaster County. Her mother was "a paragon
of morality" who kept "a picture-perfect home." By contrast, Lisa Lambert was "as though delivered from Central Casting for the
part of villainess." By the testimony of even those who loved her, "she was at the time literally 'trailer trash.' " The community
"thus closed ranks behind the good family Show and exacted instant revenge against this supposed villainess." Almost
immediately after "the snap judgment" was made, law enforcement officials uncovered "inconvenient facts," but soon
"discovered a balm for these evidentiary bruises, Lawrence Yunkin." Thus "Lancaster's best made a pact with Lancaster's worst
to convict the 'trailer trash' of first-degree murder."
Dalzell's parting words: "In making a pact with this devil, Lancaster County made a Faustian bargain. It lost its soul and it almost
executed an innocent, abused woman. Its legal edifice now in ashes, we can only hope for a 'Witness'-like barn-raising of the
temple of justice."
Page 29 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
15 of 19
Uprising Began With Calls, Letters

The uprising in Lancaster County in the wake of Dalzell's ruling began first with the usual letters to editors and calls to radio talk
shows.
The legal system is a "crock of crap." How could Dalzell destroy the reputation of "honorable and decent people" for the
purpose of freeing a "cold-blooded killer?" What kind of justice do we have?
Soon enough, such talk escalated. All sorts of theories about Dalzell's motives began circulating. Something's been going on
behind the scenes, it was suggested. Something behind what Dalzell did, something we don't know about.
Ted Byrne, the conservative radio talk show host in Lancaster County, pored through Dalzell's decisions in a law library. Then,
seeking hidden connections, he analyzed the activities of the attorneys at Dalzell's old law firm and Rainville's firm.
It was considered significant that Dalzell and Greenberg, 30 years before, had been classmates at the University of
Pennsylvania. Some talk had it that they were old pals. Some talk had it that Dalzell had handed the Lambert case to his own
"carefully assembled defense team."
Had Dalzell reached the end of a career path? Had he felt unfulfilled? Had he wondered how he might become an appellate
judge? Had he seen a challenge to the controversial habeas corpus situation as a means to garner attention?
For that matter, how did the Lambert case get to Dalzell in the first place? Had not Dalzell displayed an excessive personal
interest in Lisa in his chambers? Was it possible that they had a relationship?
"We must begin to think who it was that had to gain from this travesty of justice other than Lambert," suggested one citizen in a
letter to the editor. "My vote goes to Judge Stewart Dalzell. It would appear that it is an appropriate time for this newspaper to
dig very deep into the archives of the noteworthy judge to determine what it was or who it was that set him on his grudge
mission to 'punish' the county for sins of the past committed against him."
Such comments reflected as much bewilderment as paranoia. They came from a citizenry who well knew Lisa Lambert, and
well knew those who had prosecuted her. Yet rarely did anyone, amid all the outpouring of emotion and speculation, feel
inclined to discuss the particulars of the Lambert case as revealed in Dalzell's courtroom.
More common was East Lampeter Supervisor Chairman John Shertzer's response. "There were a lot of false accusations
throughout the trial. . . . We never had the opportunity to address those," Shertzer told a reporter, before confessing that he, in
fact, couldn't address them: "There are some things about this that I don't have a lot of background in. But I just know these
people. . . . They were treated very abusively on the stand by Lambert's attorneys as well as the judge."
Lancaster's citizens were struggling to hold together a way of viewing their world. Even those willing to acknowledge certain
blemishes in that world--even those willing to acknowledge official wrongdoing in the Lambert case--found themselves laboring
to understand what Dalzell had done. No matter what was revealed in a Philadelphia courtroom, no matter what Lancaster
authorities did or failed to do, it seemed incomprehensible that Dalzell would let Lisa Lambert walk free, without at least a retrial.
Not even Lisa's parents had hoped for that back when their daughter's appeals first started. Their dream, Leonard Lambert told
a reporter then, was that Lisa receive "a level of punishment that's not greater than what's deserved. . . . It's a known fact that
Page 30 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
16 of 19
she was there. But something could argue that maybe she doesn't deserve more than aggravated assault or third-degree
murder."
Dalzell went too far, even the more reasonable in Lancaster County now declared. He was a disgrace to the legal profession.
He had made a mockery of justice. He was a man without honor.
Hazel Show, more than anyone, sounded the clarion. "Thank you for listening to me," she'd told Dalzell on the hearing's last
day. "My parents brought me up to be truthful, and I believe in God. . . . So it is up to me to tell the truth." Yet soon after,
whether out of confusion or regret at what she'd wrought, Show began to backtrack and revise.
Never in her "wildest dreams," she declared, had she thought her story would free Lisa. All her story proved was that she got
home just as the killers left, in time to hear her daughter's dying declaration. But the judge "didn't want to hear that." The judge
"wouldn't let me say that."
No matter that Madenspacher insisted Hazel never mentioned this notion to him in their hotel meeting. No matter that she never
mentioned this notion while on the witness stand on the hearing's last day. It now became her constant refrain. "We have to get
this judge off the bench," she began declaring publicly. "There is not one bit of justice in him."
They began first with a petition drive. Hazel's ex-husband, John Show, drew it up, calling for Congress to "investigate" Dalzell
and take "corrective action," including impeachment. Show's girlfriend took it to her beauty shop, where customers clamored to
sign it. Local businesses started stocking piles on their front counters. Volunteers called for extra copies, carried them door to
door, offered them at yard sales. One couple outside a Kmart parking lot on a hot Sunday collected more than 500 signatures.
On the morning after an ad for the petition appeared in the Lancaster newspapers, John Show walked to his mailbox and found
300 envelopes. By mid-September, he had 37,000 signatures.
Then came Hazel Show's 10-page "Citizens Action Report," the keystone of her newly launched national campaign seeking to
reform the entire federal judiciary. Now the Shows wanted, among a host of items, to bar federal judges from banning retrials, to
fix stricter guidelines for appointing federal judges, to limit federal judges' terms in office. Hazel Show's words and image soon
became ubiquitous in Lancaster County.
Television provided one forum, both local talk shows and the national tabloids. Politicians provided another. The
Washington-based Judicial Selection Monitoring Project, an arch-conservative organization seeking to block the appointment of
what it calls "activist liberal judges," featured both Shows in a 15-minute videotape that lambasted Dalzell and misidentified him
as a Clinton appointee.
The Shows, accompanied by 16 friends and relatives, took their campaign to Washington on Sept. 17, where Pennsylvania
Sen. Arlen Specter, along with Reps. Joseph R. Pitts and George W. Gekas, accepted cartloads of petitions. The lawmakers,
weeks before, had introduced legislation that would severely restrict federal judges' power to bar retrials during habeas
proceedings--a bill specifically designed to reverse Dalzell's decision. Now, to the Shows, Specter agreed to call it the "Laurie
Bill" and promised them a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. Wherever they went, the Shows were applauded and courted.
"How often do you get to do this?" Hazel observed.
"I think we made an impact," John offered.
Page 31 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
17 of 19
Argument That Judge Brought It on Himself

It can fairly be argued that Dalzell brought some of this on himself. He may have overly embraced Lisa Lambert's account of
events, and unduly diminished her role. He may not have needed to rough up witnesses in his courtroom as much as he did. He
certainly need not have painted Lancaster County with such a broad brush at the end of his opinion.
How could he claim to know this county, his critics asked. How could he claim to know our citizens? How could he say such
things about us?
Yet, valid as such claims may be, it most likely will be Dalzell who leaves a lasting impact, not those fueling the backlash
against him.
Whether right or wrong, whether he operated entirely within his bounds, a federal judge consumed by moral outrage has, as he
intended, sent a message. The idea behind Lisa Lambert's outright release was not, finally, to let a guilty person go free. It was
to let the powers of the state know they can't violate bedrock principles of the Constitution and get away with it.
They haven't.
In early May, the U.S. attorney's office in Philadelphia, responding to Dalzell's referral, announced it had launched a criminal
investigation into those who investigated and prosecuted Lisa Lambert. Aiding them will be the FBI and the Justice
Department's civil rights division. They will focus on John Kenneff and seven police officers, among them Ronald Savage,
Ronald Barley, Robin Weaver and Raymond Solt.
Days later, the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, in refusing Lancaster County's motion for a temporary stay of Dalzell's order,
said "the commonwealth has not demonstrated that it is likely to prevail on the merits of its appeal. . . . We remind the
commonwealth that Judge Dalzell's factual findings are based on his view of the credibility of the witnesses and testimony. . . .
We can only reverse if we find them clearly erroneous."
In that written opinion, the appellate panel also chastised the commonwealth for calling Lisa Lambert a "convicted killer" in its
brief. She "no longer has that status," the 3rd Circuit reminded. "Indeed, that description is inflammatory and inappropriate,
given {Dalzell's} findings of actual innocence. . . . "
What remains to be seen is whether Dalzell will ultimately be allowed his unprecedented involvement in a state's sovereign
affairs. At the habeas hearing's end, Lancaster County hired its own high-powered Pennsylvania law firm, Sprague & Lewis,
known for its political connections, particularly to the Republican Party. On Oct. 21, when lawyers for both sides argued the
merits of the county's appeal before a 3rd Circuit panel, the appellate judges grilled them on a critical question: Did Lisa
Lambert exhaust all her appeals in Pennsylvania's courts before turning to a federal judge for help?
This issue, rather than any question of Lisa's innocence or a prosecutor's malfeasance, is what presently fuels a nationwide
debate in the legal community and beyond. Elemental principles of law and government in this country normally restrain federal
intrusion until a state has heard all claims, and has been given the chance to correct its own errors. Just weeks ago, a 3rd
Circuit panel--saying "we are sensitive to the independence of the Pennsylvania courts and of that state's sovereignty"--denied
another convict's habeas petition because he hadn't exhausted his state appeals.
Dalzell, in his opinion, recognized these principles, then essentially dismissed them. The Pennsylvania General Assembly, he
Page 32 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
18 of 19
pointed out, amended its statutes in 1995 to exclude "actual innocence" as a basis for certain appeals. By doing so, Dalzell
declared, Pennsylvania, in effect, relinquished its jurisdiction over claims such as Lisa Lambert's, and placed them "squarely
into the federal forum." And even if Pennsylvania were willing to consider some of Lambert's claims, Dalzell added, "we find that
the state proceedings that would follow if we dismissed this action are ineffective to protect the rights of Ms. Lambert."
By thus declaring his utter distrust in Pennsylvania's ability to deliver justice, Dalzell has challenged the fundamental balance of
power between state and federal courts that governs the judicial system. This is why five state attorneys general--including
California's--have joined Pennsylvania in an amicus brief that talks of the Dalzell ruling's "potential to seriously weaken, if not to
dismantle entirely, the system for litigating habeas actions." This is why law-and-order-minded national politicians have their
knives out for Dalzell. This is why Lisa Lambert's federal hearing promises to be one of the most carefully reviewed cases in
criminal law for a long time to come.
This is also why Dalzell's actions will leave a legacy no matter what the outcome of the present appeals. His ruling may or may
not stand, his ruling may or may not establish a formal precedent, but--by granting a hearing and allowing widespread
discovery--Dalzell has required that attention be paid to what happened in a Lancaster County courtroom in the summer of
1992. He's shown why the federal habeas corpus action is essential to the integrity of the judicial system.
Dalzell has also set a moral, if not legal, example. Rulings in one case often affect other rulings. One judge's decision shapes
not just the outcome of a particular case, but also the character of justice. What he doesn't allow, others likewise forbid.
In mid-May, in Lancaster County court, Lisa Lambert's original trial lawyer, Roy Shirk, serving as defense attorney in a routine
burglary case, rose to ask for a mistrial. As in the Lambert case, he argued, prosecutors in this one had failed to turn over
exculpatory evidence to the defense. Shirk most likely meant only to put this commonplace claim into the record for later review,
but Judge Paul K. Allison, to the lawyers' astonishment, promptly granted his request.
Yes, the judge said in declaring a mistrial, this is exactly what Dalzell felt happened to Lisa Lambert.
PHOTO: Lisa Michelle Lambert walks ahead of lawyers, Peter Greenberg and Christina Rainville, to court hearing.;
PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press; PHOTO: Lancaster County Dist. Atty. Joseph Madenspacher talks to news media after
judge ruled Lisa Michelle Lambert innocent of charges.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press; PHOTO: Hazel Show, left,
stands in bedroom where daughter, Laurie, was murdered.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press; PHOTO: Laurie's father,
John Show, above, hugs woman identified as his girlfriend, after judge ruled Lisa Michelle Lambert innocent.;
PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press; PHOTO: U.S. District Judge Stewart Dalzell was assigned the writ of habeas corpus that
set him on a course to freeing Lisa Michelle Lambert.; PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press
Credit: TIMES STAFF WRITER
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
Subjects:
Judicial reviews, Acquittals & mistrials, Murders & murder attempts, Prosecutions, Series & special reports
Locations:
Lancaster County Pennsylvania
People:
Lambert, Lisa, Show, Laurie
Document types: News
LANCASTER, Pa.
Dateline:
PART-A; National Desk
Section:
ISSN/ISBN:
04583035
Page 33 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
19 of 19
Text Word Count 8866

Document URL:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
Copyright 2005 Los Angeles Times | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
Home Delivery | Advertise | Archives | Contact | Site Map | Help
PARTN ERS:
Page 34 of 63
6/4/2005 9:58 AM
Supreme Court puts limit on whistle-blowers in nuclear case
1 of 1
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0328Scotus-WhistleBlower0328...
Supreme Court puts limit on whistle-blowers

in nuclear case
Mark Sherman
Associated Press
Mar. 28, 2007 12:00 AM
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court left an 81-year-old retired engineer without a penny to show for his role in
exposing fraud at a former nuclear weapons plant in a ruling that makes it harder for whistle-blowers to claim cash
rewards.
James Stone stood to collect up to $1 million from a lawsuit he filed in 1989 against Rockwell International, now part of
aerospace giant Boeing Co., over problems with environmental cleanup at the now-closed Rocky Flats plant northwest
of Denver.
A court eventually ordered Rockwell to pay the government nearly $4.2 million for false claims the company submitted.
Stone could have received up to a quarter of Rockwell's payment, under the False Claims Act.
But Justice Antonin Scalia, writing in the 6-2 ruling Tuesday, said Stone was not entitled to recover any money
because he lacked "direct and independent knowledge of the information upon which his allegations were based."
Scalia said Stone had little connection to the jury's verdict against Rockwell.
The company still must pay the penalty. The only question before the court was whether Stone would get a cut.
The outcome was cheered by business groups that wanted the court to limit whistle-blowers in false claims lawsuits.
Since Congress reinvigorated the Civil War-era law in 1986, those suits have returned $11 billion to the government.
Recent high-profile cases include settlements with leading pharmaceutical manufacturers.
James Moorman, president of the advocacy group Taxpayers Against Fraud Education Fund said that individuals
whose information leads the government to pursue fraud can be told years later that they can't collect anything,
Moorman said.

Page 35 of 63
3/28/2007 8:38 PM
(Slip Opinion)
OCTOBER TERM, 2006
Syllabus
NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is
being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.
The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been
prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader.
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Syllabus
ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORP. ET AL. v.

UNITED STATES ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE TENTH CIRCUIT
No. 051272.
Argued December 5, 2006Decided March 27, 2007
While employed as an engineer at a nuclear weapons plant run by petitioner Rockwell under a Government contract, respondent Stone predicted that Rockwells system for creating solid pondcrete blocks
from toxic pond sludge and cement would not work because of problems in piping the sludge. However, Rockwell successfully made such
blocks and discovered insolid ones only after Stone was laid off in
1986. In 1989, Stone filed a qui tam suit under the False Claims Act,
which prohibits submitting false or fraudulent payment claims to the
United States, 31 U. S. C. 3729(a); permits remedial civil actions to
be brought by the Attorney General, 3730(a), or by private individuals in the Governments name, 3730(b)(1); but eliminates federalcourt jurisdiction over actions based upon the public disclosure of allegations or transactions . . . , unless the action is brought by the Attorney General or the person bringing the action is an original source
of the information, 3730(e)(4)(A). An original source has direct
and independent knowledge of the information on which the allegations are based and has voluntarily provided the information to the
Government before filing an action . . . based on the information.
3730(e)(4)(B). In 1996, the Government intervened, and, with
Stone, filed an amended complaint, which did not allege that Stones
predicted piping-system defect caused the insolid blocks. Nor was
such defect mentioned in a statement of claims included in the final
pretrial order, which instead alleged that the pondcrete failed because a new foreman used an insufficient cement-to-sludge ratio.
The jury found for respondents with respect to claims covering the
pondcrete allegations, but found for Rockwell with respect to all other

Page 36 of 63
ROCKWELL INTL CORP. v. UNITED STATES

Syllabus
claims. The District Court denied Rockwells postverdict motion to
dismiss Stones claims, finding that Stone was an original source.
The Tenth Circuit affirmed in part, but remanded for the District
Court to determine whether Stone had disclosed his information to
the Government before filing the action. The District Court found
Stones disclosure inadequate, but the Tenth Circuit disagreed and
held that Stone was an original source.
Held:
1. Section 3730(e)(4)s original-source requirement is jurisdictional.
Thus, regardless of whether Rockwell conceded Stones originalsource status, this Court must decide whether Stone meets this jurisdictional requirement. Pp. 811.
2. Because Stone does not meet 3730(e)(4)(B)s requirement that a
relator have direct and independent knowledge of the information on
which the allegations are based, he is not an original source.
Pp. 1218.
(a) The information to which subparagraph (B) speaks is the information on which the relators allegations are based rather than
the information on which the publicly disclosed allegations that triggered the public-disclosure bar are based. The subparagraph standing on its own suggests that disposition. And those allegations are
not the same as the allegations referred to in subparagraph (A),
which bars actions based on the public disclosure of allegations or
transactions with an exception for cases brought by an original
source of the information. Had Congress wanted to link originalsource status to information underlying public disclosure it would
have used the identical phrase, allegations or transactions. Furthermore, it is difficult to understand why Congress would care
whether a relator knows about the information underlying a publicly
disclosed allegation when the relator has direct and independent
knowledge of different information supporting the same allegation.
Pp. 1214.
(b) In determining which allegations are relevant, that term is
not limited to allegations in the original complaint, but includes the
allegations as amended. The statute speaks of the relators allegations, simpliciter. Absent some limitation of 3730(e)(4)s requirement to the initial complaint, this Court will not infer one. Here,
where the final pretrial order superseded prior pleadings, this Court
looks to the final pretrial order to determine original-source status.
Pp. 1417.
(c) Judged according to these principles, Stones knowledge falls
short. The only false claims found by the jury involved insolid pondcrete discovered after Stone left his employment. Thus, he did not
know that the pondcrete had failed; he predicted it. And his predic-

Page 37 of 63
Cite as: 549 U. S. ____ (2007)
Syllabus
tion was a failed one, for Stone believed the piping system was defective when, in fact, the pondcrete problem would be caused by a foremans actions after Stone had left the plant. Stones original-source
status with respect to a separate, spray-irrigation claim did not provide jurisdiction over all of his claims. Section 3730(e)(4) does not
permit jurisdiction in gross just because a relator is an original
source with respect to some claim. Pp. 1718.
3. The Governments intervention in this case did not provide an
independent basis of jurisdiction with respect to Stone. The statute
draws a sharp distinction between actions brought by a private person under 3730(b) and actions brought by the Attorney General under 3730(b). An action originally brought by a private person, which
the Attorney General has joined, becomes an action brought by the
Attorney General only after the private person has been ousted.
Pp. 1820.
92 Fed. Appx. 708, reversed.
SCALIA, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS,
C. J., and KENNEDY, SOUTER, THOMAS, and ALITO, JJ., joined. STEVENS,
J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which GINSBURG, J., joined. BREYER, J.,
took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Page 38 of 63
Cite as: 549 U. S. ____ (2007)
Opinion of the Court

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order
that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press.

_________________
No. 051272
_________________
ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORP., ET AL.,

PETITIONERS v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
[March 27, 2007]
JUSTICE SCALIA delivered the opinion of the Court.

The False Claims Act, 31 U. S. C. 37293733, eliminates federal-court jurisdiction over actions under 3730
of the Act that are based upon the public disclosure of
allegations or transactions unless the action is brought by
the Attorney General or the person bringing the action is
an original source of the information. 3730(e)(4)(A). We
decide whether respondent James Stone was an original
source.
I
The mixture of concrete and pond sludge that is the
subject of this case has taken nearly two decades to seep,
so to speak, into this Court. Given the long history and
the complexity of this litigation, it is well to describe the
facts in some detail.
A
From 1975 through 1989, petitioner Rockwell International Corp. was under a management and operating
contract with the Department of Energy (DOE) to run the
Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant in Colorado. The most

Page 39 of 63

significant portion of Rockwells compensation came in the

form of a semiannual award fee, the amount of which
depended on DOEs evaluation of Rockwells performance
in a number of areas, including environmental, safety, and
health concerns. United States ex rel. Stone v. Rockwell
Intl, Corp., 92 Fed. Appx. 708, 714 (CA10 2004).
From November 1980 through March 1986, James Stone
worked as an engineer at the Rocky Flats plant. In the
early 1980s, Rockwell explored the possibility of disposing
of the toxic pond sludge that accumulated in solar evaporation ponds at the facility, by mixing it with cement. The
idea was to pour the mixture into large rectangular boxes,
where it would solidify into pondcrete blocks that could
be stored onsite or transported to other sites for disposal.
Stone reviewed a proposed manufacturing process for
pondcrete in 1982. He concluded that the proposal would
not work, App. 175, and communicated that conclusion to
Rockwell management in a written Engineering Order.
As Stone would later explain, he believed the suggested
process would result in an unstable mixture that would
later deteriorate and cause unwanted release of toxic
wastes to the environment. Ibid. He believed this because he foresaw that the piping system that extracted
sludge from the solar ponds would not properly remove
the sludge and would lead to an inadequate mixture of
sludge/waste and cement such that the pond crete blocks
would rapidly disintegrate thus creating additional contamination problems. Id., at 290.
Notwithstanding Stones prediction, Rockwell proceeded
with its pondcrete project and successfully manufactured
concrete hard pondcrete during the period of Stones
employment at Rocky Flats. It was only after Stone was
laid off in March 1986 that what the parties have called
insolid pondcrete blocks were discovered. According to
respondents, Rockwell knew by October 1986 that a substantial number of pondcrete blocks were insolid, but

Page 40 of 63
Cite as: 549 U. S. ____ (2007)
DOE did not become aware of the problem until May 1988,
when several pondcrete blocks began to leak, leading to
the discovery of thousands of other insolid blocks. The
media reported these discoveries, 3 Appellants App. in
Nos. 991351, 991352, 991353 (CA10), pp. 88938 to
88939; and attributed the malfunction to Rockwells
reduction of the ratio of concrete to sludge in the mixture.
In June 1987, more than a year after he had left Rockwells employ, Stone went to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) with allegations of environmental crimes at
Rocky Flats during the time of his employment. According
to the court below, Stone alleged that
contrary to public knowledge, Rocky Flats accepted
hazardous and nuclear waste from other DOE facilities; that Rockwell employees were forbidden from
discussing any controversies in front of a DOE employee; that although Rocky Flats fluid bed incinerators failed testing in 1981, the pilot incinerator remained on line and was used to incinerate wastes
daily since 1981, including plutonium wastes which
were then sent out for burial; that Rockwell distilled
and fractionated various oils and solvents although
the wastes were geared for incineration; that Stone
believed that the ground water was contaminated
from previous waste burial and land application, and
that hazardous waste lagoons tended to overflow during and after a good rain, causing hazardous wastes
to be discharged without first being treated. App. to
Pet. for Cert. 4a.
Stone provided the FBI with 2,300 pages of documents,
buried among which was his 1982 engineering report
predicting that the pondcrete-system design would not
work. Stone did not discuss his pondcrete allegations with

Page 41 of 63

the FBI in their conversations.1

Based in part on information allegedly learned from
Stone, the Government obtained a search warrant for
Rocky Flats, and on June 6, 1989, 75 FBI and Environmental Protection Agency agents raided the facility. The
affidavit in support of the warrant included allegations (1)
that pondcrete blocks were insolid due to an inadequate
waste-concrete mixture, App. 429, (2) that Rockwell
obtained award fees based on its alleged excellent
management of Rocky Flats, id., at 98, and (3) that Rockwell made false statements and concealed material facts in
violation of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
of 1976 (RCRA), 90 Stat. 2811, 42 U. S. C. 6928, and 18
U. S. C. 1001. Newspapers published these allegations.
In March 1992, Rockwell pleaded guilty to 10 environmental violations, including the knowing storage of insolid
pondcrete blocks in violation of RCRA. Rockwell agreed to
pay $18.5 million in fines.
B
In July 1989, Stone filed a qui tam suit under the False
Claims Act.2 That Act prohibits false or fraudulent claims
for payment to the United States, 31 U. S. C. 3729(a),
and authorizes civil actions to remedy such fraud to be
brought by the Attorney General, 3730(a), or by private
individuals in the Governments name, 3730(b)(1). The
Act provides, however, that [n]o court shall have jurisdiction over an action under this section based upon the
public disclosure of allegations or transactions . . . from
the news media, unless the action is brought by the Attorney General or the person bringing the action is an origi
1 Stone claimed the contrary, but the District Court found that he had
failed to establish that fact.
2 Qui tam is short for qui tam pro domino rege quam pro se ipso in
hac parte sequitur, which means who pursues this action on our Lord
the Kings behalf as well as his own.

Page 42 of 63
Cite as: 549 U. S. ____ (2007)
nal source of the information. 3730(e)(4)(A). An original source is an individual who has direct and independent knowledge of the information on which the allegations
are based and has voluntarily provided the information to
the Government before filing an action under this section
which is based on the information. 3730(e)(4)(B).
Stones complaint alleged that Rockwell was required to
comply with certain federal and state environmental laws
and regulations, including RCRA; that Rockwell committed numerous violations of these laws and regulations
throughout the 1980s3; and that, in order to induce the
Government to make payments or approvals under Rockwells contract, Rockwell knowingly presented false and
fraudulent claims to the Government in violation of the
False Claims Act, 31 U. S. C. 3729(a). As required under
the Act, Stone filed his complaint under seal and simultaneously delivered to the Government a confidential disclosure statement describing substantially all material
evidence and information in his possession, 3730(b)(2).
The statement identified 26 environmental and safety
issues, only one of which involved pondcrete. With respect
to that issue, Stone explained in his statement that he had
3 The laws and regulations allegedly violated included DOE Order

Nos. 5480.2 (Dec. 1982), 5483.1 as superseded by 5483.1A (June 22,
1983), and 6430.1 (Dec. 12, 1983) (DOE General Design Criteria Manual); Colo. Rev. Stat. 255501 et seq. (1982) (Hazardous Substances),
257101 et seq. (1982 and Supp. 1988) (Air Quality Control Program),
257501 et seq. (Asbestos Control), 2515101 (Hazardous Waste
Management Act, 258201 (1982) (Water Quality Control Act), 2511
101 (1982 and Supp. 1988) (Radiation Control), 2922101 (Hazardous
Substance Incidents), 255503 (1982), 258506, 258608, 2515
308 through 2515310, and 2922108; the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970, 29 U. S. C. 651 et seq.; the Atomic Energy Act of
1954, as amended, 42 U. S. C. 2011 et seq.; the Energy Reorganization
Act of 1974, 42 U. S. C. 5801 et seq.; the Water Pollution Prevention
and Control Act, 33 U. S. C. 1251 et seq.; the Clean Air Act, 42 U. S. C.
7401 et seq.; the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U. S. C. 300f et seq.; and
regulations promulgated under these statutes.

Page 43 of 63

reviewed the design for the pondcrete system and had

foreseen that the piping mechanism would not properly
remove the sludge, which in turn would lead to an inadequate mixture of sludge and cement.
In December 1992, Rockwell moved to dismiss Stones
action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, arguing that
the action was based on publicly disclosed allegations and
that Stone was not an original source. The District Court
denied the motion because, in its view, Stone had direct
and independent knowledge that Rockwells compensation
was linked to its compliance with environmental, health
and safety regulations and that it allegedly concealed its
deficient performance so that it would continue to receive
payments. App. to Pet. for Cert. 61a.
The Government initially declined to intervene in
Stones action, but later reversed course, and in November
1996, the District Court granted the Governments intervention. Several weeks later, at the suggestion of the
District Court, the Government and Stone filed a joint
amended complaint. As relevant here, the amended complaint alleged that Rockwell violated RCRA by storing
leaky pondcrete blocks, but did not allege that any defect
in the piping system (as predicted by Stone) caused insolid
pondcrete.4 Respondents clarified their allegations even
further in a statement of claims which became part of the
final pretrial order and which superseded their earlier
pleadings. This said that the pondcretes insolidity was
due to an incorrect cement/sludge ratio used in pondcrete
operations, as well as due to inadequate process controls
and inadequate inspection procedures. App. 470. It
continued:
4 In addition to the pondcrete allegations, respondents charged Rockwell with concealing problems with saltcrete (a mixture of cement and
salt from liquid waste treatment processes) and spray irrigation (a
method of disposing of waste water generated by the sewage treatment
plant at Rocky Flats).

Page 44 of 63
Cite as: 549 U. S. ____ (2007)
During the winter of 1986, Rockwell replaced its then

pondcrete foreman, Norman Fryback, with Ron Teel.
Teel increased pondcrete production rates in part by,
among other things, reducing the amount of cement
added to the blocks. Following the May 23, 1988 spill,
Rockwell acknowledged that this reduced cement-tosludge ratio was a major contributor to the existence
of insufficiently solid pondcrete blocks on the storage
pads. Id., at 476477.
The statement of claims again did not mention the piping
problem asserted by Stone years earlier.
Respondents False Claims Act claims went to trial in
1999. None of the witnesses Stone had identified during
discovery as having relevant knowledge testified at trial.
And none of the documents Stone provided to the Government with his confidential disclosure statement was
introduced in evidence at trial. Nor did respondents allege
at trial that the defect in the piping system predicted by
Stone caused insolid pondcrete. To the contrary, during
closing arguments both Stones counsel and the Governments counsel repeatedly explained to the jury that the
pondcrete failed because Rockwells new foreman used an
insufficient cement-to-sludge ratio in an effort to increase
pondcrete production.
The verdict form divided the False Claims Act count into
several different claims corresponding to different awardfee periods. The jury found in favor of respondents for the
three periods covering the pondcrete allegations (April 1,
1987, to September 30, 1988), and found for Rockwell as to
the remaining periods. The jury awarded damages of
$1,390,775.80, which the District Court trebled pursuant
to 31 U. S. C. 3729(a).
Rockwell filed a postverdict motion to dismiss Stones
claims under 3730(e)(4), arguing that the claims were
based on publicly disclosed allegations and that Stone was

Page 45 of 63

not an original source. In response, Stone acknowledged

that his successful claims were based on publicly disclosed
allegations, but asserted original-source status.
The
District Court agreed with Stone. The United States
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed in relevant
part, but remanded the case for the District Court to
determine whether Stone had disclosed his information to
the Government before filing his qui tam action, as
3730(e)(4)(B) required. On remand, the District Court
found that Stone had produced the 1982 engineering order
to the Government, but that the order was insufficient to
communicate Stones allegations. The District Court also
found that Stone had not carried his burden of proving
that he orally informed the FBI about his allegations
before filing suit. On appeal, the Tenth Circuit disagreed
with the District Courts conclusion and held (over the
dissent of Judge Briscoe) that the 1982 engineering order
sufficed to carry Stones burden of persuasion. 92 Fed.
Appx. 708. We granted certiorari, 548 U. S. ____ (2006), to
decide whether Stone was an original source.
II
Section 3730(e)(4)(A) provides that
[n]o court shall have jurisdiction over an action under
this section based upon the public disclosure of allegations or transactions in a criminal, civil, or administrative hearing, in a congressional, administrative, or
Government Accounting Office report, hearing, audit,
or investigation, or from the news media, unless the
action is brought by the Attorney General or the person bringing the action is an original source of the information. (Footnote omitted.)
As discussed above, 3730(e)(4)(B) defines original
source as an individual who [1] has direct and independent knowledge of the information on which the allegations

Page 46 of 63
Cite as: 549 U. S. ____ (2007)
are based and [2] has voluntarily provided the information

to the Government before filing an action under this section which is based on the information. As this case
comes to the Court, it is conceded that the claims on which
Stone prevailed were based upon publicly disclosed allegations within the meaning of 3730(e)(4)(A). The question
is whether Stone qualified under the original-source exception to the public-disclosure bar.
We begin with the possibility that little analysis is
required in this case, for Stone asserts that Rockwell
conceded his original-source status. Rockwell responds
that it conceded no such thing and that, even had it done
so, the concession would have been irrelevant because
3730(e)(4) is jurisdictional. We agree with the latter
proposition. It is true enough that the word jurisdiction
does not in every context connote subject-matter jurisdiction. Noting that jurisdiction is a word of many, too
many, meanings, we concluded in Steel Co. v. Citizens for
Better Environment, 523 U. S. 83 (1998), that establishing
the elements of an offense was not made a jurisdictional
matter merely because the statute creating the cause of
action was phrased as providing for jurisdiction over
such suits. Id., at 90 (quoting United States v. Vanness, 85
F. 3d 661, 663, n. 2 (CADC 1996)). Here, however, the
issue is not whether casting the creation of a cause of
action in jurisdictional terms somehow limits the general
grant of jurisdiction under which that cause of action
would normally be brought, but rather whether a clear
and explicit withdrawal of jurisdiction withdraws jurisdiction. It undoubtedly does so. Just last Term we stated
that, [i]f the Legislature clearly states that a threshold
limitation on a statutes scope shall count as jurisdictional,
the courts and litigants will be duly instructed and will
not be left to wrestle with the issue. Arbaugh v. Y & H
Corp., 546 U. S. 500, 515516 (2006) (footnote omitted).
Here the jurisdictional nature of the original-source re-

Page 47 of 63
10

quirement is clear ex visceribus verborum. Indeed, we

have already stated that 3730(e)(4) speaks to the power
of a particular court as well as the substantive rights of
the parties. Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States ex rel.
Schumer, 520 U. S. 939, 951 (1997).
Stones contrary position rests entirely on dicta from a
single Court of Appeals decision, see United States ex rel.
Fallon v. Accudyne Corp., 97 F. 3d 937, 940941 (CA7
1996). Accudyne thought it significant that jurisdiction
over False Claims Act cases is conferred by 28 U. S. C.
1331 and 1345 (the federal-question and United-Statesas-plaintiff provisions of the Judicial Code) and 31
U. S. C. 3732(a) (the provision of the False Claims Act
establishing federal-court venue and conferring federalcourt jurisdiction over related state-law claims), rather
than 3730, which is the section referenced in
3730(e)(4). To eliminate jurisdiction, the court believed,
it is those jurisdiction-conferring sections that would have
to be referenced. We know of nothing in logic or authority
to support this. The jurisdiction-removing provision here
does not say no court shall have jurisdiction under this
section, but rather no court shall have jurisdiction over
an action under this section. That is surely the most
natural way to achieve the desired result of eliminating
jurisdiction over a category of False Claims Act actions
rather than listing all the conceivable provisions of the
United States Code whose conferral of jurisdiction is being
eliminated. (In addition to the provisions cited by the
Accudyne court, one might also have to mention the diversity-jurisdiction provision, 28 U. S. C. 1332, and the
supplemental-jurisdiction provision, 1367.)
Accudyne
next observed that the public-disclosure bar limits only
who may speak for the United States on a subject and who
if anyone gets a financial reward, not the categories of
disputes that may be resolved (a real jurisdictional
limit). 97 F. 3d, at 941. But this is a classic begging of

Page 48 of 63
Cite as: 549 U. S. ____ (2007)
11
the question, which is precisely whether there has been

removed from the courts jurisdiction that category of
disputes consisting of False Claims Act qui tam suits
based on publicly disclosed allegations as to which the
relator is not an original source of the information. Nothing prevents Congress from defining the category of
excluded suits in any manner it wishes. See, e.g., 28
U. S. C. 1500 (no jurisdiction over any claim for or in
respect to which the plaintiff . . . has pending in any other
court any suit . . . against the United States). Lastly,
Accudyne asserted that the Supreme Court had held that
a similar reference to jurisdiction in the Norris-LaGuardia
Act, 29 U. S. C. 101, 104, limits remedies rather than
subject-matter jurisdiction. 97 F. 3d, at 941 (citing Burlington Northern R. Co. v. Maintenance of Way Employes,
481 U. S. 429, 444446 (1987)). But the language of the
Norris-LaGuardia Act is in fact not similar. It provides
that [n]o court of the United States shall have jurisdiction
to issue any restraining order or temporary or permanent
injunction in any case involving or growing out of any
labor dispute . . . . 29 U. S. C. 104 (emphasis added). It
is facially a limitation upon the relief that can be accorded,
not a removal of jurisdiction over any case involving or
growing out of a labor dispute. Here, by contrast, the text
says [n]o court shall have jurisdiction over an action
under this section.
Whether the point was conceded or not, therefore, we
may, and indeed must, decide whether Stone met the
jurisdictional requirement of being an original source.
III
We turn to the first requirement of original-source
status, that the relator have direct and independent
knowledge of the information on which the allegations are
based. 31 U. S. C. 3730(e)(4)(B). Because we have not
previously addressed this provision, several preliminary

Page 49 of 63
12

questions require our attention.

A
First, does the phrase information on which the allegations are based refer to the information on which the
relators allegations are based or the information on which
the publicly disclosed allegations that triggered the publicdisclosure bar are based? The parties agree it is the former. See Brief for Petitioners 26, n. 13; Brief for United
States 24, and n. 8; Brief for Respondent Stone 15, 21.
But in view of our conclusion that 3730(e)(4) is jurisdictional, we must satisfy ourselves that the parties position
is correct.
Though the question is hardly free from doubt,5 we
agree that the information to which subparagraph (B)
speaks is the information upon which the relators allegations are based. To begin with, subparagraph (B) standing
on its own suggests that disposition. The relator must
have direct and independent knowledge of the information on which the allegations are based, and he must
provid[e] the information to the Government before filing
an action under this section which is based on the information. Surely the information one would expect a relator to provide to the Government before filing an action
. . . based on the information is the information underlying the relators claims.
Subparagraph (A) complicates matters. As described
earlier, it bars actions based on the public disclosure of
allegations or transactions and provides an exception for
5 The
Courts of Appeals have divided over the question. See United

States ex rel. Laird v. Lockheed Martin Eng. & Science Servs. Co., 336
F. 3d 346, 353355 (CA5 2003) (describing the Courts of Appeals
divergent approaches). Only by demoting the actual text of 3730(e)(4)
to a footnote and then paraphrasing the statute in a way that assumes
his conclusion can JUSTICE STEVENS assert (without further analysis)
that the statutes meaning is plain. See post, at 1, 2 (dissenting
opinion).

Page 50 of 63
Cite as: 549 U. S. ____ (2007)
13
cases brought by an original source of the information.

If the allegations referred to in subparagraph (B)s phrase
requiring direct and independent knowledge of the information on which the allegations are based, are the same
allegations referred to in subparagraph (A), then original-source status would depend on knowledge of information underlying the publicly disclosed allegations. The
principal textual difficulty with that interpretation is that
subparagraph (A) does not speak simply of allegations,
but of allegations or transactions. Had Congress wanted
to link original-source status to information underlying
the public disclosure, it would surely have used the identical phrase, allegations or transactions; there is no conceivable reason to require direct and independent knowledge of publicly disclosed allegations but not of publicly
disclosed transactions.
The sense of the matter offers strong additional support
for this interpretation. Section 3730(e)(4)(A) bars actions
based on publicly disclosed allegations whether or not the
information on which those allegations are based has been
made public. It is difficult to understand why Congress
would care whether a relator knows about the information
underlying a publicly disclosed allegation (e.g., what a
confidential source told a newspaper reporter about insolid
pondcrete) when the relator has direct and independent
knowledge of different information supporting the same
allegation (e.g., that a defective process would inevitably
lead to insolid pondcrete). Not only would that make little
sense, it would raise nettlesome procedural problems,
placing courts in the position of comparing the relators
information with the often unknowable information on
which the public disclosure was based. Where that latter
information has not been disclosed (by reason, for example, of a reporters desire to protect his source), the relator
would presumably be out of court. To bar a relator with
direct and independent knowledge of information underly-

Page 51 of 63
14

ing his allegations just because no one can know what

information underlies the similar allegations of some other
person simply makes no sense.
The contrary conclusion of some lower courts rests on
the following logic: The term information in subparagraph (B) must be read in tandem with the term information in subparagraph (A), and the term information in
subparagraph (A) refers to the information on which the
publicly disclosed allegations are based. See, e.g., United
States ex rel. Laird v. Lockheed Martin Eng. & Science
Servs. Co., 336 F. 3d 346, 354 (CA5 2003). The major
premise of this reasoning seems true enough: information in (A) and (B) means the same thing. The minor
premise, howeverthat information in (A) refers to the
information underlying the publicly disclosed allegations
or transactionsis highly questionable. The complete
phrase at issue is unless . . . the person bringing the
action is an original source of the information. It seems
to us more likely (in light of the analysis set forth above)
that the information in question is the information underlying the action referred to a few words earlier, to-wit, the
action based upon the public disclosure of allegations or
transactions referred to at the beginning of the provision.
On this interpretation, information in subparagraph (A)
and information on which the allegations are based in
subparagraph (B) are one and the same, viz., information
underlying the allegations of the relators action.
B
Having determined that the phrase information on
which the allegations are based refers to the relators
allegations and not the publicly disclosed allegations, we
confront more textual ambiguity: Which of the relators
allegations are the relevant ones? Stones allegations
changed during the course of the litigation, yet he asks
that we look only to his original complaint. Rockwell

Page 52 of 63
Cite as: 549 U. S. ____ (2007)
15
argues that Stone must satisfy the original-source exception through all stages of the litigation.
In our view, the term allegations is not limited to the
allegations of the original complaint. It includes (at a
minimum) the allegations in the original complaint as
amended. The statute speaks not of the allegations in the
original complaint (or even the allegations in the complaint), but of the relators allegations simpliciter.
Absent some limitation of 3730(e)(4)s requirement to the
relators initial complaint, we will not infer one. Such a
limitation would leave the relator free to plead a trivial
theory of fraud for which he had some direct and independent knowledge and later amend the complaint to
include theories copied from the public domain or from
materials in the Governments possession. Even the
Government concedes that new allegations regarding a
fundamentally different fraudulent scheme require reevaluation of the courts jurisdiction. See Brief for United
States 40; Tr. of Oral Arg. 40.
The rule that subject-matter jurisdiction depends on
the state of things at the time of the action brought,
Mollan v. Torrance, 9 Wheat. 537, 539 (1824), does not
suggest a different interpretation. The state of things and
the originally alleged state of things are not synonymous;
demonstration that the original allegations were false will
defeat jurisdiction. Anderson v. Watt, 138 U. S. 694, 701
(1891); Morris v. Gilmer, 129 U. S. 315, 326 (1889). So
also will the withdrawal of those allegations, unless they
are replaced by others that establish jurisdiction. Thus,
when a plaintiff files a complaint in federal court and then
voluntarily amends the complaint, courts look to the
amended complaint to determine jurisdiction. See Wellness Community-Nat. v. Wellness House, 70 F. 3d 46, 49
(CA7 1995); Boelens v. Redman Homes, Inc., 759 F. 2d 504,

Page 53 of 63
16

508 (CA5 1984).6

Here, we have not only an amended complaint, but a
final pretrial order that superseded all prior pleadings and
controll[ed] the subsequent course of the action, Fed.
Rule Civ. Proc. 16(e). See Curtis v. Loether, 415 U. S. 189,
190, n. 1 (1974) (where a claim was not included in the
complaint, but was included in the pretrial order, it is
irrelevant that the pleadings were never formally
amended (citing Fed. Rules Civ. Proc. 15(b), 16)); Wilson
v. Muckala, 303 F. 3d 1207, 1215 (CA10 2002) ([C]laims,
issues, defenses, or theories of damages not included in
the pretrial order are waived even if they appeared in the
complaint and, conversely, the inclusion of a claim in the
pretrial order is deemed to amend any previous pleadings
which did not include that claim); Syrie v. Knoll Intl, 748
F. 2d 304, 308 (CA5 1984) ([I]ncorporation of a [new]
claim into the pre-trial order . . . amends the previous
pleadings to state [the new] claim). In these circumstances, we look to the allegations as amendedhere, the
statement of claims in the final pretrial orderto determine original-source status.
The Government objects that this approach risks driving
a wedge between the Government and relators. It worries
that future relators might decline to acquiesc[e] in the
Governments tactical decision to narrow the claims in a
case if that would eliminate jurisdiction with respect to
the relator. Brief for United States 44. Even if this policy
concern were valid, it would not induce us to determine
6 It
is true that, when a defendant removes a case to federal court

based on the presence of a federal claim, an amendment eliminating
the original basis for federal jurisdiction generally does not defeat
jurisdiction. See Carnegie-Mellon Univ. v. Cohill, 484 U. S. 343, 346,
357 (1988); St. Paul Mercury Indemnity Co. v. Red Cab Co., 303 U. S.
283, 293 (1938). But removal cases raise forum-manipulation concerns
that simply do not exist when it is the plaintiff who chooses a federal
forum and then pleads away jurisdiction through amendment.

Page 54 of 63
Cite as: 549 U. S. ____ (2007)
17
jurisdiction on the basis of whether the relator is an original source of information underlying allegations that he
no longer makes.
IV
Judged according to the principles set forth above,
Stones knowledge falls short. The only false claims ultimately found by the jury (and hence the only ones to
which our jurisdictional inquiry is pertinent to the outcome) involved false statements with respect to environmental, safety, and health compliance over a one-and-ahalf-year period between April 1, 1987, and September 30,
1988. As described by Stone and the Government in the
final pretrial order, the only pertinent problem with respect to this period of time for which Stone claimed to
have direct and independent knowledge was insolid pondcrete. Because Stone was no longer employed by Rockwell
at the time, he did not know that the pondcrete was insolid; he did not know that pondcrete storage was even
subject to RCRA; he did not know that Rockwell would fail
to remedy the defect; he did not know that the insolid
pondcrete leaked while being stored onsite; and, of course,
he did not know that Rockwell made false statements to
the Government regarding pondcrete storage.
Stones prediction that the pondcrete would be insolid
because of a flaw in the piping system does not qualify as
direct and independent knowledge of the pondcrete
defect. Of course a qui tam relators misunderstanding of
why a concealed defect occurred would normally be immaterial as long as he knew the defect actually existed. But
here Stone did not know that the pondcrete failed; he
predicted it. Even if a prediction can qualify as direct and
independent knowledge in some cases (a point we need not
address), it assuredly does not do so when its premise of
cause and effect is wrong. Stones prediction was a failed
prediction, disproved by Stones own allegations. As Stone

Page 55 of 63
18

acknowledged, Rockwell was able to produce concrete

hard pondcrete using the machinery Stone said was
defective. According to respondents allegations in the
final pretrial order, the insolidity problem was caused by a
new foremans reduction of the cement-to-sludge ratio in
the winter of 1986, long after Stone had left Rocky Flats.
Stone counters that his original-source status with
respect to his spray-irrigation claim (which related to a
time period different from that for his pondcrete claim,
App. 492) provided jurisdiction with respect to all of his
claims. We disagree. Section 3730(e)(4) does not permit
jurisdiction in gross just because a relator is an original
source with respect to some claim. We, along with every
court to have addressed the question, conclude that
3730(e)(4) does not permit such claim smuggling. See
United States ex rel. Merena v. SmithKline Beecham Corp.,
205 F. 3d 97, 102 (CA3 2000); Hays v. Hoffman, 325 F. 3d
982, 990 (CA8 2003); Wang ex rel. United States v. FMC
Corp., 975 F. 2d 1412, 14151416, 1420 (CA9 1992). As
then-Judge Alito explained, [t]he plaintiffs decision to
join all of his or her claims in a single lawsuit should not
rescue claims that would have been doomed by section
(e)(4) if they had been asserted in a separate action. And
likewise, this joinder should not result in the dismissal of
claims that would have otherwise survived. SmithKline
Beecham, supra, at 102.
Because Stone did not have direct and independent
knowledge of the information upon which his allegations
were based, we need not decide whether Stone met the
second requirement of original-source status, that he have
voluntarily provided the information to the Government
before filing his action.
V
Respondents contend that even if Stone failed the original-source test as to his pondcrete allegations, the Gov-

Page 56 of 63
Cite as: 549 U. S. ____ (2007)
19
ernments intervention in his case provided an independent basis of jurisdiction. Section 3730(e)(4)(A) permits
jurisdiction over an action based on publicly disclosed
allegations or transactions if the action is brought by the
Attorney General. Respondents say that any inquiry into
Stones original-source status with respect to amendments
to the complaint was unnecessary because the Government had intervened, making this an action brought by
the Attorney General.7 Even assuming that Stone was an
original source of allegations in his initial complaint, we
reject respondents intervention argument.
The False Claims Act contemplates two types of actions.
First, under 3730(a), [i]f the Attorney General finds that
a person has violated or is violating section 3729, the
Attorney General may bring a civil action under this
section against the person. Second, under 3730(b), [a]
person may bring an action for a violation of section 3729
for the person and for the United States Government.
When a private person brings an action under 3730(b),
the Government may elect to proceed with the action,
3730(b)(4)(A), or it may declin[e] to take over the action,
in which case the person bringing the action shall have the
right to conduct the action, 3730(b)(4)(B). The statute
thus draws a sharp distinction between actions brought by
the Attorney General under 3730(a) and actions brought
by a private person under 3730(b). An action brought by
a private person does not become one brought by the
Government just because the Government intervenes and
elects to proceed with the action. Section 3730 elsewhere
refers to the Governments proceed[ing] with an action
brought by a person under subsection (b)which makes
crystal clear the distinction between actions brought by
7 The Government includes a significant caveat: In its view, intervention does not cure any pre-existing defects in Stones initial complaint;
it only cures defects resulting from amendments to the pleadings.

Page 57 of 63
20

the Government and actions brought by a relator where

the Government intervenes but does not oust the relator.
Does this conclusion cast into doubt the courts jurisdiction with respect to the Government as well? After all,
3730(e)(4)(A) bars jurisdiction over any action brought
under 3730, as this one was, unless the action is brought
(1) by the Attorney General or (2) by an original source;
and we have concluded that this is brought by neither.
Not even petitioners have suggested the bizarre result
that the Governments judgment must be set aside. It is
readily enough avoided, as common sense suggests it must
be, by holding that an action originally brought by a private person, which the Attorney General has joined, becomes an action brought by the Attorney General once the
private person has been determined to lack the jurisdictional prerequisites for suit. The outcome would be similar to that frequently produced in diversity-jurisdiction
cases, where the courts of appeals . . . have the authority
to cure a jurisdictional defect by dismissing a dispensable
nondiverse party. Grupo Dataflux v. Atlas Global Group,
L. P., 541 U. S. 567, 573 (2004) (citing Newman-Green,
Inc. v. Alfonzo-Larrain, 490 U. S. 826, 837 (1989)); see
United States Steel Corp. v. EPA, 614 F. 2d 843, 845 (CA3
1979) ([T]here are instances when an intervenors claim
does not rise and fall with the claim of the original party);
7C C. Wright, A. Miller, & M. Kane, Federal Practice and
Procedure 1920, p. 491 (2d ed. 1986) ([A]n intervenor
can proceed to decision after a dismissal of the original
action . . . if there are independent grounds for jurisdiction
of the intervenors claim). What is cured here, by the
jurisdictional ruling regarding Stones claim, is the characterization of the action as one brought by an original
source. The elimination of Stone leaves in place an action
pursued only by the Attorney General, that can reasonably
be regarded as being brought by him for purposes of
3730(e)(4)(A).

Page 58 of 63
Cite as: 549 U. S. ____ (2007)
21
*
*
*
We hold that the District Court lacked jurisdiction to
enter judgment in favor of Stone. We reverse the Tenth
Circuits judgment to the contrary.
It is so ordered.
JUSTICE BREYER took no part in the consideration or
decision of this case.

Page 59 of 63
Cite as: 549 U. S. ____ (2007)
STEVENS, J., dissenting

_________________
No. 051272
_________________
ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORP., ET AL.,

PETITIONERS v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
[March 27, 2007]
JUSTICE STEVENS, with whom JUSTICE GINSBURG joins,

dissenting.
Any private citizen may bring an action to enforce the
False Claims Act, 31 U. S. C. 37293733, unless the
information on which his allegations are based is already
in the public domain. Even if the information is publicly
available, however, the citizen may still sue if he was an
original source of that information. 3730(e)(4)(A) (No
court shall have jurisdiction over an action under this
section based upon the public disclosure of allegations or
transactions . . . unless the action is brought by the Attorney General or the person bringing the action is an original source of the information). Because I believe the
Court has misinterpreted these provisions to require that
an original source in a qui tam action have knowledge of
the actual facts underlying the allegations on which he
may ultimately prevail, I respectfully dissent.
In my view, a plain reading of the statutes provisions
specifically, 3730(e)(4)(A) and (B)makes clear that it is
the information underlying the publicly disclosed allegations, not the information underlying the allegations in
the relators complaint (original or amended), of which the
relator must be an original source.1 Moreover, the stat
1 Section
3730(e)(4)(A) states that

Page 60 of 63

utes use of the article an, rather than the, in describing the original source indicates that the relator need not
be the sole source of the information.
By contrast, the majoritys approach suggests that the
relator must have knowledge of actual facts supporting
the theory ultimately proven at trialin other words,
knowledge of the information underlying the prevailing
claims. See ante, at 17 (limiting the relevant jurisdictional
inquiry to those false claims ultimately found by the
jury). I disagree. Such a view is not supported by the
statute, which requires only that the relator have direct
and independent knowledge of the information on which
the publicly disclosed allegations are based and that the
relator provide such information to the Government in a
timely manner. As I read the statute, the jurisdictional
inquiry focuses on the facts in the public domain at the
time the action is commenced. If the process of discovery
leads to amended theories of recovery, amendments to the
original complaint would not affect jurisdiction that was
proper at the time of the original filing.2
No court shall have jurisdiction over an action under this section based
upon the public disclosure of allegations or transactions in a criminal,
civil, or administrative hearing, in a congressional, administrative, or
Government Accounting Office report, hearing, audit, or investigation,
or from the news media, unless the action is brought by the Attorney
General or the person bringing the action is an original source of the
information. (Footnote omitted.)
Section 3730(e)(4)(B) then states that
For purposes of this paragraph, original source means an individual
who has direct and independent knowledge of the information on which
the allegations are based and has voluntarily provided the information
to the Government before filing an action under this section which is
based on the information.
2 The majoritys approach requires courts to reevaluate jurisdiction
over a qui tam action brought by an original source every time the
complaint is amended. Such an approach, the Government has argued,
will interfere with its ability to tailor the claims advanced as it sees
appropriate. By contrast, under the approach I would adopt, the

Page 61 of 63
Cite as: 549 U. S. ____ (2007)
In this case, as the Court points out, the fact that Rockwell was storing thousands of insolid pondcrete blocks at
the Rocky Flats facility had been publicly disclosed by the
news media before Stone filed this lawsuit. Ante, at 3, 4.
In my view, the record establishes that Stone was an
original source of the allegations publicly disclosed by the
media in June 1989, even though he thought that the
deterioration of the pondcrete blocks would be caused by
poor engineering rather than a poor formula for the mixture. The search warrant that was executed on June 6,
1989, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) affidavit that was released to the news media on June 9,
1989, were both based, in part, on interviews with Stone
and on information Stone had provided to the Government, including the 1982 Engineering Order.
With respect to earlier media coverage of the pondcrete
leakage discovery in May 1988, however, Stones status as
an original source is less obvious. Stone first went to the
FBI with allegations of Rockwells environmental violations in March 1986. App. 180. He subsequently met with
several FBI agents over the course of several years. Id., at
180182. During those meetings he provided the FBI with
thousands of pages of documents, including the Engineering Order, in which he predicted that the pondcrete system design would not work. On the basis of that record, it
seems likely that Stone (1) had direct and independent
knowledge of the information on which the [publicly disclosed] allegations [we]re based and (2) voluntarily provided such information to the Government before filing
suit. It is, however, his burden to establish that he did so.
Because there has been no finding as to whether Stone
jurisdictional inquiry relates only to whether the relator was an original source of the information underlying the public disclosures, which
can easily be determined when an action is filed and need not be
revisited during later stages of the litigation.

Page 62 of 63

was an original source as to those public disclosures, I

would vacate and remand for a determination whether
Stone was in fact an original source of the allegations
publicly disclosed by the media in 1988 and 1989.

Page 63 of 63
Covert Harassment Conference

1-2 October 2015, Berlin, Germany
2
3
Mind Control:
4
5
DR. NICK BEGICH

A Brave New World together with HAARP The Update
DR. BEGICH:
Hello, and thank you for being
here and thank you to Peter and the rest of the team for
putting this together.
8
9
Everyone hears me okay, yes?

Okay.
In the back?
Good.
10
All right.
I want to give a little bit of
11
background in terms of my interest in these areas.
12
those that don't know my family story, it really goes
13
back quite a ways.
14
For
My father was in the United States Congress in
15
the early 1970s during the Nixon Administration.
16
lost in a plane with Hale Boggs.
17
remember this if you've got a little bit of gray hair.
18
Hale Boggs was our House majority leader at the time,
19
one of the most powerful people in the United States
20
Congress.
21
strong dislike for J. Edgar Hoover, because he basically
22
read everybody's mail, tapped everybody's phones,
23
including the United States Congress, and then,
24
essentially, blackmailed political leaders to follow
25
whatever script he laid out.
Dr. Nick Begich Lecture Nov 2015
Some of you may
He was also a Warren Commissioner.
Page 64 of 132
He was
He had a
Boggs was a pretty outspoken individual.
At
the time -- it was just before the second election of
Richard Nixon -- Boggs came to Alaska to work on my
father's campaign, which would have been his second term
in the United States Congress.
Boggs, before they flew out on October 16th,
three weeks before the second election of Richard Nixon,
began to talk about this scandal brewing in Washington,
DC.
In fact, that very scandal, had it unfolded a
10
little bit differently -- for those that remember, the
11
planes disappeared.
12
Three weeks later, Nixon's elected for his
13
second term.
14
the Watergate scandal broke.
15
office.
16
moved up again.
17
Rockefeller then slid into the Vice President's slot.
18
And then one of the old Manson women from the Charles
19
Manson days tried to assassinate Ford, which would have
20
put Rockefeller in the White House.
21
It wasn't too much long after that that
Ford moved up.
Agnew was thrown out of
Then Nixon resigned.
Ford
For those that don't remember,
What would have otherwise happened, most
22
likely, the election would have taken place.
23
would have won.
24
out at the same time.
25
controlled the Congress.
Nixon
Agnew and Nixon would have been thrown

The Democrats would have
The Speaker of the House would
Page 65 of 132
have elevated to the Presidency.
have been in control.
happened and history tells us a lot about what really
happened there.
The Democrats would
But the opposite, of course,
Twenty years later there was a report, an
investigative report by a publication called "Roll Call"
in Washington, DC.
these various Congressional deaths.
crashes are kind of the hazard of political leadership,
10
That report was looking into all of

You know, plane
it seems like.
11
But in researching that, what they found in the
12
FBI files were a couple of telexes -- this goes before
13
FAX machines -- and telexes coming from California into
14
Washington, DC reported that two people had been found
15
at a crash site.
16
the FBI to determine whether they were credible.
17
follow-up telex came through saying, yes, they were.
18
That plane was never recovered.
19
officially; yet 20 years later, we find out, in fact,
20
there were.
21
Those sources were later looked at by

A
There were no survivors
So I know about conspiracies.
Conspiracies are
22
conversations that happen in a room like this when
23
there's a bunch of people standing on the outside who
24
might not agree with us.
25
the political life, even at the highest levels, things
But the reality is, even in
Page 66 of 132
happen.
Things happen that aren't easily explained.
Maybe a few decades go by before the truth is finally
revealed.
So I have a strong motivation foundationally in
terms of how I approach controversial issues.
do it with fear.
years.
is the absolute adversary for getting anything
accomplished on this planet.
I've been doing this work for over 20
Fear isn't part of the equation.
10
I don't
In fact, that
My interest in these areas started with HAARP.
11
And how many in this room do not know anything about
12
HAARP?
13
Okay.
Well, that's a lot better than it used
14
to be.
All right.
15
Twenty years of this work and the work of others have
16
kind of brought this into the public.
17
It used to be the other way around.
So the first image -- I'm going to use HAARP as
18
sort of the backdrop as I move into the mind control,
19
mind effects-related technology.
20
in my part of the world.
21
know if -- maybe I've come the farthest for this
22
presentation.
23
appreciate the opportunity to inform people about this
24
subject.
25
This is just an image
I come from Alaska.
I don't
But I appreciate being here and I
So HAARP is a large array, a field of antennas
Page 67 of 132
in Alaska, currently 180 antennas.
They're
approximately 20 meters tall.
which you can see, which is the very top of these
antennas.
concentrate radiofrequency energy into a relatively
small space.
They have a cross dipole,
And what these are designed to do is focus or
If you think about the energy of a flashlight,
for instance, or a torch, as they say here in Europe, I
shine that against the wall, the beam starts out small,
10
and then it broadens as you get further away from the
11
source.
12
The same is true with radiofrequency energy.
13
You can think about it as an inverted funnel starting
14
here at the transmitter and then spreading out and
15
getting thinner and thinner, less dense, which is why
16
the further you get away from radio broadcast antennas,
17
the weaker and weaker the signal.
18
With HAARP, the opposite occurs.
They have
19
figured out a way through what's called cyclotron
20
resonance, which would be focusing or concentrating the
21
energy.
22
like sort of a cork-screwing kind of motion that got
23
smaller and smaller as you move further and further away
24
from the transmitter.
25
So if you could visualize it, it would look
So it concentrates that energy or focuses that
Page 68 of 132
energy so you can manipulate it in various ways.
the HAARP array, which was originally designed by a
gentleman, Bernard Eastlund, who's now deceased, was
intended to do a number of things as a weapons
application.
half the current size of the transmitter in Alaska.
can see the field of antennas.
90 antennas in the array.
9
10
And so
This is the earlier version when it was

You
In this case there were
And here's another image as they expanded the

array to 180.
11
And another image showing the array.
Now, they also upgraded the technology pretty
12
substantially over the years.
13
efficient.
14
much bigger effects.
15
So it became much more
So with a much smaller system you create
So what does it do?
Essentially, it's sending
16
energy or focusing energy up into an area known as the
17
ionosphere, which in this image in miles -- I apologize
18
for that -- is approximately 37 miles to 620 miles out
19
into space.
20
Now, this is a highly energized area.
If you
21
think about radiofrequency signals or shortwave signals,
22
they would come from the earth, they'd bounce off of us,
23
and then bounce back down to the earth to transmit over
24
large distances.
25
The ionosphere also is an area that can be
Page 69 of 132
disturbed by solar radiation, radiation from the sun.
When it becomes destabilized, it interferes with
terrestrial communications of every kind.
So part of the idea in this technology was to
learn how to stabilize the ionosphere during these
periods or deliberately disrupt the ionosphere to
interfere with communications on a global basis.
8
9
Now, what caught my interest when I first

looked at this issue of HAARP was a very short article
10
in a publication, an Australian publication, that talked
11
about this big system in Alaska.
12
Now, I come from a family that's pretty
13
politically engaged.
14
Congress, my younger brother just finished a term in the
15
United States Senate.
16
politics a very long time.
17
Besides my dad being in the
My family's been involved in
Alaska is a very big region, but we're a really
18
small population; 700,000 people in our entire region.
19
And when you think about big projects, you know, you
20
think you know something about them.
21
Well, I'm reading about this project in my
22
state in a journal in Australia and I'm going, you know,
23
why doesn't anybody know about this?
24
25
And so I decided I would go in and look into

this issue independently.
And I did.
Page 70 of 132
I picked up maybe
30 articles and papers, design specifications, some
things, and with friends encouraging me to publish, I
published the first article that I had written on HAARP
back in 1994.
So it's been a very long time ago.
What also caught my interest was the idea that
they were primarily utilizing, in some applications,
extremely low frequency signals or ELFs.
signals that can be biologically active, can affect us
as human beings and in very specific ways.
10
These are
And in particular, certain applications of the
11
technology -- and this gives you sort of a graphic
12
illustration of the focus.
13
were given to me by the inventor, Bernard Eastlund,
14
prior to his passing.
15
publications and in some of our work.
16
kind of a graphic showing the radiofrequency from the
17
array, moving up into the ionosphere and focusing that
18
energy.
19
These view graphs, actually,
And we utilized them in our

So this gives you
His initial concept was to create a global
20
shield, to be able to utilize the natural magnetic field
21
lines that surround the earth, be able to punch energy
22
into this and then create this kind of global shielding
23
effect.
24
piercing that energy would be disrupted, like
25
satellites, intercontinental ballistic missiles,
And the idea was that any electronic device
Page 71 of 132
virtually any electronic device that ran into this field
of energy that was being amplified would be destroyed.
Now, one of the other interesting parts of
this -- and this kind of shows that, again, utilizing
one of Eastlund's graphics.
line and then you see this cork-screwing energy going
around it.
southern polar regions into the northern polar regions.
And, in this case, they actually couple -- actually
10
utilize the energy on the ground to couple with the
11
natural energy, and then coming from the north to the
12
south, create this cork-screwing effect, which
13
accelerates the electrons and then creates this global
14
shield.
15
So you can see like a field
That energy naturally is occurring from the
Now, that was his initial concept.
And as a
16
concept, it caught the attention of a number of people
17
and eventually got funding from the Congress, initially
18
at 30 million, and over the last few decades now over
19
almost 300 million, which in dollars is not a lot of
20
money, but when you consider, this is sort of the
21
pinnacle of billions of dollars spent in ionosphere
22
research over many decades.
23
What caught my attention in terms of the
24
technology of Eastlund -- I'm going to skip some of
25
these that are not so relevant -- was the idea that you
Page 72 of 132
10
could manipulate the ionosphere -- and I'll use this as
a better example.
you could punch or pulse energy into the ionosphere --
so think about this energy going up and, like, a hammer
ringing a bell.
ionosphere itself vibrates and then it begins to send a
signal in the ELF range.
signal going up, punching the ionosphere, the ionosphere
which is energized then acts as a broadcast antenna in
So one of the thoughts was that if
Every time it hits that ionosphere, the
So you have a high frequency
10
the sky bringing back an ELF signal to the earth, and in
11
this case covering an entire hemisphere.
12
Now, ELF signals, extremely low frequency
13
signals, are very long wavelengths.
14
earth and sea.
15
submarines, as an example, the depth, because short
16
wavelengths won't penetrate the earth and sea.
17
also used for what's called earth-penetrating
18
tomography, which in simple language or by analogy would
19
be like x-raying the earth or looking into the earth for
20
underground structures.
21
They penetrate the
They're utilized for communication with
They're
But one of the side effects of ELF is the
22
entrainment effect on the human mind.
23
signals will lock onto in what's called a frequency
24
following response.
25
techniques to create a frequency following response.
Because ELF
And you can use a lot of different
Page 73 of 132
11
You can use flickering light, you can use binaural beat,
which I'll explain in a few minutes.
electromagnetic fields such as this, or even the power
grid itself can be modulated in such a way to create a
signal that the human body will join with, will couple
with, and begin to follow.
of energy to accomplish this.
You can use
It doesn't take a great deal
This is the one that triggered my real interest
in HAARP, because this is the one that everybody kind of
10
ignored and said, oh.
11
well, if ELF has a biological effect, it's a side
12
effect.
13
phrase earlier today.
14
believe that it's an intended consequence.
15
intended to grade populations in very specific ways.
16
In fact, the HAARP planners said,
It's an unintended consequence.
We heard that
But I don't believe that.
It's
Now, this book was mentioned by my friend
17
earlier today, "Between Two Ages", by Zbigniew
18
Brzezinski.
19
written, actually, in 1973, when Brzezinski was at
20
Columbia University.
21
Security Adviser to President Carter.
22
the time that Kissinger and he and others were starting
23
to think about the Trilateral Commission organizing this
24
think tank, so to speak.
25
And why this is an important book, it was
This is before he became National
Now, find this book.
Page 74 of 132
This is around
I really encourage you to
12
find this book and read it, because it is not a
prediction of what will come with technology.
blueprint, in fact.
It's the
You can read this.
When I first read it -- he writes in a pretty
convoluted style.
English to understand.
read it because he predicted the economic changes that
took place, the political changes that took place in the
world over the last 40 years with a great deal of
10
accuracy.
11
prediction.
12
It's a little difficult even in

But I really encourage you to
And some will say it really wasn't the

It was the plan.
If you look within this text between Pages 54
13
and 56, you'll see a section that's dedicated to the
14
kind of technologies we're talking about today, a mind
15
control technology.
16
guy named J. F. Gordon MacDonald.
17
geophysicist at UCL.
18
chapter in a book and the chapter was called, "How to
19
Wreck Your Environment", which this is before Earth Day,
20
okay, so he could get away with that.
21
that book was actually published.
22
caught Zbigniew Brzezinski's attention was, he said, if
23
we could ever figure out how to electronically stroke
24
the ionosphere in just the right way, we could return a
25
signal to the earth that would influence the behavior of
And what Zbigniew referenced was a

And he was a
He wrote a book -- or, actually, a
Page 75 of 132
It was 1969 when
But what he said that
13
people over huge geographic areas.
Now, that's a pretty profound thing.
But we
didn't have a way to stroke the ionosphere in 1969.
we did by the 1990s.
fact, the HAARP system that can accomplish this.
But
And that was, in fact, and is, in
So the idea was -- and it was kind of, in a
gross sort of way, primitive, if you will, but what the
intention was, was that if you could pulse the
ionosphere, return this ELF signal to the earth, you
10
could agitate the population in very specific ways.
11
could make them passive, less aggressive, or the
12
opposite by just amplifying that signal.
13
explain a little bit of that as we go on.
You
And I'll
14
The other person that comes out in the last
15
presentations, Jose Delgado, and this book he wrote,
16
"Physical Control of the Mind:
17
Society".
18
images that you saw in just this short video clip of
19
Delgado's work, there is a good section in this text as
20
well showing that.
21
Toward a Psychocivilized
And this is, again, a 1960s book.
Those
But in those days they used implants.
They had
22
to physically put something in the brain.
23
Delgado originally did -- he was actually educated in
24
electrophysiology at the University of Madrid.
25
graduated in 1950.
And what Jose
He
Electrophysiology, as a degree
Page 76 of 132
14
field, thinking about it in 1950, now 65 years ago, most
people don't even realize that's an area of higher
education today, much less that far back.
One of my mentors, Raul Makayla (phonetic), he
actually graduated University of Madrid in 1958, and his
area of interest was, essentially, the same, biomagnetic
and electric fields, effects on human physiology, and he
spent his career studying that.
Delgado, at Yale University, he initially was
10
mapping the brain of primates and humans by stimulating
11
various portions of the brain to figure out what was
12
responsible for what kind of activity.
13
began to utilize the implants in those dramatic ways in
14
those film clips with the charging bull and he throws
15
the switch and the bull stops, to demonstrate that you
16
could take a creature from passive to highly aggressive
17
to passive to highly aggressive, just like flipping on
18
and off the lights in your living room.
19
And then he
What Delgado discovered by the mid-'80s is that
20
you didn't need any implants.
You just needed to
21
manipulate the energy itself.
And you didn't need a
22
great deal of energy.
23
Now, we've heard -- I forget the amount of
24
energy surrounding us now.
25
believe it was 18 zeros after the one that we heard
Page 77 of 132
Was it a quintillion?
15
earlier.
radiofrequency energy alone, it was 200 million times
more around us every day than nature created in 1994.
Back when I wrote the HAARP book in '94, just
Now, when you think about it, what did Delgado
discover?
of energy in the natural background noise of the earth
was sufficient to manipulate the behavior of human
beings if you could hit the right frequencies, if you
could hit those window frequencies that stimulated that
10
He discovered that one-fiftieth of the amount
kind of activity.
11
Now, if you think about this -- again, by
12
analogy, think about dialing through the radio stations
13
on a radio.
14
noise, the static, you get no clear signal.
15
you have resonance between the transmitter and the
16
receiver, then you get a nice, clear signal.
17
The same is true in our physiology.
18
you're looking at stimulating or affecting a specific
19
element in the body, molecules in the body, cell
20
structures or organ structures or even the human mind,
21
it's about manipulating the underlying energy.
22
In between the stations you get the white

But when
Whether
When you think about medical science in terms
23
of how the fork in the road is and how this kind of
24
applies to why don't we know more about this today,
25
well, there's lots of literature now.
Page 78 of 132
25,000 sources, I
16
think we heard quoted earlier today.
25,000 sources
talking about the energy interactions with the human
body.
That is a lot of information.
But what happened in medical science?
A lot of
people that went into life sciences, they were really
good in the chemistry, a little weak in the math, so
they went to life sciences.
better in the math, they went to physics.
upon a time, these two came together and we got
People who were a little

And then once
10
biophysics, which is really the root of real health
11
science.
12
you've got to get to the energetic interactions that
13
create chemical reactions that then manifest in the
14
body.
15
If you really want to get to the meat of it,
And that's what we kind of miss in so much of
16
our medicine.
17
opposed to an electromagnetic model.
18
to World War II, that fork in the road was being
19
explored pretty aggressively, the energetic models.
20
they were somehow lost in that shuffle and we ended up
21
with the pharmaceutical industry, and the results of
22
that, I think we can all not be quite so proud of.
23
We followed a pharmaceutical model as

In the '30s, prior
But
In terms of where the technology is going and
24
where a lot of the science is going, it will be
25
electromedicine that cures most of what we call
Page 79 of 132
17
incurable.
debilitates human consciousness itself.
It will also be that which enhances or
Now, Jose Delgado, when he figured out that you
didn't need implants, you just need to manipulate the
energy itself, this became kind of the essence of sort
of where everything went from there.
But I want to roll back a little bit, a little
bit back in time, and talk more about the evolution of
mind control as technology starting with the work at
10
Harvard University of a gentleman, Estabrook, who was
11
working in the Harvard hypnotherapy labs in the 1920s.
12
You can look Estabrook up.
13
of Congress and you'll see his list of publications, and
14
I recommend that you do that.
15
Look him up at the Library
What he decided was that you could create what
16
we would call today a Manchurian candidate.
17
take certain individuals, put them in a very, very deep
18
state of hypnosis and then over a period of time train
19
them so they would be like this super spy that you could
20
send into another country and they'd hang out for a year
21
or two, but if they got captured, they wouldn't really
22
remember any of their former self, and then when they
23
came back, in this case, into the United States, that we
24
would then give them the appropriate suggestions and
25
then extract the intelligence from them.
Page 80 of 132
You could
18
And this is what Estabrook was working on.
By
the 1930s, a lot of his work was being classified and he
continued to work in this field up through the 1960s.
His last book -- and I always like to read the last
thing someone writes, you know, because it tells you a
lot about, sort of, the conclusions and there are things
that you might discard bits and pieces as science
enlightens you and your experience enlightens you.
what he talked about in that last book were the
10
experiments he was involved in using LSD and other
11
hallucinogenics in mind control, which he actually
12
talked about in a favorable sense.
13
And
And for those of you that remember, the CIA was
14
heavily involved in this in the 1960s and, in fact, the
15
whole area pre-1960s going back even to the Korean War,
16
which is sort of my next mark on the timeline.
17
The Korean War, we had prisoners, patriotic
18
young Americans come back from war and they're handing
19
out Communist leaflets on street corners, and the term
20
or the phrase brainwashing came into being.
21
where it came from.
22
after the Korean War.
23
That's
It came from that series of events
The idea of being able to manipulate people's
24
behavior and change them so profoundly became of
25
interest to the predecessor of the Central Intelligence
Page 81 of 132
19
Agency and then later the Central Intelligence Agency.
And what they looked at were lots of different ways to
manipulate human behavior.
Now, when I was researching my first book with
Jeane Manning, "Angels Don't Play This HAARP", I was
looking for a good source document that would speak to
this, because you always read about this in secondary,
tertiary sources.
surplus book room, and I'm telling this guy that I know,
And so I'm in a book room, a big
10
I really need this source.
11
conversation, I reach unconsciously behind me into a box
12
and I pull out this book.
13
And as I'm having this
This is a really interesting one.
This is
14
actually a presidential report.
15
was commissioned at the time, 1975, to look at the
16
abuses of the CIA.
17
Committee reports, which were Congressional hearings
18
that took place in the early '70s to investigate the
19
abuses of the Central Intelligence Agency, the kind of
20
abuses that we read about today, because nothing really
21
changed.
22
This is a report that
Now, this came out of the Church
Supposedly, this was to change things.

Now, what's in this report?
The LSD
23
experiments were in this report.
24
Intelligence Agency was domestically infiltrating civil
25
rights groups, antiwar groups, people that, essentially,
Page 82 of 132
The idea the Central
20
opposed the government within the United States, which
was not part of their mandate, in fact, was illegal.
The fact that they were reading people's mail, utilizing
unwitting victims and experiments for mind control.
of this came out in this report in 1975.
CIA continues to do it even to this day.
All
And yet, the
Think about the kinds of activities that have
been reported pretty widely over the last few years,
whether it's digging through garbage to blackmail other
10
diplomats, which is something our Intelligence community
11
does, whether it's to send pallet loads of money into
12
countries like we did in Afghanistan to bribe officials
13
as a way of doing business, or whether it's to
14
assassinate people with drones, kidnap people and
15
torture them.
16
Now, most of us don't know people like this,
17
but this is the government that I unfortunately have
18
guiding my country right now.
19
criminals.
20
couldn't happen here.
21
It's a government of
Now, people want to talk about, oh, this
It has happened here.
It's happened for
22
decades in the United States.
23
President's Commission touches the very tip of that
24
iceberg.
25
This report by the
This is another document.
Page 83 of 132
This is -- this guy,
21
Captain Tyler, he later became a colonel and retired.
He was involved in pretty much the sort of esoteric side
of some of the government research.
chapter out of this book is called, "Low-Intensity
Conflict and Modern Technology".
Maxwell Air Force Base in 1984.
about a large -- a variety of technologies.
8
9
This book -- this
It was prepared by
And it was talking
But in this particular one, if you look at,

certainly, the subject lines, you have stimulation of ,
10
bones* generation, healing of fractures, treatment of
11
disease, healing of wounds.
12
modification in animals.
13
that are listed here were kind of under the mysterious
14
category.
15
happening in 1984.
16
You look at behavior
You know, some of these things
They couldn't really explain what was
But the idea was to stimulate research in these
17
fields.
18
started to flow into these areas.
19
that came out in the 1980s as a result of some of this
20
was the Radiofrequency Dosimetry Handbook.
21
big, thick handbook.
22
of Utah under contract to the United States Air Force to
23
determine the radiofrequency dosages that were required
24
to override every vital organ of the human body, whether
25
it be the heart, the liver, the lungs, the kidneys, just
So a number of things happened.
A lot of money
One of the reports
It was a
It was produced by the University
Page 84 of 132
22
sort of preempt their natural function to be able to do
it remotely.
And the idea was to take that leap of
technology and begin to apply it into weapon systems.
Mind control.
you will remember this one.
Yeah, 2002.
about the ethics of mind control.
it exist or doesn't it exist?
"The Economist".
Cover story.
Some of
This is 2002, I believe.
And what this cover story was about was

Not saying, hey, does
It's just saying it's
10
here right now.
11
we should advance this technology, whether we should
12
limit this technology.
13
credible publication.
14
story.
15
We really need to be debating whether
"The Economist" is certainly a

Not too much happened from this
This is -- unfortunately, it's not showing up.
16
November -- you can get this one on my website.
17
give you my website, because this is a very important
18
document.
19
human experiments.
20
in history, that's like tomorrow and yesterday, right?
21
It's, like, now.
22
mind control experiments and who has the authority to
23
approve them.
24
approve them is under secretaries of the Navy in the
25
case of Navy Intelligence or Naval research.
I'll
The Navy set up a new set of regulations for

It was approved in 2006.
You know,
And in this they specifically call out
And the persons with the authority to
Page 85 of 132
23
Now, it's not just CIA.
Naval Intelligence
does this work.
non-lethal weapons that this falls under.
has the electromagnetic directorate, which is working in
an area called controlled effects, which deal, again,
with mind control and physiological effects on human
beings.
"Technology Horizons".
issue.
10
The Marines have a section on

The Air Force
In fact, they publish a publication called

I believe it's the June 2004
You can look it up.
The cover story is on
controlled effects.
11
Now, what are controlled effects?
The first
12
effect is attacking hardware; you know, like equipment,
13
like machines, to be able to interfere with the flow of
14
electrons through circuits to disrupt those machines to
15
operate.
16
history, but using energy itself to manipulate hardware.
17
Not using bombs and bullets and the things of
The second sort of level of controlled effects
18
talked about in that article is the idea of manipulating
19
the software, the systems that run those systems, so
20
that you can disrupt the software, then you disrupt the
21
hardware, and things collapse.
22
And the third leg of controlled effects is the
23
human operator.
24
article produced by the electromagnetic director of the
25
Air Force is that we can target or create the illusion
And what they say in this particular
Page 86 of 132
24
of all of the senses in the human body; sight, sound,
touch, taste, to give people complete memory sets,
complete experiential sets that you wouldn't be able to
distinguish the synthetic from the real.
Now, think about that for a moment.
What does
that do to court testimony in 20 years if this becomes
the norm?
post-traumatic stress syndrome folks, people coming back
from warfare.
They're now talking about using this for
This just sort of cleans up the garbage
10
of the mind and gets rid of that stress.
11
think that's a great idea.
12
the biggest mistake we could ever make.
13
whatever those servicemen and women were engaged in --
14
what used to happen in warfare -- what happened in World
15
War II when everybody came back, they said, I don't ever
16
want to see my children in these things, I don't want to
17
see my grandchildren in these things.
18
put down, not amplified.
19
Some people
Personally, I think that's

Because
Wars need to be
When you take the human factor out of warfare
20
and it becomes like a videogame, then our willingness to
21
withdraw from direct conflict no longer happens.
22
And think about where our military science has
23
gone.
In fact, I want to mention another very important
24
publication.
25
in the early 1980s.
It was produced by the US Army War College

It's called the "Revolution of
Page 87 of 132
25
Military Affairs and Conflict Short of War".
particular paper was talking about revolution of
military affairs.
And this
What is that exactly?
This is a leap as important as the introduction
of gunpowder in the middle ages in Europe, as important
as atomic weapons in the last century.
they characterize it.
where we move from ordinance, from bullets, bombs,
things that rip tissue and tear things up, to
And that's how
And what this is is the leap
10
electromagnetic weapon systems that keep sort of the
11
hardware intact, but debilitate the human operator to
12
the point of being combat ineffective.
13
enhance the possibilities within our own combatants
14
while degrading the abilities of others.
15
Or conversely,
There's simple ways that you can achieve this.
16
You can introduce to the battlefield certain elemental
17
compounds that in small background amounts would not be
18
considered dangerous.
19
example.
20
body to maintain thyroid function.
21
much iodine, you'll get poisoned.
22
get sick.
23
Let me give you iodine as an
We all need a certain amount of iodine in the
So what can you do?
But if you have too

You'll die.
You'll
You can send a signal in
24
that resonates the very same signal strength and
25
frequency as iodine, you can send that signal in and the
Page 88 of 132
26
body will begin to react as if its gotten this massive
load of iodine and show all the symptoms of iodine
poisoning.
You check the thyroid; check the blood, it's
not there.
Mystery illness.
Something as simple as that for manipulating
large populations, not necessarily with their consent
and not necessarily with clear knowledge, and nothing
shows up in the background that would say why this
poison actually exists that would account for this.
10
simple way.
11
One of the other ways that this technology can
12
be exploited is really quite simple.
13
article produced by "Parameters", which is a military
14
publication.
15
the -- I believe it was the Fall 1998, but you can look
16
up the article name called, "The Mind has no Firewall".
17
It's a very important article.
18
about all the various ways in which you could introduce
19
mind effects or mind control technologies using modern
20
technology today.
21
written in a military journal called "Orienteer"
22
published in what is now Russia.
23
"Parameters".
There was an
You can look it up.
It's
This article talked
And the original article was actually
What's interesting about this is it said you
24
could use any electromagnetic carrier, whether it be
25
radio, TV, the Internet, now cell phones; but,
Page 89 of 132
27
essentially, any of these carriers, you can modulate a
signal on them that will manipulate behavior of segments
of the population.
And the Russians demonstrated this in a couple
of different ways.
There was a program.
It was called
"Undercurrents".
Canadian Public Broadcasting System.
did two really interesting stories that I got to
participate in.
It aired in the CBC, which is the

"Undercurrents"
One was on HAARP and the other was on
10
mind control.
And on the mind control story that they
11
did -- this was a very popular program in Canada at the
12
time and this particular segment was their highest rated
13
that they had ever run.
14
who were involved in the "Star Wars" initiative during
15
the Reagan Administration that couldn't talk about what
16
they did in the White House, but they could talk about
17
what they observed in Russia.
And they had folks that came in
18
And one of the things that they talked about
19
was the idea that you could -- you could create, sort
20
of, this white noise and on this white noise carry a
21
signal.
22
cake.
23
these little cakes?
24
of Europe as well.
And so they put out this message, bring us

And Russians at tea time, you know, they eat
25
I guess you do that in other parts
And so at the appointed time they began to
Page 90 of 132
28
broadcast this.
and on the street were bringing cake into the meeting
room without really knowing why they were doing it.
They just felt like doing it.
what they were programmed to do.
And workers from within that building
Now, this goes back.
Well, that was, in fact,
We're talking about
15-year-old technology.
And when you think about sort
of where did it go from there, in 2006, there were a
couple contracts left by DARPA, which does research for
10
the defense industry in the United States.
And DARPA
11
used to be run by a guy named Tony Tether.
Tony Tether
12
was a good friend of Ben Eastlund's.
13
Now, what they were doing then was, they had
14
left two contracts to the University of California for
15
what's called electronic telepathy.
16
telepathy.
17
a distance by analyzing the emanations coming from this
18
area, being able to analyze that and determine and
19
interpret what it is.
20
contract was to create complex signals to see if you
21
could transfer that array, so to speak, of signals into
22
another person's consciousness and whether they would
23
perceive the same images.
24
25
Okay.
Electronic
The idea of reading another person's mind at
And then the other half of the
Now, there was work done by Elizabeth Rauscher

and her late husband, Bill Van Bise, in this very same
Page 91 of 132
29
area.
In fact, I have a copy of their unpublished paper
where they actually built an electronic circuit where
they could take a person in one room and a person in
another room, attach this person to that circuit and
this person to that circuit, and then, you know, the
psychic card where they show the triangles, the squares
and the circles and the little squiggly lines, a hundred
percent accurate with nine test subjects who had never
experienced consciously in any way any sense of
10
extrasensory perceptions or psychic perceptions.
11
did it with hardware, transferring thoughts from one to
12
the other.
13
They
Now -- which tells me it's probably a little
14
more simple than what DARPA's doing.
15
Eastlund was doing work on HAARP and he was doing other
16
work for DARPA at the time and we had talked about him
17
in our first publication, and then actually after
18
publication became friends, and Ben Eastlund's attitude
19
was, you know, some things just shouldn't be done.
20
one of the things that he had been working on was
21
whether modification technologies, which he was at that
22
time and when we first met, making that technology
23
available to the military.
24
us and others, he decided there's certain technologies
25
that are not safe in the hands of military.
Page 92 of 132
But when Ben
And
And after some dialogue with
30
At one point along the course I began doing
quite a bit of work on this whole mind effects issue.
And I caught the attention of a woman, Dorothy Lay.
Now, Dorothy is one of the heirs to the Lay, as in
Frito-Lay and PepsiCo Corporation.
family.
specifically as it applied to victims.
So a very wealthy
Dorothy was very interested in this technology
And so she approached me at one point and asked
if I would become a member of her board of directors for
10
a non-profit that she was setting up to deal with these
11
kinds of technologies.
12
whether I should tell you the rest of this story, and I
13
think I will, because why not?
14
And I've got to think about
So I have this thing, intuition.
All of us
15
have it.
16
do today.
17
listen, because when I really think about it, it's never
18
been wrong.
19
about it.
20
start acting on it.
21
I used to not pay as much attention to it as I

When my intuition tells me something, I
Neither has yours, if you really think

Or maybe you don't think about it and just
So my intuition said -- and this was a very
22
difficult time for me in 2002.
23
betrayed by a very good friend, economically was
24
bankrupt in the middle of this work, because I started
25
this work in '94.
In 2002, I had been
Economically was being crushed.
Page 93 of 132
And
31
at that point I was deciding whether I was going to stay
in this work at all.
And I'm going through a bunch of my files and I
see this file and it's marked Lay.
person had contacted us needing some information and we
provided it.
way we operated is, I sold books.
bought my books.
And I remember this
And we never charge for that.
I mean, the
And people like you
And they allowed me to do this work.
I didn't write for grants where somebody could
10
manipulate me and control me and tell me what to say.
11
didn't go out and find some publisher that would edit
12
out my work.
13
book.
14
that work by buying that book.
15
two and a half million dollars and I spent that two and
16
a half million dollars over 20 years doing what I'm
17
doing right now.
I risked my own money.
I published my
And then I asked people to help me by supporting
18
A VOICE:
19
(Applause.)
20
DR. BEGICH:
And I tell you, I made
Thank you.
And the whole idea was just to
21
educate.
22
reason I didn't was because I felt that that was putting
23
the cart before the horse.
24
people that the technology is real, that this could
25
really happen to people and from that foundation, and
I didn't deal with victims.
Page 94 of 132
Okay.
And the
We first need to educate
32
that became the foundation of my work in this.
So Dorothy calls me on the phone and she says,
will you be on my board?
an hour.
on your board.
And I talked to her for about
At the end of the hour, I said, no, I can't be
She said, well, why not?
I said, because my intuition is telling me I
really can't be on your board.
And she goes, well, I deserve more than that.
10
I said, okay.
I don't know your board members,
11
I don't know who your board is, but something in here is
12
saying there's a problem there and I don't want to be
13
associated with them.
14
(Applause.)
15
DR. BEGICH:
16
I got the call back.
17
you have millions.
18
what they say they're doing.
19
being done and find out for yourself.
20
diligence again.
21
So it was a couple of months later

Because I told her also, I said,
You have the ability.
And she did.
Go see if it's really
back and she said, you were right.
23
me a number of ways.
24
just me now and my attorney.
Do your due
A couple months later she came
22
25
Go research
They were defrauding
I've cleared out my board.
It's
Will you be on my board?
Now, bear in mind, I'm in a pretty desperate
Page 95 of 132
33
situation economically.
At the time I have five
children at home.
have an economy that I've got to manage.
Dorothy, no, I can't be on your board.
I've got people to take care of.

And I tell
She says, well, why not?
I said, well, I need to meet you first in
person, eyeball to eyeball.
for three days.
foundation.
I said, we're going to talk
We're not going to talk about your
I want to know everything I'm ever going to
10
read about you and your family in the newspaper.
11
you to have the same knowledge level of me.
12
to know what your world view is before I join with you
13
in achieving that world view, because you have the means
14
and I have the willingness if that world view is shared.
15
So we spent a few days.
I want
And I want
We decided that I
16
could do this.
17
And we put together, as her major effort was, a
18
conference on mind effects.
19
public.
20
bring some key people together to have a conversation
21
that would be open and free.
22
And for four years I worked with her.
But it wasn't open to the
It was closed to the public.
And it was to
And one of those people I invited was Ben
23
Eastlund, who by then I'd gotten to know, had watched
24
what he had done in terms of his career.
25
connected with DARPA at the time.
Page 96 of 132
He was well
34
And I called him and I said, you know, Ben,
would you consider participating in this conference?
And he said, you know, if you had asked me this
seven or eight years ago, on a scale of one to ten, ten
being the relevance and importance of this, and one
being irrelevant and unimportant, I would have given
this a one or a two.
time I talk to Tony Tether or others at DARPA, nobody's
laughing about mind control anymore and it's a nine or a
10
He goes, but -- he goes, every
ten and, yes, I'll participate in your conference.
11
The next person I asked was Garth Nicolson.
12
Does that name ring any bells for anybody?
13
Nicolson was a full professor, I believe it was Texas
14
A&M.
15
thousand medical students.
16
whistle on Gulf War Syndrome and testified in our
17
Congress six times before his wife was fired as a
18
molecular biologist from Texas A&M.
19
they couldn't fire him.
20
him, because he was one of the first courageously enough
21
to step up to the plate and complain about what had been
22
happening in the Gulf War; we depleted uranium and some
23
of the other technologies that were being applied there.
He taught medical students.
24
25
Okay.
Garth
He taught over a
He was the guy that blew the
And he was tenured;
But they definitely harassed
Well, the best thing that ever happened to him

was he got out of the university system.
Page 97 of 132
He formed a
35
nonprofit to deal with chronic disease.
somebody that I watched maintain his course under really
difficult circumstances.
conference.
And he was
So he was invited to that
I invited the daughter of my mentor, Raul
Makayla.
one of the boards in Russia that regulates medical
applications of lasers.
Quite brilliant.
10
She's an electrophysiologist.
She serves on
She's an electrophysiologist.
We invited her.
We invited Rosalie Bertell.
11
remember Rosalie Bertell?
12
passed.
13
physicist, biologist.
14
doctoral students at Berkeley.
15
It's kind of an odd combination.
16
statistician to go in to Bhopal for the World Health
17
Organization after that huge chemical disaster.
18
was considered one of the top people in the world for
19
dealing with victims of radiological experiments,
20
including electromagnetic radiation.
21
some of our work and added to it and published a book on
22
the HAARP system and its effect on human beings on this
23
sort of broad scale.
24
been through some really difficult times as well, rose
25
out of her own ashes and maintained her ethical
Okay.
Does anyone
Also deceased now.
A few.
Rosalie's
She was a mathematician,
She taught higher mathematics to

She was also a nun.
She was the lead
But she
She actually took
So we had invited Rosalie, who had
Page 98 of 132
36
platform.
The other person we invited was Alexander
Kaivarainen.
Does anybody recognize that name?
He was
the former head of the USSR Academy of Science
Biophysics Department for ten years.
area that really gets into the meat of what we're
talking about here today.
believe, is deceased now also.
guys, you know, they're a lot older than me and they
And this is the
Now, what got -- Alex, I

You know, all these
10
keep dying of old age.
11
science at a young age watching a demonstration of the
12
paranormal, ESP, telepathy, these kinds of things in
13
Russia when he was a teenager.
14
caught his interest.
15
But Alex got his stimulation in
And it just really
When I met Alex, he was in his 60s and he was
16
the brightest top five physicists on the planet,
17
recognized by institutions around the world.
18
he had determined is that there were rational reasons
19
for why these things manifested.
20
this conference and actually presented a paper giving
21
the mathematics and the physics that lends itself to
22
these extrasensory possibilities, these things that the
23
military now calls anomalous human capabilities.
24
used to call it extrasensory perception or ESP, but now
25
they give it a new name because there's a lot of
Page 99 of 132
And what
So he was invited to
We
37
connotations with that that kind of get you discredited
in certain segments of the scientific community.
So I want to talk -- roll back again a little
bit -- I want to talk about binaural beat, which I had
mentioned earlier in this presentation.
around a little bit.
not even use these things, but I think people feel more
comfortable using them.
And I jump
It's kind of my style.
The binaural beat.
I used to
We can't hear these really,
10
really low frequency signals, because the human ear
11
doesn't quite work that way.
12
the human ear won't hear.
Below a certain frequency,
13
Now, a gentleman by the name of Robert Monroe
14
developed a method using binaural beat where you could
15
send in a signal within the range of human hearing, say,
16
at 15,000 Hertz or pulses per second or cycles per
17
second, coming in one ear at, say, 15,000, another
18
signal coming in the other ear at, say, 15,007.
19
the cranium they will cancel each other out and leave a
20
beat frequency of seven, the difference between the two.
21
15,000, 15,007.
22
seven pulses per second, which happens to be in the
23
upper Theta range, and this is where the brain then
24
drives to.
25
Within
The beat frequency becomes seven Hertz,
At the same time that that occurs, you get a
Page 100 of 132
38
hemispheric balance, a distribution of energy across
both hemispheres of the brain, the analytical side and
the creative side and working together.
actually how human beings are supposed to function.
This is how young children predominantly function, with
more of a balance between the hemispheres, where the
energy is more balanced.
8
9
This is
And then we educate them.
And with young girls, who we say are more

intuitive and have this other operation of the brain,
10
and young boys are more analytical, and now we kind of
11
treat everybody the same so we kind of dumb them all
12
down to the same level.
13
children and you look at where their brain activity is
14
and between 3 and, say, 5 or 6 years old, they have
15
this predominant brain frequencies or a lot of Theta
16
brain frequencies coming in and then some ELF and then
17
higher frequency ranges.
18
But when you look at young
Now, what is Theta?
Theta states if we're in a
19
Theta state, we're kind of like in that dream-like state
20
between awake and asleep where you're consciously aware
21
of your dreams.
22
good deal of their time.
23
as we call it, are so active.
24
don't pay attention to that, don't pay attention to
25
that.
That's where 3 to 5 year olds spend a

That's why their imaginations,
And we keep saying, oh,
This was our first attempt to shut down the
Page 101 of 132
39
intuitive combinations of the way the brain is actually
supposed to work.
In fact, for those who have a Christian
background, you know Jesus Christ himself said, look at
the little children, watch what they do.
think I heard somebody say something about this earlier,
little children come to the table kind of innocent with
a view of the world that's quite different than the rest
of ours.
You know, I
But the brain activity of children is unique
10
and we begin to take that out of them in the structure
11
of the way we educate.
12
So what Robert Monroe -- he was actually a
13
radio engineer.
14
had this really weird experience.
15
body experience, that he had that kind of threw him.
16
You know, it didn't make any sense to him.
17
began -- he also noticed that in the background there
18
was this kind of noise that he perceived.
19
He owned a bunch of radio stations.
He
It's an OBE, an outer
So he
So he began to experiment and he created this
20
technique for binaural beat.
21
series.
22
binaural beat.
23
those US patents from 1994, and this is showing the
24
brain before the activity, before turning on the
25
Hemi-Sync, and this is after, showing a more even
He developed a whole
In fact, he actually got US patents on a

This is an image taken out of one of
Page 102 of 132
40
distribution in a more rhythmic pattern in the
brainwaves as you see in the upper right-hand corner.
Let me roll back again so you can kind of see
the comparison.
activities happening all through the brain, and then a
coherent signal creating a hemispheric balance and an
optimization of brain potential.
8
9
Normal brain, kind of disorganized
So what did he do with this?
He developed a
whole series of things; audio input technology,
10
essentially, to manipulate behavior, but where you're in
11
control of that manipulation.
12
smoking, you get his CD on quit smoking.
13
brain in such a way, becomes compelling, very affective.
14
So you want to quit

It affects the
Sleep disorders can be addressed in this way.
15
They have someone be able to relax, meditation,
16
concentration, accelerated learning.
17
things can be done.
18
over the course of many, many, many, many years, and now
19
his daughter doing the work of working with thousands of
20
people to determine which signals actually created which
21
effects and then developing technology that they could
22
place in the hands of individuals to make the choice on
23
how to use it.
24
25
A whole array of
And they did this by working with,
Now, that's kind of an interesting way of

looking at technology.
It was my area of interest, in
Page 103 of 132
41
the beginning of all of this work, was not looking for
the dark side of all of this, but in the mid-'80s I got
very interested in light and sound stimulation of the
brain that capitalized on sound signals and flickering
light for brain entrainment.
the brain will follow that external signal or what's
called FFR, frequency following response.
little energy.
Entrain the brain where
So very
Let me roll back to Delgado again.
10
One-fiftieth of the amount of energy the earth creates
11
is sufficient to move your brain into very specific
12
states.
13
just another technique for altering brain activity that
14
might be beneficial, but you're in control of it, not
15
somebody else.
16
Dialing that radio up, if you will.
This is
I'm going to skip some of these just because
17
they're not so relevant.
18
images and let me just go back into the whole dialogue
19
of this, mind effects.
20
And I'm going to close the
When I think about sort of where do we go with
21
this conference, when we put that conference together
22
with the Lay Institute, our purpose was to put together
23
these really good thinkers to try and see if we could
24
create a synergy between them.
25
And when I first got interested in doing
Page 104 of 132
42
something actively in science, it wasn't about HAARP and
it wasn't about mind control.
would play -- and I was working in a government office
at the time, and it was -- my friend said, you make your
living with your left foot.
living, but the rest of my creativity could be engaged
elsewhere and me working in bureaucracy was really a bad
match.
The role that I thought I
Because I could make my
But the point was, my youngest son, when I was
10
getting really frustrated with my work, said, change
11
channels.
12
You know, I'm thinking about this, because I
13
had just given him this discussion about creativity was
14
like changing the channels on the TV set, right, and so
15
he's feeding it back, time to change the channels, Dad.
16
So I thought about it.
And what I decided I
17
would do is -- I read independently in science over 20
18
years.
19
say, one guy in one branch of science.
20
if this person could ever meet that person, you could
21
really see something happen.
I had read some really compelling things from,
22
I thought, boy,
And the first paper I actually ever presented
23
in science, I was 19 and it was at another obscure
24
conference that I ended up in on biorhythm research.
25
And my paper was contrasting at that time the Soviet
Page 105 of 132
43
method of research versus the US method.
method was compartmentalization, separate.
distill things down to the smallest subspecialty and
then push these people into a corner and let them do
this bit of the research.
other people over here and ten other groups over there
and fifteen groups over there, and somewhere all of this
stuff comes together and it gets really sloppy.
It's sloppy because there's a lot of repetition; it's
10
Now, the US
You know,
And then you've got nine
Okay.
very expensive.
11
Now, the Russians, Soviets at the time, they
12
didn't have the money for that kind of research, to
13
spread it out that way, and they used a very different
14
method.
15
fields, even though they didn't seem like they should
16
connect.
17
together to develop science.
18
at the exposures that we had seen earlier, what are the
19
regulatory exposures of electromagnetic fields, the
20
Russians in the '90s and the '80s were a thousand times
21
more stringent than they were in the US.
22
They took experts from all of these different
They put them in the same room to work
Well, why was it?
That's why when you look
Because they had actually
23
made the observations that we hadn't made and actually
24
connected the dots in a way to say, hey, this is
25
dangerous.
That doesn't mean they followed their own
Page 106 of 132
44
regulations, because they probably didn't.
whatever was expeditious there.
recognized the physiological responses to
electromagnetic fields and the fact that you could
manipulate it.
They did
But at least they
What was discovered by a guy named Allan Frey,
he was looking at microwaves, and he discovered that
there's this flickering effect, but it only occurred
when you pulse-modulated the signal.
And if you look
10
at -- I heard earlier, it's always scalars.
11
scalars.
12
fields as we think about them.
13
It's not vectors.
It's always
It's not electromagnetic
But if you look at the ones that affect human
14
psychology and physiology, if you look at those signals,
15
they have a very quick rise time and a very fast drop.
16
They're like the punch, like punching that ionosphere to
17
create the ELF.
18
modulations on these other carriers are meant to trigger
19
that effect by you entraining to that pulse, that
20
firing, or some submodulation being carried on a general
21
carrier.
22
It's like those signals.
Those
Now, if you remember the first Gulf War, the
23
first Bush War, and you remember how the Iraqi Army just
24
sort of gave up.
25
just like school children on their first fire drill
The fourth largest Army in the world
Page 107 of 132
45
throwing their hands up and surrendering, you know,
thousands of guys to a few dozen.
Now, I speculated on this.
What was that about?

And then it was
Scottish media that later reported on this and said it
was Project Solo, which was a project operated by the
United States.
flying over the country at the time and it was taking
and piggybacking the signal on the radio broadcast going
into the region that were broadcasting the Muslim music
10
And what we did is we had this C-130
and prayers.
11
So all these guys are in their bunkers
12
listening to their favorite radio station.
Unbeknownst
13
to them, the subsignals being played on that broadcast
14
created anxiety, high levels of anxiety and fear.
15
then you watched this Army just collapse under this.
16
And that was kind of the -- in my view, the
And
17
first test of could you really do this, could you do it
18
in this adversarial environment.
19
And one of my friends joked, hey, it's the
20
perfect Republican weapon, right?
21
hardware in place, but totally wipe out the population.
22
Zbigniew Brzezinski said, in between two ways,
23
it doesn't matter if it's Republicans or Conservatives.
24
They just use different rationale for accomplishing
25
their political ends.
You can keep all the
On the conservative side, the
Page 108 of 132
46
Neocon side, it might be the fascination with gadgetry
and new technology, as Zbigniew Brzezinski said, and on
the liberal side it might be the idea that we're doing
this for your own good.
And we've all heard that before.
The government is here, right?
The fact of the matter is, when you start
thinking about mind control technologies as a concept,
the idea that someone believes that they can interfere
with your free will, this is something that most
10
religions in the world say God won't even do.
11
think this is their appropriate direction in technology,
12
to interfere with the way consciousness flows.
13
Yet, men
Now, think about for a moment what are the
14
things that -- what is the easiest way to manipulate
15
consciousness?
16
Create an environment of anxiety and fear.
17
happens at that point is you cannot reach your higher
18
states of consciousness.
19
The easiest way, the simplest way.

Because what
If you look at Monroe, rhythmic patterns in the
20
Hemi-Sync as an example, higher states of consciousness
21
are associated with those rhythmic patterns within the
22
brain; not that incoherent scattering of death and
23
information and energy.
24
25
So if you create a certain environment of fear

and anxiety and you look at an EEG monitor and the brain
Page 109 of 132
47
activity of an individual, you see it's kind of
scattered in patterns.
higher emotions; love, compassion.
rhythmic patterns.
One person is experiencing

You begin to see
Another simple way of seeing is something that
you can actually measure.
Take two people that are in
love and they -- you know the saying, and I looked into
her eyes, right?
another individual and hold that gaze, you'll begin to
If you actually gaze into the eyes of
10
mirror each other's brain activity in a pretty unique
11
way.
12
long enough.
Two people's breathing begins to
13
synchronize.
Their energy fields begin to synchronize.
Your breathing will even synchronize if you do it
14
And at the same time, their awareness, their
15
intuitions elevate and their rhythmic patterns in the
16
brain can be seen.
17
fear -- think about the advertising you see on
18
television.
19
breath is, you know?
20
uncomfortable.
21
If you can create an environment of
It's all about how you smell, how your

It's all these things to make you
Think about the 6:00 news.
Now, we heard
22
someone talk about the 6:00 news and how that kind of
23
works.
24
people sit down in front of the television set.
25
already fatigued.
You come home from a hard day at work.
Most
They're
They begin to watch the television.
Page 110 of 132
48
And then their spouse hollers, it's time for dinner;
it's time for dinner.
right?
they're in a light trance-like state.
How many of you've been there,
Nobody's listening.
No one's hearing.
Because
Now, if you look in a dark room -- the
television is here -- look behind you at the white wall
and look at the flicker rate.
coherent signal within a certain range through the optic
nerves, your brain will lock onto that signal.
If that flicker rate is a
If you
10
monitor the brain activity at that time, you'll drop
11
into this highly-suggestive state and now you listen to
12
the advertising.
13
Now, every school of psychology teaches
14
frequency following response today and that you can
15
create these kinds of effects.
16
advertising?
17
advertising works so well.
18
convincing and compelling.
19
Would they apply in
Of course they would.
That's why
It works because it's
When you look at the 6:00 news, would somebody
20
utilize that in broadcasting the news of the latest
21
propaganda from whatever source it's coming from?
22
would speculate -- today I would speculate and say yes.
23
When you think about how simple it is to create
24
that agitation.
25
University who published a paper in 1995 talking about
There was a person at Valencia
Page 111 of 132
49
this whole concept.
could create a complex signal, broadcast it out over a
large area that just created the sense that something's
not right.
And what he said back then was you
Unease.
And then you go watch the 6:00 news and they
indict some specific ethnic group, maybe it's Muslims,
and then a certain amount of that anger gets diverted
that way.
decided on the laser edge of populations, on majorities,
Well, in a day where a lot of things are
10
this is a very, very powerful tool and one quite simple
11
tool to apply in the modern world.
12
When you think about news feeds today, how much
13
is really investigative reporting and how much of it is
14
just spitting out somebody's press release, right?
15
little investigative reporting today because it's
16
expensive, because it's not immediate, and when you look
17
at the news media today, it's almost immediate and most
18
of it is just meant to entertain.
19
inform.
20
Very
It's not meant to
You know, freedom of the press, it used to have
21
something to do with keeping an informed public so we
22
could make good decisions and we could govern as a
23
public.
24
Say whatever you want, say it however you want, but
25
nobody takes responsibility and we have the neutered
Today we debate the media as freedom of speech.
Page 112 of 132
50
neutral news.
come on.
And if you really believe it's neutral,
Everybody who assigns a story to a reporter
knows that reporter's biased.
It comes out in the news and what gets published and
what doesn't.
the news?
up.
But no one has really taken it on as a topic and
10
The editors have bias.
How many stories about mind control hit
Occasionally.
The economists might pick it
Somebody might pick up a little bit, a piece of it.
consistently pursued it.
11
Yet, when you think about modern technology and
12
the resolution -- now, we've been talking about things
13
that have happened in the past, and somebody even
14
mentioned this, MK-ULTRA is a program -- you've heard it
15
alluded to.
16
subprojects under it.
17
That was the CIA's program.
It had 144
Most of the records surrounding that were
18
shredded by a guy named Gottlieb, who was responsible
19
for that at the Central Intelligence Agency during the
20
Church Committee hearings.
21
truth back then.
22
this, has become increasingly refined as our technology
23
has advanced.
24
25
We never really got the
But the resolution, the ability to do
When you think about technological advances,

one of the things I read says that technology from the
Page 113 of 132
51
invention of the wheel to where we are today, it doubles
about every nine to ten months.
Invention of the wheel to where we are today, ten months
from now we're going to double that, and then we're
going to keep doing that.
Wow.
Think about it.
It used to be every five years in the 1980s,
and it kept shrinking as our computing power increased
and our ability to manipulate large amounts of data
increased.
10
Now, a super computer, think about a super
11
computer.
12
was doing this work, about 280 teraflops a second, which
13
at that time would be like six billion people on the
14
planet with hand calculators doing a calculation every
15
60 seconds for 60 hours to do what that super computer
16
could do in a second.
17
A super computer will do somewhere, when I
Well, the next evolution -- some think it's
18
already here -- are the quantum computers.
19
the quantum computer do?
20
will do what a super computer does in a trillion years.
21
It's back to this analogy of how much EMF do we have out
22
there.
23
What will
A quantum computer in one hour
Well, think about the same kind of
24
amplification and computing power.
25
as a concept.
You look at privacy
It doesn't exist in the world today,
Page 114 of 132
52
right?
Virtually everything about us is catalogued,
tracked, whether it's your GPS on your phone, whether
it's your phone conversations -- in the United States,
every piece of mail is photographed for who it went to
and who sent it.
When you think about your telecommunications,
your Internet connections, Google, AT&T, Verizon, all of
them have violated the very essence of what personal
privacy is all about.
10
Because today, in the 21st Century, we need a
11
revolution, an evolution of what privacy is all about.
12
Because you, experiencing the victimization of this
13
technology, are the pinnacle of the abuse.
14
is subject to abuse of personal privacy.
15
But everyone
You used to think about it, it would start and
16
end in our physical doorway in our home.
17
in your home compared to what is in data banks stored on
18
every single human being in this room.
19
It has nothing
Now, people say, oh, don't worry about it.
20
don't have the ability to collect.
21
resolution to look into it.
22
that resolution.
23
computing first will be able to hack through every
24
security code for every system on the planet within
25
hours.
We
We don't have the
Quantum computers will give
Whichever government finds quantum
They'll be able to predict with so much accuracy
Page 115 of 132
53
by collecting all that data and analyzing that data, it
will almost seem a spiritual event.
But it will only be accurate up to a certain
point.
And then there will be a little bit of a flaw.
And over time that flaw will amplify to where it's big
flaws.
guide our world, to guide our ideas, our philosophy, and
how we pursue the world.
But we'll rely increasingly on these systems to
The Internet.
What people think about that is
10
the world wide mind of the 21st Century.
11
Public Broadcasting System, did a special called "The
12
World Wide Mind".
13
I say within 20 years or even now -- maybe it already
14
exists now -- but within 20 years that you'll be able to
15
connect the physical minds of all of the people on the
16
planet in a world wide mind.
17
PBS, our
And they say within 100 years -- and
Now, that might appeal to some.
It doesn't
18
really appeal to me from the standpoint of technology.
19
I think we already have that on a certain level.
20
think we already are connected on a certain level.
21
belief systems limit our ability to access that level,
22
but I believe it's here.
23
I
Our
And I've seen enough demonstrations of it.
You
24
know, all those scientists I had in that room for that
25
mind effects conference, the part that really blew me
Page 116 of 132
54
away that I didn't expect was what they really centered
on was the idea -- and this was Rosalie Bertell, the nun
and physicist, and she said that the next leap is going
to be the leap where we realize or we recognize or we
remember our extrasensory perceptions, our anonymous
capabilities as human beings and that becomes the next
evolution of the human kind.
8
9
And what suppresses that is fear and anxiety,

because you cannot reach those cases of consciousness as
10
long as you're in fear and anxiety.
And anyone who
11
purports or is a victim of these technologies, do you
12
have anxiety, do you have fear?
13
you have the ability to reach those higher states of
14
consciousness in that condition?
15
not possible.
Of course you do.
Do
It's physiologically
16
So when you think about entire populations,
17
whether it's religion injecting fear or whether it's
18
government injecting fear or as my friend used to say,
19
you know, the king keeps you poor and the church keeps
20
you dumb, kind of was the early idea when you think
21
about how things evolved in Europe several hundred years
22
ago.
23
When you think about modern technology on the
24
backdrop of that concept, what's changed?
25
changed.
It's just the same deal.
Page 117 of 132
Nothing's
You know, 6,000 wars
55
in 4,000 years, most of them over religion; let me give
you a clue, God doesn't need any help killing anybody.
God can probably do it himself or herself.
The fact of the matter is, the idea that people
would just be evil on -- and I think I heard earlier
today that the psychopaths are in the minority.
believe they are.
people, they're out there, but they're not this mass.
Most people do things because they believe they're
I think really evil-to-the-core
10
right, and then they want to impose their rightness on
11
other people.
12
And this is kind of a mistake and then we end
13
up in this conflict between ideas without being fair and
14
recognizing people's right to disagree.
15
said earlier, certain things you can't say in Germany.
16
Certain things you can't say in a movie theater, too.
17
You know, you can't yell fire.
18
sense.
And I heard it
Now, it makes good
You don't want to yell fire in a movie theater.
19
Some would say what we're doing here is yelling
20
fire in a movie theater because we're letting people
21
know what we know, what we've concluded from a good deal
22
of research.
23
You know, my books are written, every page at
24
the bottom of each page are the footnotes.
25
find that distracting.
Some of you
Personally, I want to know where
Page 118 of 132
56
the information came from as I'm reading it, not a week
later as I'm contemplating it.
source.
I want to know the
And so in the publications that I've written,
1600 source documents, reviews out of a matrix of a
hundred thousand that we had available to us, more or
less.
have made it into four books on technology dealing with
mind effects, dealing with HAARP, dealing with personal
20,000 have made it into my archives and 1600
10
privacy issues.
11
the last four years.
12
A lot of the things go unreleased in
You can look at my publications from 1999 and
13
2000, and you'll see the same things, because the old
14
literature showed enough to come to those conclusions.
15
When I testified in the European Parliament in
16
the '90s, at their invitation -- and this was another --
17
a good side story for technology.
18
name of Thomas Spencer, he was from the UK, he was a
19
Parliamentarian at the time, and he was the Chairman of
20
the Environmental Subcommittee of the European
21
Parliament.
22
given him the book on HAARP and he was very interested
23
in this.
24
I flew to Brussels and spent a few days with him talking
25
about the issue and brought with me a couple feet of
A gentleman by the
And he had contacted me.
So we had a conversation.
Page 119 of 132
Somebody had
And at my expense,
57
unclassified documents for his research team to take a
look at.
What happened then is he moved in the European
Parliament -- he was a Conservative, by the way, and he
moved into a Foreign Affairs Chairman, a very powerful
position, an ideal position for dealing with the things
that we were dealing with at the time.
8
9
So we -- at his invitation, I came over to

testify in front of the group on security and
10
disarmament in the European Parliament on HAARP and on
11
non-lethal weapons, the kinds of things we've been
12
talking about today, the manipulation of human beings.
13
Now, they do it a lot differently than we do it
14
in the US.
In the US, when you have public hearings,
15
the public actually gets to come.
16
Parliament, the public meeting is you have to have an
17
invitation to come.
18
know, I hadn't really thought much about that.
In the European
So that's kind of different.
You
19
And they also -- they can also do things behind
20
closed doors, which, you know, we theoretically can't do
21
in the United States.
22
the public invited or the media invited.
23
You can't have a meeting without
So what happened the night before the hearing
24
is the Committee met with myself, one of the other
25
people testifying, and a member of the press and we
Page 120 of 132
58
spent five and a half hours in a non-official meeting to
talk about these issues, so that when we actually gave
our testimony the following day, they would have
formulated a set of questions to give us the opportunity
to follow along.
because then they at least had a good base of knowledge.
So it was a great way to do it,
Now, in that private meeting we demonstrated a
technology using infrasound where you could transfer
sound through electrodes attached to the skin where you
10
would perceive that proverbial voice in the head.
11
demonstrated that to the Parliamentarians in that closed
12
session.
13
We
And then we went into the hearing the following
14
day.
And it was Rosalie Bertell, which is where I met
15
her, testifying on our side.
16
the gentleman's name, but he was from a group called
17
GRIP in Brussels that does research on weapon systems
18
particularly and he had done his Master's thesis on
19
HAARP, and so he was there.
20
It was -- I can't remember
We had someone from the International Red Cross
21
that had done work on non-lethal weapons and was a
22
specialist in this particular area.
23
there.
24
25
And then I was
We each got 15 minutes to present.
And then I
got an hour of questions from the committee in the open
Page 121 of 132
59
hearing where I had the opportunity to talk about some
of these things.
been this incident in Japan where children watching a
cartoon that had a certain flicker rate had caused over
700 children to go to the hospital with epileptic
seizures.
a problem, right?
to go into the hospital.
And right around that time there had
Now, remember, non-ionizing radiation is not

A flicker of the TV caused 700 kids
Now, some say that was by design.
Some say
10
that was by accident.
11
for talking about non-ionizing radiation in the European
12
Parliament because they had all read that story.
13
fresh.
14
But it was a perfect illustration
It was
The other thing demonstrating infrasound,
15
something that had never been demonstrated, to my
16
knowledge, in that type of a meeting, to show that you
17
could actually transfer sound without necessarily
18
involving the ears.
19
Now, there's another technology that was
20
advanced by a guy named Woody Norris -- he won the
21
Lemelson Prize at MIT for this particular technology,
22
and I believe the year was 2004.
23
Norris -- and his was using acoustic heterodyne where he
24
could send in two signals from two different sources,
25
point them at an individual in the crowd, and they would
Page 122 of 132
You can look up Woody
60
hear this voice in their head and nobody else would hear
it.
Well, he won a half a million dollars for that
prize, organized a company called ATCO.
them up.
technology to the military for perimeter protection.
You know, where they could have these sort of alarm
systems so when the protestors got too close they'd hear
these warning signs that nobody else was hearing.
They're a public company.
10
You can look
And he sold that
Now, you think about that for a moment.
11
Imagine -- this is why the European Parliament got
12
interested, because we used this illustration.
13
imagine a national leader standing up in front of a
14
group and all of a sudden they hear voices in their head
15
that nobody else hears.
16
right?
17
what that technology can do.
18
demonstration.
That's the end of that guy,
I mean, he's out of there.
19
Now,
And that's exactly
And that was one
Now, some have said that you can pulse modulate
20
on a single beam and create the same effect or utilize
21
something like HAARP, not so much for voice in the head,
22
but for certainly changing emotional state of large
23
segments of the population.
24
25
When we looked at all of this, we even looked

back -- you know, where else could this have been used?
Page 123 of 132
61
And there was a device in Vietnam called the Lida
machine, L-i-d-a.
named Ross Adey, who is, unfortunately, also deceased.
Ross Adey was brilliant and was utilized by the
government, by private sector as an expert in these
kinds of areas.
A guy who researched this was a guy
Well, he was asked to look at -- this
particular device had been captured during the Vietnam
War.
It was a Russian device.
And it created the
10
entrainment effect using flickering light and sound.
11
And they used it for interrogating prisoners by putting
12
them into that, like, trance-like state and then
13
extracting intelligence from them.
14
1960s.
Now, that's the
Again, this is low resolution, low technology.
15
As computing powers increased, as our knowledge
16
in human physiology has increased, as our knowledge of
17
the electromagnetic nature of human beings has
18
increased, the ability to manipulate large segments of
19
the population comes easily achieved, either as a side
20
effect or unfortunate disaster of our technology.
21
You mentioned Swiss Re, Swiss Re Insurance.
22
Swiss Re Insurance wrote a paper on Electrosmog.
23
believe it was 2002.
24
industry then, don't insure electromagnetic field
25
effects because it will result in a bigger lawsuit than
And they said to the insurance
Page 124 of 132
62
Firestone on their tires or the smoking industry,
because the knowledge is here and now and nobody insures
that risk.
Lloyd's of London insures anything, but they
won't insure that risk.
Nobody does.
Because insurance
companies don't like to lose money.
that.
before cell phones were invented, the University of
Washington had investigated those very same frequencies
It's as simple as
And yet the telecom industry on cell phones --
10
on chick embryo studies and determined they were
11
harmful.
12
Cell phones didn't exist then.

Then cell phones come out and everything's safe
13
all of a sudden.
14
says, now, wait a minute, we did all this research.
15
This is a dangerous thing.
16
a powerful adversary.
17
That same guy that did that research
But the telecom industry is
So it went to the Congress.
18
There was a guy in Florida.
19
controversy.
20
said, we need a study.
21
pay for the study.
22
study.
23
You remember this.
Brain cancer.
It ended up in the Congress.
Big
Congress
So the industry says, oh, we'll
They spend 25 million dollars on the
I can't remember the guy's name who did it, but
24
he eventually published a book because his findings
25
were, hey, this is dangerous.
Page 125 of 132
All right.
He issues his
63
report.
they got the 25 million into his queue.
it all on these projects.
himself.
5
6
They figured, hey, they got him.
You know,
He got to spend
He got to make some money
Hey, he's our man.

Well, he wasn't.
This guy actually had some
integrity, and I apologize for not recalling his name.
A VOICE:
DR. BEGICH:
A VOICE:
10
George Carlo.
Which one is it?
George Carlo.
DR. BEGICH:
George Carlo, that's correct.
And
11
he wrote a book called, "Cell Phones", a very important
12
book.
13
And when it comes to children, one of his
14
observations was -- he had the simple observation of
15
damage to skulls.
16
five-year-old, 400 percent more energy transfers to the
17
skull into the brain than an adult.
18
twelve-year-old, approximately 200 percent.
19
You know, you have a four-year-old, a
Ten-year-old,
This is one of the main reasons why you don't
20
want children using cell phones or, even worse, the
21
portable phone in the home because it's even less
22
efficient with the battery and the energy with even more
23
leakage.
24
phone today where you actually pick it up and talk into
25
it.
And what do we do?
Try and find a hard line
You can't even find them anymore.
Page 126 of 132
They're almost
64
impossible to find.
When you look at what we have learned about
human physiology and the effects of electromagnetic
fields on the human physiology, it is the revolution in
science that will collapse the pharmacuetical industry
one day.
recognize that the pea in the soup of electromagnetic
radiation has been the cause and the root to most of the
chronic disease we see on the planet today.
10
And one day we're going to wake up and
When you combine that with that concept that I
11
used, that example of iodine, everyone has a little bit,
12
now you have these complex interactions, 5,000 new
13
chemicals are introduced or compounds introduced to the
14
public every year without really any serious studies,
15
and then you add this on top of it, and now you have a
16
very toxic world.
17
manipulation from the propaganda of World War II to the
18
downloading of that.
19
achieve?
20
personnel with a download.
Blap.
21
years' worth of education.
Now, let's go on.
22
And then you take the technology of
What does the military hope to
They want to be able to train military
And now here's the thing.
23
kind of education.
24
programming.
25
thinking involved.
There's your 12
Think about that
No critical thinking involved.
It's like writing to a disk.

Who controls that?
Page 127 of 132
Just
No critical
Curriculum
65
controls the way in which our society goes.
risk.
This is the
What about evidence in courtrooms when you can
create a synthetic memory or wipe one out?
that do to a Democratic Republic or a Democracy where
people have the power?
us as we become increasingly transparent to governmental
agencies and they become increasingly opaque.
What does
That power has been taken from
It is the opposite of what should be occurring.
10
There shouldn't be a camera in every household.
There
11
should be a camera in every government office.
12
the technology's there.
13
and look at what our employees are doing, right?
14
Wouldn't you like to be able to dial up your
15
Congressional office and see that conversation they're
16
having in real time?
17
that?
Because
We should be able to dial in
And why shouldn't we be able to do
What do they have to hide?
18
You know, you think about government and you
19
start saying that and, you know, the only people
20
protected from that kind of intrusion in the US are
21
federal employees.
22
protection than the average citizen within the country
23
that I live in.
24
25
They have a higher level of
For what?
And when you think about government, everyone

points to the politician.
I can tell you, most
Page 128 of 132
66
politicians are ignorant.
parties in the United States the preference is to have
people that are -- they look like the news announcer,
but they couldn't think their way out of a phone booth,
right?
they couldn't think their way out of one.
want people that are smart enough to look good, but not
smart enough to think on their own.
politician for political parties, because they can be
10
In fact, most political
We don't even have a phone booth anymore, but

Because they
That's the ideal
told what to do.
11
Look at how much money is being spent in
12
political outcomes.
Huge amounts of money.
Some people
13
have pointed and looked at, like, Australia to mandatory
14
voting.
Everybody votes now.
15
Worst possible thing that you could ever do.
16
And here's why:
17
pulls the lever?
18
maybe 20 percent of the population votes, but at least
19
they're informed.
20
When the population doesn't vote, who

Those that are informed, right?
So
They've educated themselves.
If you force people to vote to keep their
21
driver's license, their medical benefits, or whatever
22
social programs you've got running and you say, you will
23
vote, now who decides what they vote on?
24
buy the 30-second or one-minute ad on TV that influences
25
them.
Whoever can
The moment they walk into the booth, they go, ah,
Page 129 of 132
67
and pull the lever.
A very dangerous situation.
Now we have a dangerous situation.
Democracy is something that each of us have to
claim internally.
The change that people are looking
for in this group happens by a change in consciousness,
by us recognizing what we are as human beings,
recognizing the potential that we have.
know what these government programs yielded?
points to the fear side of the equation.
Because you
Everybody
But what they
10
really discovered was that every single soul, every
11
human being has this anomalous capability.
12
Now, imagine if we could awaken those
13
capabilities, could you hide anything?
14
people could literally look into the mind of another
15
person, that makes a politician pretty vulnerable,
16
wouldn't it?
17
I mean, if
That is the next evolution that I believe is
18
happening and it's the only evolution, the only
19
revolution that can change the way things are.
20
starts with human consciousness.
21
believe to be right and true and beginning to act on it.
22
Not from a foundation of fear, but a foundation of
23
confidence.
24
25
It
It starts with what we
You know, somebody asked me once, what do you

think about faith?
I said, faith is what you know to be
Page 130 of 132
68
right and true and you step into it on the idea that you
can achieve it.
You believe it.
So many people I've seen in this work, they
keep jumping into things beyond their belief.
don't believe they can achieve it.
and they fail, and they keep failing.
are doing good work otherwise step back, do what you can
do with confidence, do what you can do with knowledge,
don't wait for a group to form.
They try it anyway

And people who
The group's already
10
here.
It's called the human race.
11
to be right and true.
12
up, learn from it, and move forward.
13
They
Act on what you know
If you make a mistake, clean it
When you look across this room and you look at
14
all these folks with a little bit of gray hair, and
15
you've got the gray hair not by all of those great
16
things that happened in your life, but by the real
17
disasters that happened in your life.
18
think about bad news is a stimulation for good news.
19
You know, you
People ask me, you know your father's
20
disappearance, disappeared off the face of the earth,
21
that must have been a horrible thing.
22
the time.
23
life because it altered my course.
24
25
Yeah, it was at
I consider it the most important event in my
The worst things in our lives alter our course,

change our direction, activate that higher potential
Page 131 of 132
69
that cause us to rise out of the ashes of our apathy and
our defeats and stand on our feet again and move
forward.
The pain that people experience today is the
catalyst for the solutions tomorrow, whether we like it
or not, whether it's falling down as a two-year-old or
standing up as an adult.
our ethics, on the basis of our values, and we
reinvigorate and let go of the fear and recognize what
If we stand up on the basis of
10
we are as creative beings, we have the potential to make
11
change.
12
And with that, I'll open it to questions.
13
(Applause.)
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 132 of 132
Case 5:15-cv-03984-JCJ Document 51 Filed 05/13/16 Page 1 of 70

by Stan J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group
Stan J. Caterbone
ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP
Freedom From Covert Harassment &
Surveillance,
Registered in Pennsylvania
1250 Fremont Street

Lancaster, PA 17603
www.amgglobalentetainmentgroup.com
scaterbone@live.com
717-669-2163
Stanley J. Caterbone, Pro Se Litigant
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
__________________________________________________________________________
:
Stanley J. Caterbone
:
Advanced Media Group
:
CIVIL DIVISION
Petitioner
:
Case No.
15-03984
Related Case: Pennsylvania
Superior 1915 MDA 2015
:
v.
:
Lancaster County Crisis Intervention
:
Craig Stedman, Lancaster County District Attorney
Detective Clark Bearinger, Lancaster City Police
Lancaster City Police Department
Dr. Silvia Gratz, Chief Medical Officer and
Fairmount Behavioral Health System
:
Defendants
:
EXHIBIT re CORROBORATING EXPERT AND FORMER NSA WHISTLEBLOWER KAREN

STEWART'S DISCLOSURE OF ELECTROGAGNETIC WEAPONS USED TO KILL CERTAIN
TARGETED INDIVIDUALS DURING APRIL 10, 2016 RADIO INTERVIEW
This exhibit, is intended to help the Court understand the complexity of the PETITIONER's
obligation to provide the Court with the evidence and insight to support the PETITIONER's claims
and statements and to try to thwart the current attempts upon his life. The PETITTIONER has
explained in all courts the events as described by Karen Stewart well before May 9, 2016 when
the PETITIONER first came upon this information. Karen Stewart is a CREDIBLE CORROBORATOR
of the PETITIONERS CLAIMS over the past 10 years in litigation in both federal and state courts.
Karen Stewart graduated from Florida State University in 1979 with a BS degree in German
The Killing of a TI - Electromagnetic Weapons
Page 1 of 70
Friday, May 13, 2016

Language and a minor or co-major equivalent in Fine Art. She worked for NSA (National Security
Agency) from 1982 to 2010. Her resume will follow.
Her video interviews can be seen on the following YOUTUBE links:

Wheel of Freedom (WUA) 4/4/16 Ex-NSA Karen Stewart
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExpCL27ft10
NSA whistle blower Karen Stewart exposes targeted Individuals, 9/11

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ravXai6nfMg
On March 9, 2016 I was detained and falsely imprisoned by no less than 8 NSA Security
Police on the barracks of the Headquarters of the NSA at Ft. Meade Maryland. I was handcuffed,
and interrogated for over an hour, while my car was dog sniffed and searched. I was ordered to
return to Lancaster rather than continue on to Washington, D.C., and was ordered not to enter
any federally owned property again. The following is a video of my statement:
Statement and Video of False Imprisonment re Handcuffed and Interrogation for an hour at NSA
Headquarters (National Security Agency at Ft. Meade, Maryland) by 8 NSA Police officers on March
9, 2015 Recorded on March 11, 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeXlaQn5Nhs
BACKGROUND
Stan J. Caterbone's International Signal & Control or ISC Whistleblowing History and Mind
Control Relationships are outlined in the following statements and declarations, which have
already been proven and verified and have never been specifically contested in any court of law:
Stan J. Caterbone was a Federal Whistleblower in 1987 regarding ISC
The 29 False Arrests and Prosecutorial Misconduct that Stan J. Caterbone was subject to in 1987
through 2015 was an effort to cover-up the allegations made by Stan J. Caterbone in the Spring
and Summer of 1987 after the Meeting of June 23, 1987 with ISC and United Chem Con Executive
Larry Resch.
The ISC Fraud and Sales of Arms to Iraq Story by the ABC News Nightline with Ted Koppel and
the Financial Times of London in May, July, and September of 1991 was most likely initiated or
was corroborated by Lancaster Newspapers reporter Thomas Flannary.
Thomas Flannary's mysterious death in February of 2004 was either murder or was a cover story
Page 2 of 70

to hide the fact that he was a CIA operative used to control the flow of information,
disinformation, and propaganda. It is highly subject that he began his career with Lancaster
Newspapers in 1987 and is not a native Lancastrian.
The ISC merger was not completed until December of 1987, 3 months after the False Arrests of
Stan J. Caterbone.
The official meeting with the Pennsylvania Securities Commission Agent Howard Eisler in
September of 1987, which was solicited by Agent Eisler was an effort to illegally interrogate Stan
J. Caterbone without a legal subpoena.
In the months after the June 23, 1987 meeting with ISC Executive Larry Resch Stan J.
Caterbone had personally solicited a vast array of local, state, and federal officials, including the
FBI and Congressman Robert Walker, PA State Representative Gibson Armstrong for assistance in
the retaliation and slander campaign that was in progress. There is credible linkage between the
ISC Scandal, U.S. Sponsored Mind Control, Stan J. Caterbone's family VICTIMIZATION of the
same, and the participation of LANCASTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.
The Zook Murder Appeal proves that Lancaster County Detective Michael Landis, Judge James
Cullen, and Judge Farina of the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas were all involved in U.S.
Sponsored Mind Control before 2004 and before Stan J. Caterbone went public with his
VICTIMIZATION of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control.
Bobby Ray Inman, former director of the National Security Agency (NSA) was on the Board of
Directors of ISC and was involved in U.S. Sponsored Mind Control Technologies through his
company S.A.I.C. Corporation. Bobby Ray Inman would later be selected by Former President Bill
Clinton for his Director of Defense, but would later remove himself due to allegations and public
scrutiny for his role in the ISC scandal.
In the Fall of 1991 Robert Gates was nominated for Director of the Central Intelligence Agency
(CIA) and during his televised confirmation hearings the was subject to brutal array of questions
concerning his participation in the ISC scandal. He went on to be nominated and later would serve
both the Bush Administrations and the Obama Administrations as Secretary of Defense until
resigning in 2011.
There have been at least 3 documented attempts on the life of Stan J. Caterbone; 1987, 1991,
and 2004, all attempts at vehicular homicide. Thomas P. Caterbone's passing in 1996 was the
Page 3 of 70

result of a wrongful death claim by Fulton Bank. Samuel A. Caterbone was most likely an KULTRA
murder tactic in Santa Barbara, California on December 25, 1984. Samuel P. Caterbone was most
likely the result of an MKULTRA murder tactic on July 20,2001 in New York city.
The above finding of facts and evidence corroborates a vast conspiracy and criminal enterprise
that violates both civil and criminal RICO statutes and antitrust statutes.
The above would constitute treble damages for Stan J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group in
U.S. District Courts, specifically in the Eastern District for Pennsylvania Case No. 05-2288, 064650, 14-02559, and other related cases; and Case No. 08-13373 in the Lancaster County Court
of Common Pleas.
THE DISCLOSURE
Karen Stewart's resume at the NSA is as follows: I Worked various projects over the
years, not just USSR/Russia, but various countries researching/reporting on foreign military status
and alliances, weapons development and proliferation, the Chernobyl disaster and aftermath, the
fall of the Iron Curtain and changing relations among newly liberated countries, economic and
diplomatic developments of certain target countries. I researched and wrote a series of
intelligence
reports
in
support
of
Operation
Iraqi
Freedom
that
kept
secret
Russian
countermeasures sold to Iraq from wreaking havoc on the American invasion. This ultimately is
what got me fired because I questioned why my work was used to promote another employee
who had no experience with but, was credited with my work .
The following transcript of an interview by Karen Stewart in which she describes the lethal
electromagnetic weapons and her experience on being on the receiving end was taken from the
article titled NSA Whistleblower Comes Out of the Shadows Into the Light and can be
found at:
http://canadafreepress.com/article/nsa-whistleblower-comes-out-of-the-
shadows-into-the-light
The article was written by Sher Zieve -- Bio and Archives and published March 28, 2016. The
byline is as follows: In February, 2014 I published an interview of an NSA Whistleblower. This is a
follow-up to that column. Due to recent threats to her person and other exigent circumstances,
the Whistleblower has decided to come out of the shadows and into the light. I am honored that
she again chose me to write her story.
KAREN STEWART'S TRANSCRIPT
Page 4 of 70

First of all, the case STEWART V. NSA is a righteous lawsuit, (brought in 2010) meaning
it is a clear case of employer abuse of power and position to an egregious and even premeditated
criminal level meant to circumvent whistleblower protection laws like the No Fear Act. Simply put,
I asked the NSA Inspector General (IG) to investigate why my award-winning intelligence report
series supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom (2003) was used to promote an entirely different
woman twice (2004 & 2005) one who had nothing to do with my reports whatsoever, and was a
known incompetent, but had methodically sexually compromised many of the male managers
within the Weapons & Space (W&S) Directorate. Instead of following correct procedure, the IG
and NSA Security decided to cover up the infraction by attacking me. Threats were made to paint
my complaint as paranoid and to fire me for a non-existent mental illness if I did not drop my
effort to get credit for and the promotion for my own work, given to the wrong woman. These
threats quickly took shape as false accusations against me by the guilty personnel obviously
coached by Security, manifested with stalking harassment masquerading as an investigation by
NSA Security goons from 2006-2009. In late 2010, despite all evidence showing my innocence
from ridiculous and impossible charges, I was fired by an NSA Kangaroo court with a
predetermined agenda. My EEOC appeal (lawsuit) had been accepted for adjudication and the
judge had ordered no adverse action until its adjudication but NSA ignored his orders.
I moved from Columbia, Maryland back to my familys hometown of Tallahassee, Florida in

2011. All was quiet until February 2015 when I instructed the law firm I had hired to subpoena
evidence from the Maryland Department of Motor Vehicles identifying a burglar (a now retired NSA
Executive) who had broken into my home very shortly after I had tried to make my 2006
Inspector General request for an investigation, and stolen extra house, car, and mail keys as well
as illegally bugging (burst bug) our home and phone/internet to facilitate further harassment and
likely search for blackmail material (no luck for them there).
After the subpoena, I began noticing Security types in Tallahassee following me and photostalking me by March/April. Their license plates suggested Naval Security Group from Pensacola
and NSA Security personnel from Georgia (Augusta) and Texas (San Antonio). A quick check with
the Leon County Sheriffs Department, specifically Duty Officer deputy Canon, confirmed that NSA
also had personnel land at a private airport and deputies had escorted them the the Phipps
property north of Lake Jackson (near where I now live) for a secret exercise, just before the
second round of stalking harassment began. The sequence of events seems to have been for NSA
Security to contact the Naval Security Group in Pensacola, Florida (Headquartered at Ft. Meade,
Maryland along with NSA) to initially stalk and photograph me under ridiculous false pretenses
until NSA could send its own Security personnel to Tallahassee. Once there, under guise of
Page 5 of 70

authority, it appears that NSA enlisted the help of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement
(FDLE) and its civilian group, InfraGard, made up of civilians recruited from their Ride-Along
programs. As usual, NSA personnel fabricated some big lie as to why the civilians should actively
and passively stalk and harass me, and despite quite obvious questions about why laws and due
process were to be completely suspended in my case, the group eagerly jumped at the
opportunity for hundreds to gang up on one person (for Federal money, I may add).
Thus, under NSA tutelage and FDLE auspices, suddenly I was a cast-iron target, meaning
multiple people covered me wherever I was, whatever I did. Cars were even stationed near my
home overnight on rotating shifts, beeping to each other when changing shifts but also for my
benefit. NSA also sought out willing neighbors to augment their snooping and harassment efforts,
which could be anything from hosting an NSA Security goon for accessibility to my property, both
home (to bug and monitor short-distance transmissions) and car (to install and switch out vehicle
GPS trackers to facilitate car stalking and impeding as harassment. ) Those were the active
participants, others not assigned to me on a certain shift were ordered to quickly text in to a
special site the big bad threat to report my location and time I was there. People even snooped
in my shopping carts to be able to tattle to someone about what I was doing, what I was buying.
(God help us, she bought bananas!!! Save the children!).
This was annoying enough but I tried to ignore it because I thought NSA once again was
going for the usual See, shes paranoid, reporting harassment every day now just dismiss her
lawsuit! But I did report acts of harassment that caused physical damage such as hit
and run, purposely sideswiping my car, (This is exatly what happened to the
PETTITIONER on May 9, 2016 enroute to MEDEXPRESS for pain medications) and
botching the placement/removal of a GPS tracker under my rear spoiler that destroy my
spoiler. (They feared my mechanic would find their tracker so they botched its removal
the night before my appointment). I even made fun of my stalkers when I could, using
my hobby art shop on a popular internet site to create bumper magnets making fun of
them. After all, they were mostly nave, unsophisticated boobs who desperately
imagined that they were little James Bonds and that the greatest existential threat to
their country was a woman waiting for her lawsuit to be decided, living in Tallahassee,
walking her dogs, visiting friends.
In late November 2015, however, NSA apparently decided that I was not
sufficiently being intimidated by their civilian confederacy of dunces to back off my
lawsuit to recover my stolen salary and stolen retirement at the appropriate pay level.
In 2009 I had researched gang-stalking and discovered it was a real and growing
Page 6 of 70

phenomenon, but when electrical harassment was mentioned, I could not really grasp
the concept and wondered about its existence. But I was to find out first hand in
November 2015 that it does exist and is a horrific crime against humanity.
NSA and its operatives started using small, mobile devices called Directed
Energy Weapons (DEWs) against me and my family in the night. These mobile weapons
emit multiple types of electrical emanations from ultrasonic, to microwaves modulated
to radio frequencies, to other kinds of wave variations I cant say I understand yet.
Now, with the help of certain mercenary and morally depraved neighbors, the effort is
almost 24/7 now with the intention being torture and slow-kill. These types of weapons
over a lengthy time, cause cancer, autoimmune disease, heart attacks, seizures,
strokes, etc. It is the perfect stealth murder weapon for a corrupt government.
At this point, when we leave the house, a criminal base of stalkers has been
enlisted by NSA to follow us and aim the DEWs at us wherever feasible to increase
exposure in order to speed up death, with the help of the InfraGard dimwits still texting
in my location like good little sheeple.
The Leon County Sheriffs Department as well as the Tallahassee Police

Department are dragging their feet, making excuses, denying any such thing exists, or
insulting me when I try to enlist their help to come up with a strategy to combat this
new crime before I or one of my family is dead. They cant quite grasp the fact that
this is domestic terrorism and nothing protects the police or any official from this new
weapon held and wielded by criminals. Yet, plenty of recruits in their ranks have
experience using the mobile DEWs in Iraq. It is very interesting to me that the Naval
Security Group headquartered at Ft. Meade with NSA, is also called the Silent
Warriors because they specialize in the use of Directed Energy Weapons. Im sure the
Naval Security Group base in Pensacola has many on hand and may have even gotten a
request from NSA to borrow a few for their secret exercise in Tallahassee.
Clearly, NSA is of the opinion that you do not have Constitutional Rights unless
they say you do. If they use this to get rid of an inconvenient lawsuit such as mine
instead of simply settling for a tenth of the cost of harassment, then they must feel
confident they can murder anyone, anywhere, for any reason and get away with it
including any leader or politician.
These documents will also provide the Court with sufficient knowledge of the PETITIONER's
Page 7 of 70

claim of the value of the PETITIONER's litigation of up to $50 million dollars as stated in the U.S.
Bankruptcy Case No. 05-23059. The APPELLANT does not intend to overburden the Court with
unnecessary filings, however this burden of supporting the claims and statements falls on the
shoulders of all those in the government that ignored the PETITIONER's pleas for help to resolve
these issues dating back to the days immediately following the meeting with International Signal
& Control, Plc., (ISC) Executive Larry Resch on June 23, 1987.
Date: May 10, 2016
/S/ Stanley J. Caterbone,

Stanley J. Caterbone, Pro Se
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com
scaterbone@live.com
(717) 669-2163
Page 8 of 70

There is no doubt that NSA is now run by sycophants and sociopaths
EXCLUSIVE: Former NSA Employee Speaks Out on its

Corruption Karen Stewart
By Sher Zieve -- Bio and Archives
February 20, 2014
3 Comments | Print Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
At the very least, for the past few months to a year it has become increasingly evident that
although not allmany agencies of the US Federal government have become increasingly dirty,
perverse and corrupt and require a deep and thorough cleaning.
The US Secret Service has previously been exposed as including claims of involvement with
prostitutes, leaking sensitive information, publishing pornography, sexual assault, illegal wiretaps,
improper use of weapons and drunken behavior and the IRS was caught and admitted to denying
Obamas political enemies (aka TEA Party, Christians, religious Jews, conservatives) their
Constitutional rights while allowing progressive groups (aka Liberals, Leftists, Marxists, Maoists,
Socialists, Communists) theirs. Andlove him, hate him or fall somewhere in-betweenEdward
Snowden shone a very bright light on the unconstitutional domestic mega-spying of one of these
clandestine agenciesthe National Security Agency. Thus far, under Obamas increasingly iron
rule, few-to-no members of these agencies have even been indicted by Congress for their blatant
crimes against the American people.
The NSA appears to have begun as a patriotic organization that was geared toward protecting the
USA and its citizens. Whether or not that was its original intended purpose is a subject for
discussion and speculation. However, portions of the NSA seem to have devolved into something
very sinister. Todays interview will concentrate on this agency.
NSA Analyst. Due to a number of substantive reasons, this former Analysts identity cannot be
divulged at this time and will be referred to as W. I have, however, confirmed this individuals
prior employment and credentials via a well-known NSA Whistleblower. The information
disseminated to me, amongst other things tells a sordid story of corruption and how employees
are silenced into submissionvia fearwithin the agency,
The Interview
Sher:Thanks so much for being with me, today, in order to provide essential additional
information to the public on how many of their tax dollars are really being spent. You were
employed by the NSA for over two decades. Would you tell the readers what initially attracted you
to the agency as well as how it has deteriorated over time?
Karen Stewart: Like many people from families with a strong history of serving our country,
coming out of college, I looked to find a way to best utilize my particular interests and talents in
service to my fellow Americans. The mission of the NSA it seemed to me, was to stop threats
coming to our shores. Its charter clearly targeted foreign nationals on foreign soil who did or
could intend us harm. That appealed to me as a righteous endeavor and honorable tack for my life
to take.
Page 9 of 70

Sher: Youve shared with me how the NSA deals with its employees who bring legitimate
complaints to their superiors. How thoroughly intimidating and threatening are their behaviors
toward those who balk at their adverse treatment? Would you give a few examples?
Karen Stewart: Apparently the nature of NSA Security degenerated under General Michael
Hayden, the previous Director of NSA (DIRNSA), who promoted a very questionable mid-level
Security manager to a power position within Security. Hayden had originally been tasked to
eviscerate NSA since a very shallow and short-sighted Congress believed that the fall of the Iron
Curtain meant no danger existed anywhere anymore that required the existence of a robust NSA
presence. There evolved, under him, a gratuitously vicious bully mindset that employees were to
be intimidated at any opportunity not only to drive them out of NSA but to cut back on people
reporting problems that made NSA look bad, especially problems involving upper management.
Under Hayden and his successor, General Keith Alexander, the filing of complaints to or requests
for investigations by the NSA EEO or the OIG (Office of the Inspector General) were often
inexplicably blown off despite adequate evidence or the presence of willing witnesses. Then the
person who had filed the complaint would be subjected to an out of cycle reinvestigation
interview with Security as well as polygraph exam, wherein the tone of the Security person was
not neutralas it should bebut, hostile with far-fetched or even ridiculous non-issues presented
as potentially problematic. This was a Security shot across the bow to warn the person that he
had crossed the line by filing the complaint. If he pursued the complaint, Security would lean on
his managers to heavily discourage him from doing what he thought was proper and was indeed a
protected action under the law. If he persisted, did his own amateur investigation, or told
coworkers about the situation, he might be called down to Security multiple times and accused of
being paranoid and delusional based on his complaint, and his job threatened.
The worse the infraction reported, especially if a high level manager looked to be involved, the
more severe the reaction by Security. In cases of egregious wrong-doing by a manager, Security
would review the personnel files, medical files, and financial statements to find anything they
could use to threaten or blackmail him with, or pretend to misinterpret some tidbit of information
as something it was not.
Some people were forced to sign admissions of guilt of preposterous misinterpretations of facts in
order to keep their jobs, thereby killing their credibility and complaint. When nothing was found in
such files that could be used, a false accusation of espionage or leaking classified materials ginned
up by Security, was used to justify a Security intrusion into the persons home to search for
blackmail material, further assess the interests and personality of the targeted individual (TI), and
plant bugs and abscond with an extra set of keys for further intrusions. The more the person
objected to being bullied, the more heavy-handed Security became, insisting that hostility toward
them indicated wrong-doing on the TIs part. Thus the TI would become harried and
harassed for a crime he never committed, if it ever even was committed, and to
repeated accusations by Security Psych services of a non-existent mental illness, more
than adequately supported by years of internal, psychological evaluations stating he
was mentally sound (Paranoia with delusions is rare and certainly never occurs
overnight, but that does not deter a Security psychologist attack dog, whose favorite
mode of attack employs reference to this malady).
The more a person stood his ground, the more personal it became to Security, which
then became dedicated to the personal destruction of the TI. Under the pretext of the
fake accusation of espionage or leaking classified information, Security would slander
the individual with his coworkers, work friends and managers to isolate him and apply
yet more pressure. Many backed away from supporting the TI in fear for their careers
and maybe even freedom. Certainly this sent a message to the workforce in the TIs
area that NSA Security was at its essence, a rogue, unaccountable and psychotic entity
that was to be greatly feared.
Once NSA Security had decided upon the removal of the TI for failing to be sufficiently
cowed, then false evidence was given to the FBI liaisons assigned to NSA. This would
Page 10 of 70

engender a fraudulent FISA warrant, which loosed FBI surveillance and investigators
upon the person for a few weeks or months, further slandering him to his work and
social circles and thereby putting pressure on him by their constant presence. When the
FBI would find no basis for the accusation, they would drop the case and move on.
However, at that point, Security would send in their own personnel sans warrant, to
overtly stalk and harass the TI , 24/7.
In some instances, Security has even gone into the persons

neighborhood to recruit snitches and augment harassment
with hostile civilians convinced the TI is an enemy of the state,
based on baseless Security slander.
Intrusions would be made into his home to remove gathered evidence or
move things around as a psychological ploy and his car would be secretly
GPSd to facilitate vehicular stalking and aggressive driving games.
There have even been reports of pet murders by poisoning as an
escalation of the harassment with the inferred threat that perhaps it
could be the TIs child or himself next. The harassment is essentially
elevated until the TI either breaks and assaults a harasser or
complains to Security about the insane and sadistic, not to mention
criminal way in which he is being mistreated. This is what Security
planned for and is ready to jump on as their springboard to terminating
his employment.
His security clearance is immediately pulled, he is warehoused in a menial job until adequate
paperwork and a back-story can be fabricated or forged to falsely present a termination due to
mental instability or illness, and the person is fired. Of course there is an appeals process, but it is
thoroughly corrupted. No matter how much evidence supports the victim and how little supports
NSA, NSA always wins these cases where it is clear the person was targeted for dismissal. Of
course, this does nothing but embolden more degenerate or criminal behavior while making it
clear that the person reporting evil will be considered the problem, and that in reality no labor
laws or whistle protection laws can actually protect an NSA employee, because real watch dog
entities dont exist within NSA and state and Federal authorities routinely turn a blind eye to the
reported abuses even as they become more criminal and seditious.
I shake my head at sycophant, disingenuous politicians who claim Edward Snowden could have or
should have gone through proper internal authorities to report the abuses and criminal acts
being committed within NSA. Would that be to the thoroughly corrupted, attack dog-watch dog
entities, or the thoroughly oblivious or compromised politicians responsible for oversight who are
in fact, in the NSAs pocket due to bribery, blackmail or stupidity?
Sher: The NSA seems to suffer from the some of the same maladies as did the recent outing
the Secret Service. Without becoming too specific, would you give us a general idea as
advancement for sexual favors that have occurred within the agency? How defeating is that
employees who are simply working to protect the country while their bosses are indulging
sexual liaisons with lower level employees?
of
to
to
in
Karen Stewart: In my career, promotions were always hard to come by, meted out perhaps
every five years if you were a good or exceptional worker, but male managers discovered that
they held the keys to paradise in regard to attractive or even acceptable women willing to take
shortcuts. These were the women who would make promotions in stunningly rapid succession with
little to no accomplishments - of their own, that is. While others killed themselves with years of
grueling shift work or even multiple dangerous foreign assignments only to find themselves
evaluated as a 3.6 on a scale of 5, when an attractive, morally loose recent college graduate
Page 11 of 70

would receive a 4.8 for essentially alphabetizing a shelf of reference books her first 6 months on
the job. This made many, many people bitter and certainly sent the wrong signal to the hardest
workers and the most talented. Though many stopped being as dedicated to their jobs, others did
indeed press ahead and worked tirelessly knowing their reward was the mission accomplished and
not likely appropriate recognition. Capable men despaired of receiving deserved promotions and
women almost feared being promoted for exceptional work, fearing they would be assumed to be
one of the typically incapable promotion bimbos among the bloated management. Expertise and
knowledge became commodities to guard and not share with new workers, fearing you would not
reap the benefits of your own work. This of course created a situation where expertise and insight
must be gained and regained from scratch, losing precious time training up area or target experts
to the detriment of the mission.
It was very discouraging to see immature or degenerate bosses spending their time flirting and
chasing skirts, the very same people who were charged with competently reviewing your work,
(keeping apprised of the big picture so people felt free to specialize their research), and whose
responsibility it was to accurately and honestly represent their people before promotion boards.
But the atmosphere of secrecy, the strict laws about divulging names of NSA employees or
anything that occurred there, emboldened certain men to believe that their wives and families
would never know of their indiscretions, and turned work time into play time for them. And now
apparently young males are also being pursued as sexual toys. One has to wonder what is being
missed in the realm of highly perishable intelligence leads by distracted managerial incompetents.
Sher: As an additional example of NSA intimidation, one of the things youd said may be shared is
your experience with the 3 Amigos. Would you tell us about them?
Karen Stewart:There were three eccentric looking older males who were often seen in the NSA
OPS1 cafeteria together, whom we also got to know by word of mouth, as master electricians wellversed in computer science. They were nicknamed by some in the analyst field as Rasputin,
Santa, and Choo Choo or the engineer, due to their highly unusual appearances and dress.
One eye witness being harassed on yet another NSA Security retaliatory witch hunt, reported
seeing one of these men at her home, on her property, when she discovered indications that her
home had been broken into, her cable box broken into, and her phone hacked, leaving tell-tale
clicking sounds at regular intervals whenever she used her phone. Any phone tap done by warrant
is done at the carriers hub under their auspices and will not click, only illegal hack jobs click.
She noted him not only as a trespasser being somewhere he should not have been, but
recognized him by his highly unusual appearance from work. When she attempted to look him up
in the NSA data base by career specialty, she found that what should have been his photo, which
should have been a source of pride since he was of the rank to be a Flag Badger (Manager whose
rank is senior enough to garner a photo with the American flag in the background), was instead a
photo of a desert animal called a Meercat indicating that he wanted his identity hidden from the
general NSA population.
Sher: With regards to many who have said that the NSAs collection of meta-data on all forms of
communication between legal citizens of the USA is unconstitutional, also indicated is the fact that
not one terrorist act has been stopped by said collection. It appears good old-fashioned police
work is what still gets the perp. In your opinion, is this accurate?
Karen Stewart: I think it is indeed true that the meta data collection ruse within the USA
distracts from tried and true research and investigation, which the latter method apparently DID
INDEED uncover the 9/11 plot months before it happened, well in time to have prevented it,
according to two separate analysts with whom I have spoken, one just two days after 9/11 as he
broke down and sobbed his heart out, repeating We could have saved them! We could have
saved them! But they wouldnt let us report it!, and the other several years later, who maintained
the same story of being threatened and forbidden to report any warning about 9/11, then being
harassed and fired for a non-existent mentally illness. However, it is a good means to track your
political enemies and detractors and their affiliates within the US - for future reference? It would
appear much more for the self-preservation and expansion of NSA as the ubiquitous Orwellian Big
Brother than for the protection of the USA. With the power the NSA wields, it could easily
Page 12 of 70

influence border control issues and immigration issues to make us not as susceptible to terrorist
intrusions and infiltrations, but that would undermine their power grab and expansion within the
US, something never intended at NSAs creation - and for good reason.
Sher:As a former long time employee of the NSA, what do you believeif anythingcan be done
to correct the problems within the agency?
Karen Stewart:There is no doubt that NSA is now run by those sycophants and sociopaths who
are the least desirable to have in any position of such sensitivity and trust and are purging NSA
ranks of people with integrity. Compromising activity that would rightfully cost you your clearance,
is now viewed as intrinsic perks of the job once you reach a certain pay grade. These lesser
leaders have turned NSA into an American Gestapo Wanna-Be agency. NSA lost its way with nonserious super grade playboys not mature enough for the responsibility of the job of managing and
directing NSA, compounding the problem by promoting sycophants to protect their backs as well
as lightweights with whom to have sexcapades behind office doors, but in that group also has
risen opportunistic sociopaths and psychopaths attracted to more and more power, any way they
can get it, and by conniving and ruthlessness have blown past incompetent, distracted
management to change the very nature of the NSA from watchman to the American people to
jack booted prison guard.
If the Legislative Branch is possessed of anyone with the least bit of courage and common sense,
they would demand super clearances for those on the Intelligence Oversight Committees so that
years or decades of abusive behaviors, kingdom building, or even crimes can not continually be
swept under the rug by telling these particular politicians, You dont have the need to know, just
trust us. Obviously, they cannot be trusted. An appointment to that Committee would of course
have to become much more exclusive, requiring a thorough vetting as any job with a Top Secret
clearance should. But to deal with the toxic management at NSA now, I would require every Flag
Badger and Security manager to account for himself and what he adds to the mission. If he is
pork, retire him or require him to laterally transfer to another agency. Before that however, I
would require that every single Flag Badger and every Security group manager take a polygraph
by non-NSA affiliated or non-NSA sympathetic sources to account for the millions of dollars
wasted on their vicious and illegal war on NSA employees who dutifully report fraud, waste, abuse
as well as sexual predation and treason. Those who are found to be guilty of such things as
falsifying accusations against innocent employees; fabricating false witnesses and evidence;
engaging in illegal acts of breaking and entering; falsifying FISA warrant justifications; lying to the
FBI about a targeted victims criminality; falsifying psychological assessments; subverting lie
detector exams by screaming at the targeted subject during or just before the exam to create
false impressions of guilt; hiding or destroying exonerating evidence supporting their victims
claims; intimidating or roughing up witnesses; coordinating or participating in criminal stalking
and harassment activities, illegal break-ins, illegal wire taps, organizing and paying civilian groups
under the table to augment harassment of targeted employees, and lastly, conspiring to effect or
cover up any or all of these actions. And any NSA employee in that group who pleads the 5th,
should be fired and stripped of his retirement since this type of betrayal rots a country from
within. NSA must be recreated, and returned to the stated task in their founding charter of
focusing on foreign enemies overseas.
Sher: W, so much of the information youve provided is truly astounding! Thanks so much for
being with us today and I hope youll be available for another should ongoing events require one.
Click to view 3 Comments
Sher Zieve is an author and political commentator. Zieves op-ed columns are widely carried by
multiple internet journals and sites, and she also writes hard news. Her columns have also
appeared in The Oregon Herald, Dallas Times, Sacramento Sun, in international news publications,
and on multiple university websites. Sher is also a guest on multiple national radio
Page 13 of 70

NSA Whistleblower Comes Out of the Shadows Into the Light Karen Stewarty
By Sher Zieve -- Bio and Archives
March 28, 2016
0 Comments | Print Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
AddThis Sharing Buttons

Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to PrintShare to EmailShare to PinterestMore AddThis
Share options
In February, 2014 I published an interview of an NSA Whistleblower. This is a follow-up to that
column. Due to recent threats to her person and other exigent circumstances, the Whistleblower
has decided to come out of the shadows and into the light. I am honored that she again chose me
to write her story.
Her name is Karen Stewart Karen Stewart

BIO
Education
Freshman year - Schiller College, Strasbourg, Fr.

Sophomore - Senior years, graduated from Florida State University (79)
BS in German Language and a minor or co-major equivalent in fine art
Work History: 1982-2010 NSA (National Security Agency

Underwent initial retraining from 1982 - 83, on the job training to become a linguist in a needed
foreign language (chosen to train in depth in Russian since my college major, German was not in
demand but I had also studied Russian and French with good results).
Worked various projects over the years, not just USSR/Russia, but various countries
researching/reporting on foreign military status and alliances, weapons development and
proliferation, the Chernobyl disaster and aftermath, the fall of the Iron Curtain and changing
relations among newly liberated countries, economic and diplomatic developments of certain
target countries. I researched and wrote a series of intelligence reports in support of Operation
Iraqi Freedom that kept secret Russian countermeasures sold to Iraq from wreaking havoc on the
American invasion. This ultimately is what got me fired because I questioned why my work was
used to promote another employee who had no experience with but, was credited with my work.
Note...Due to the Top Secret nature of the work, the above summary is slightly vague, by design.
The Interview
Sher: Karen, thanks for taking the time to speak with me and its so good to have you back and
this time under your name! As a Whistleblower, what finally made you decide to come out from
the shadows?
Karen: I always intended to link my name with my story because it is a story that needs to be
told, but since I have a lawsuit against NSA (technically an appeal of an unlawful, employer
action, i.e. my termination at the 28 point year of my career for trying to request an investigation
by the NSA Inspector General), sitting under a gag order demanded by NSA, on the docket at the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in Baltimore, I could not do so without risking
the adjudication going against me for that reason alone. However, in 2015 NSA Security made the
decision to yet again engage in a massive slander campaign against me in my new location, thus
Page 14 of 70

breaking its own gag order so I feel no compunction to be held to a standard required by the
EEOC judge at NSAs request that NSA itself clearly holds in utter contempt.
Sher: Since we last talked, a lot has happened with you. You have refused to drop your
discrimination lawsuit against the NSA and have shared with me that the agency has stepped up
its efforts against youpersonally.
Youre now being stalked by what appear to be NSA operatives. Is that correct? As you reported to
me they, also, seem to be using electronic emanation technology to both stop and damage you. I
believe former NSA employee and Whistleblower Russel Tice reported on this, also. This is really
deep dark side information. Would you tell the readers what theyre doing to you, [possibly]
others and why?
Karen: First of all, the case STEWART V. NSA is a righteous lawsuit, (brought in 2010) meaning
it is a clear case of employer abuse of power and position to an egregious and even premeditated
criminal level meant to circumvent whistleblower protection laws like the No Fear Act. Simply put,
I asked the NSA Inspector General (IG) to investigate why my award-winning intelligence report
series supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom (2003) was used to promote an entirely different
woman twice (2004 & 2005) one who had nothing to do with my reports whatsoever, and was a
known incompetent, but had methodically sexually compromised many of the male managers
within the Weapons & Space (W&S) Directorate. Instead of following correct procedure, the IG
and NSA Security decided to cover up the infraction by attacking me. Threats were made to paint
my complaint as paranoid and to fire me for a non-existent mental illness if I did not drop my
effort to get credit for and the promotion for my own work, given to the wrong woman. These
threats quickly took shape as false accusations against me by the guilty personnel obviously
coached by Security, manifested with stalking harassment masquerading as an investigation by
NSA Security goons from 2006-2009. In late 2010, despite all evidence showing my innocence
from ridiculous and impossible charges, I was fired by an NSA Kangaroo court with a
predetermined agenda. My EEOC appeal (lawsuit) had been accepted for adjudication and the
judge had ordered no adverse action until its adjudication but NSA ignored his orders.
I moved from Columbia, Maryland back to my familys hometown of Tallahassee, Florida in 2011.
All was quiet until February 2015 when I instructed the law firm I had hired to subpoena evidence
from the Maryland Department of Motor Vehicles identifying a burglar (a now retired NSA
Executive) who had broken into my home very shortly after I had tried to make my 2006
Inspector General request for an investigation, and stolen extra house, car, and mail keys as well
as illegally bugging (burst bug) our home and phone/internet to facilitate further harassment and
likely search for blackmail material (no luck for them there).
After the subpoena, I began noticing Security types in Tallahassee following me and photo-stalking
me by March/April. Their license plates suggested Naval Security Group from Pensacola and NSA
Security personnel from Georgia (Augusta) and Texas (San Antonio). A quick check with the Leon
County Sheriffs Department, specifically Duty Officer deputy Canon, confirmed that NSA also had
personnel land at a private airport and deputies had escorted them the the Phipps property north
of Lake Jackson (near where I now live) for a secret exercise, just before the second round of
stalking harassment began. The sequence of events seems to have been for NSA Security to
contact the Naval Security Group in Pensacola, Florida (Headquartered at Ft. Meade, Maryland
along with NSA) to initially stalk and photograph me under ridiculous false pretenses until NSA
could send its own Security personnel to Tallahassee. Once there, under guise of authority, it
appears that NSA enlisted the help of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) and its
civilian group, InfraGard, made up of civilians recruited from their Ride-Along programs. As
usual, NSA personnel fabricated some big lie as to why the civilians should actively and passively
stalk and harass me, and despite quite obvious questions about why laws and due process were to
be completely suspended in my case, the group eagerly jumped at the opportunity for hundreds
to gang up on one person (for Federal money, I may add).
Thus, under NSA tutelage and FDLE auspices, suddenly I was a cast-iron target, meaning
multiple people covered me wherever I was, whatever I did. Cars were even stationed near my
Page 15 of 70

home overnight on rotating shifts, beeping to each other when changing shifts but also for my
benefit. NSA also sought out willing neighbors to augment their snooping and harassment efforts,
which could be anything from hosting an NSA Security goon for accessibility to my property, both
home (to bug and monitor short-distance transmissions) and car (to install and switch out vehicle
GPS trackers to facilitate car stalking and impeding as harassment. ) Those were the active
participants, others not assigned to me on a certain shift were ordered to quickly text in to a
special site the big bad threat to report my location and time I was there. People even snooped
in my shopping carts to be able to tattle to someone about what I was doing, what I was buying.
(God help us, she bought bananas!!! Save the children!).
This was annoying enough but I tried to ignore it because I thought NSA once again was going for
the usual See, shes paranoid, reporting harassment every day now just dismiss her lawsuit!
But I did report acts of harassment that caused physical damage such as hit and run, purposely
sideswiping my car, and botching the placement/removal of a GPS tracker under my rear spoiler
that destroy my spoiler. (They feared my mechanic would find their tracker so they botched its
removal the night before my appointment). I even made fun of my stalkers when I could, using
my hobby art shop on a popular internet site to create bumper magnets making fun of them. After
all, they were mostly nave, unsophisticated boobs who desperately imagined that they were
little James Bonds and that the greatest existential threat to their country was a woman waiting
for her lawsuit to be decided, living in Tallahassee, walking her dogs, visiting friends.
In late November 2015, however, NSA apparently decided that I was not
sufficiently being intimidated by their civilian confederacy of dunces to back off
my lawsuit to recover my stolen salary and stolen retirement at the appropriate
pay level. In 2009 I had researched gang-stalking and discovered it was a
real and growing phenomenon, but when electrical harassment was
mentioned, I could not really grasp the concept and wondered about its
existence. But I was to find out first hand in November 2015 that it does exist
and is a horrific crime against humanity.
NSA and its operatives started using small, mobile devices called
Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs) against me and my family in the night.
These mobile weapons emit multiple types of electrical emanations from
ultrasonic, to microwaves modulated to radio frequencies, to other kinds
of wave variations I cant say I understand yet. Now, with the help of
certain mercenary and morally depraved neighbors, the effort is almost
24/7 now with the intention being torture and slow-kill. These types of
weapons over a lengthy time, cause cancer, autoimmune disease, heart
attacks, seizures, strokes, etc. It is the perfect stealth murder weapon
for a corrupt government. At this point, when we leave the house, a
criminal base of stalkers has been enlisted by NSA to follow us and aim
the DEWs at us wherever feasible to increase exposure in order to speed
up death, with the help of the InfraGard dimwits still texting in my
location like good little sheeple.
The Leon County Sheriffs Department as well as the Tallahassee Police Department are dragging
their feet, making excuses, denying any such thing exists, or insulting me when I try to enlist
their help to come up with a strategy to combat this new crime before I or one of my family is
dead. They cant quite grasp the fact that this is domestic terrorism and nothing protects the
police or any official from this new weapon held and wielded by criminals. Yet, plenty of recruits in
their ranks have experience using the mobile DEWs in Iraq. It is very interesting to me that the
Naval Security Group headquartered at Ft. Meade with NSA, is also called the Silent Warriors
because they specialize in the use of Directed Energy Weapons. Im sure the Naval Security Group
base in Pensacola has many on hand and may have even gotten a request from NSA to borrow a
Page 16 of 70

few for their secret exercise in Tallahassee.
Clearly, NSA is of the opinion that you do not have Constitutional Rights unless they say you do. If
they use this to get rid of an inconvenient lawsuit such as mine instead of simply settling for a
tenth of the cost of harassment, then they must feel confident they can murder anyone,
anywhere, for any reason and get away with itincluding any leader or politician.
Sher: Why in the world do you think the NSA simply didnt settle the suit? With all of the
documentation you have, it seems that they are guilty of the discrimination and could have spent
far less of the taxpayers money to simply pay you off and make it go away. They would, also,
have avoided this coming out into the open. Are they that arrogant and Narcissistic?
Karen: This has truly NEVER made any sense to me or any of my friends, even those who worked
at NSA. NSA could have investigated, claimed a mistake had been made and retroactively
promoted me without even addressing the unethical behavior of W&S personnel. Instead, the IG
refused to investigate, illegally of course, but I could not have made him do his job. Plus, the
guilty were instructed to blame me for what turned out to be the first leak by ex-NSA executive
Thomas Drake, despite the fact that I had no access to, knowledge of or training in the type of
material he leaked (computer technology) and he was identified as the source of that leak six
months before I was fired. The polygraph section of Security actively tried to sabotage my
polygraph exams in response to the false counter-accusation by inappropriately screaming and
threatening me, making it impossible to pass a polygraph, which ruined my first polygraph in this
regard though I passed the next two of the three given in reaction to the false accusation.
The EEOC is capped at $300,000 actual damages, no punitive allowed. My intention was to get the
lost difference in my wages as a GS-12 when I should have been a GS-14, and to get the
appropriate level of retirement. Yet, clearly, NSA has spent millions organizing and paying civilians
(and greasing the palms of crooked law enforcement) to harass, bully, intimidate,and quite
obviously viciously slander me.
Do they engage in such psychopathic behavior because they can? Because they simply have no
real oversight? The operational head of NSA Security is indeed rumored far and wide to be an
actual psychopath who is obsessed with paintings of Dantes Inferno.
A coworker who worked in NSA Human Resources says she remembered when the resumes of
inappropriate people (criminals, perverts, mentally unstable) were automatically thrown away but
suddenly when General Hayden, a former NSA Director, promoted this particular man, the
resumes of thieves, moral degenerates, etc., were then coveted by Security. She said that she
was so upset that she had to find a different job. I did read an opinion on the Anti-polygraph site
that NSA Security leadership, and hence all of Security in essence, could be said to suffer from
Dark Triad personality disorder, which is a dangerous combination of such things as (malignant)
narcissism, sociopathy, etc. Their egos are such that they are obsessed with winning at all costs
even fighting to keep a known false accusation from being proven false by their victim, because
they exist in their own projected narrative. They exist in their own lies and cannot stand being
exposed. This means they follow their own agendas. What is good for NSA Security leadership,
even at the cost of NSA or the USA. Their allegiances are to themselves. This has made me
wonder, of late, if the woman who Security protected instead of reprimanding or firing for sexually
compromising W&S management was not a Security plant, meant to do just that. And, in so
doing, was NSA Security procuring a means to blackmail these managers for themselves or
another entity, perhaps foreign?
Sher: You have multiple photos and even drawings youve made of you stalkers. Youve also
indicated to me that the NSA has been in touch with your local law enforcement. Said law
enforcement is siding with the NSA against youa private citizen. What do your attorneys have to
say about these?
Karen: At the beginning of my search for a law firm to take my case, Melville Johnson PC
informed me that I had potentially two cases, in 2009, an employment law case and a criminal
case. I could only afford to pursue the employment case since I was facing illegal termination on
Page 17 of 70

false pretenses within a few months. While my lawyers have recorded the information about the
new assault campaign by NSA in Florida, thus far their pleas with the EEOC for some kind of
response because their client is now in physical danger have been completely ignored.
What has been going on in Florida is entirely criminal and could be a separate lawsuit, to even
include law enforcement in regard to their depraved negligenceif not complicity. But, at the
moment, I am concerned with surviving the relentless Directed Energy Weapons assaults. If I do
not, then my family will have to consider a wrongful death lawsuit against NSA, FBI (that refuse to
get involved because NSA is involved), and the FDLE, the TPD and Leon County Sheriffs
Department as well as certain complicit neighbors accepting a new riding mower or new carpeting
in exchange for helping NSA murder an inconvenient person who actually thought she had any
Constitutional, human, or Civil Rights.
Sher: With regards to your lawsuit, what are your current plans?
Karen: Good question. Reporting and recording the new barrage of assaults has whittled deeply
into my retainer. This was hard enough to maintain after spending about $110,000, thus far, and
often countering ridiculous and frivolous legal shenanigans by NSA to waste my money. With an
outrageously unresponsive EEOC, which may indeed be a complete and obscene sham for show,
one wonders why continue with the pretense that we exist as a nation of laws? Clearly, we do
not.
The government has no desire for a level playing field to impede its quest for complete tyranny.
We are now a nation of wolves and sheeple. Im sure that after getting wind of this article, NSA
will come to the EEOC with big crocodile tears claiming they need to win by default because I
broke the gag order after they themselves spent millions, bald-faced lying to thousands of
civilians, law enforcement and (apparently) the FBI about me, invoking National Security Letters
to swear them to secrecy and to hide the true nature of their faux secret exercise in Tallahassee
i.e., enticing a foolish community to stalk, harass and commit murder for Big Brother.
But, God forbid the victim would speak out!
It truly sickens me that I spent my career trying to protect and serve my fellow Americans when
not only my government but these unworthy mercenary, sociopaths have stabbed me in the back.
Some of the stalkers have even been Iraqi War veteranssome of whom might not have returned
alive without my reports.
I cant think a lot about the lawsuit with each nocturnal assault leaving me wondering if I or one
of my family will not wake up tomorrow. Im sentenced to death for being a patriot. What a
country. I read Psalm 91 & 94 nightly, praying God will want to erase this growing evil from our
country. But, I also remember that Ruth Graham said a while ago, if God doesnt judge America,
Hell have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah.
Americans are just not the people they and we used to be and, therefore, our leaders are either
apathetic cowards who tolerate evil or potentially monsters like NSA Securitywho show that they
can be and are not responsible to anyone but themselves.
Is NSA Security even able to be reined in anymore? Or would any potential leader be found dead
of a microwave induced heart attack if he tried to? Someone ought to care but I may not be
around long enough to see it.
Sher: Thanks you so much for all youve done and I sincerely hope and pray youre wrong, Karen.
Its individuals like you who founded the United States of America on Godly principles and an
unwavering sense of ethics.
*Karen may be contacted for interviews at kams56@ME.com
Page 18 of 70
Court rejects man's claim that Lancaster County's residents are torturing...
1 of 2
http://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/05/post_38.html

Page 19 of 70

5/13/2016 2:21 AM

Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
120
11of
1of
1
of
of
of
51
51
of
51
70
51
51
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
13,
17, 2016
15,
2015

scaterbone@live.com
https://www.scribd.com/stan5j.5caterbone
Stan J. Caterbone
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
(717)669-2163
PRESS RELEASE
Saturday, July 4, 2015
Lancaster, Pennsylvania, Advanced Media Group and Stan J. Caterbone Proposed ORGANIZED
STALKING AND DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS HARASSMENT BILL to Pennsylvania House of
Representative Mike Sturla (Lancaster, Pennsylvania) and City of Lancaster Mayor Richard Gray.
The draft legislation is the work of Missouri House of Representative Jim Guest, who has been
working on helping victims of these horrendous crimes for years. The bill will provide protections to
individuals who are being harassed, stalked, harmed by surveillance, and assaulted; as well as
protections to keep individuals from becoming human research subjects, tortured, and killed by
electronic frequency devices, directed energy devices, implants, and directed energy weapons.
Stan J. Caterbone has been a victim of organized stalking since 1987 and a victim of electronic and
direct energy weapons since 2005. He has also been telepathic since 2005. Stan J. Caterbone will
help introduce measures that also pertain to remote viewing; mental telepathy and synthetic
telepathy in more detail. Personal accounts of his pain and torture are also filed in various United
States federal and state courts.
We are urging you to contact your local representatives and support our efforts to pass this
legislation. Below you will find the listings of Pennsylvania State Representatives.
For More Information Please Contact Us At: scaterbone@live.com and visit our library of
documents at https://www.scribd.com/stan5j.5caterbone
_________________________________________________
The draft of the legislation can be found on the following page:
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
221
22
1of
2of
2
of
of
of
151
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2016
15,
2015

Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
322
33
2of
3of
3
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2016
15,
2015

Capitol Office
State Capitol
Jefferson City Mo.
573-751-0246
District Office
Second Street
King City Mo.
660-535-6664
May 21, 2009

To Whom It May Concern,
This letter is to ask for your help for the many constituents in our country who are being affected unjustly
by electronic weapons torture and covert harassment groups. Serious privacy rights violation and physical
injuries have been caused by the activities of these groups and their use of so-called non-lethal weapons on
men, women, and even children.
I am asking you to play a role in helping these victims and also stopping the massive movement in the use
of Veri-chip and RFID technologies in tracking Americans.
Long before Veri-chip was known we were testing these devices on Americans, many without their
knowledge or consent.
There are new revelations of the cancer risk besides the privacy and human rights problems with the use of
Veri-chip and RF signals.
I am asking for your help in stopping these abuses and aiding those already affected.
Sincerely,
Rep. Jim Guest
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
423
44
3of
4of
4
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2016
15,
2015

Organized Stalking and Directed Energy Devices and Weapons Bill
Section 1. Short Title This bill may be cited as the Organized Stalking and Directed Energy Devices and Weapons
Bill
Section 2. Findings and Purpose
A) Findings
1) The constitution guarantees the right of the people to be secure in their person. The Declaration
of Independence asserts as self-evident that all men have certain inalienable rights and that among
these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
2) As Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis wrote in 1928, the framers of the Constitution sought
"to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions, and their sensations." It is for
this reason that they established, as against the government, the right to be let alone as "the most
comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men.
3) The first principle of the Nuremberg Code states that with respect to human research, the
voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. The Nuremberg Code further
asserts that such consent must be competent, informed, and comprehending.
4)There are current regulations implementing the obligations of the United States to adhere to
Article 3 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture and other Forms of Cruel, Inhumane or
Degrading Treatment including all terms that are Subject to any reservations, understandings,
declarations, and provisions contained in the United States Senate resolution of ratification of the
Convention.
B) Purpose
To establish regulations and penalties for those who use any type of electronic frequency devices,
directed energy devices, implants, surveillance technology, and directed energy weapon to
purposefully cause any of the following: stalking, harassing, mental or physical harm, injury,
harmful surveillance, torture, diseases, and death to any United States citizen.
Section 3. Organized Stalking
If two or more persons willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follow or willfully and maliciously
harass another person and who make a credible threat with the intent to place that person in
reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of his or her immediate family, they are guilty of
the crime of organized stalking, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one
year, or by not more than one thousand dollars ($ 1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment,
or by imprisonment in a federal prison.
If two or more persons violate subdivision (a) when there is a temporary restraining order,
injunction, or any other court order in effect prohibiting the behavior described in subdivision (a)
against the same party, they shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three,
or four years.
For the purposes of this section, "harass" means engages in a knowing and willful course of
conduct directed at a specific person that seriously alarms, annoys, torments, or terrorizes the
person, or damages his personal property or possessions and that serves no legitimate purpose. *
**
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
524
55
4of
5of
5
of
of
of
251
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2016
15,
2015

For the purposes of this section, "course of conduct" means two or more acts occurring over a
period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose. Constitutionally protected
activity is not included within the meaning of "course of conduct."
For the purposes of this section, "credible threat" means a verbal or written threat, including that
performed through the use of an electronic communication device, or a threat implied by a pattern
of conduct or a combination of verbal, written, or electronically communicated statements and
conduct, made with the intent to place the person that is the target of the threat in reasonable fear
for his or her safety or the safety of his or her family, or personal property or possessions and
made with the apparent ability to carry out the threat so as to cause the person who is the target
of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety or the safety of his or her family or personal
property or possessions. It is not necessary to prove that the defendant had the intent to actually
carry out the threat. The present incarceration of a person making the threat shall not be a bar to
prosecution under this section. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the
meaning of "credible threat."
For purposes of this section, the term "electronic communication device" includes, but is not limited
to, telephones, cellular phones, computers, video recorders, fax machines, pagers or synthetic
telepathy devices.
The sentencing court also shall consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any
contact with the victim, that may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court. It is the
intent of the Legislature that the length of any restraining order be based upon the seriousness of
the facts before the court, the probability of future violations, and the safety of the victim and his
or her immediate family.
For purposes of this section, "immediate family" means any spouse, parent, child, any person
related by consanguinity or affinity within the second degree, or any other person who regularly
resides in the household, or who, within the prior six months, regularly resided in the household.
Section 4. Punishment for threats
Any person or persons who willfully threatens to commit a crime which will result in death or great
bodily injury to another person, with the specific intent that the statement, made verbally, in
writing, or by means of an electronic communication device, is to be taken as a threat, even if
there is no intent of actually carrying it out, which, on its face and under the circumstances in
which it is made, is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to convey to the
person threatened, a gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect of execution of the threat, and
thereby causes that person reasonably to be in sustained fear for his or her own safety or for his or
her immediate family's safety, shall be punished by imprisonment in a federal prison not to exceed
one year..
For the purposes of this section, "immediate family" means any spouse, whether by marriage or
not, parent, child, any person related by consanguinity or affinity within the second degree, or any
other person who regularly resides in the household, or who, within the prior six months, regularly
resided in the household.
"Electronic communication device" includes, but is not limited to, telephones, cellular telephones,
computers, video recorders, fax machines, pagers or synthetic telepathy devices
Obscene, threatening or annoying communication
(a) Every person or persons who, with intent to annoy, telephones or makes constant contact by
means of an electronic communication device with another and addresses to or about the other
person any obscene language or addresses to the other person any threat to inflict injury to the
person or any member of his or her family, or any property or personal possessions is guilty of a
misdemeanor. Nothing in this subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or electronic contacts made
in good faith.
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
625
66
5of
6of
6
of
of
of
351
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2016
15,
2015

(b) Every person or persons who makes repeated telephone calls or makes repeated contact by
means of an electronic communication device with intent to annoy another person at his or her
residence, is, whether or not conversation ensues from making the telephone call or electronic
contact, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Nothing in this subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or
electronic contacts made in good faith.
(c)
Every person or persons who makes repeated telephone calls or makes repeated contact by
means of an electronic communication device with the intent to annoy another person at his or her
place of work is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than one thousand
dollars ($ 1,000), or by imprisonment in a federal prison for not more than one year, or by both
that fine and imprisonment. Nothing in this subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or electronic
contacts made in good faith. This subdivision applies only if one or both of the following
circumstances exist:
(1) There is a temporary restraining order, an injunction, or any other court order, or any
combination of these court orders, in effect prohibiting the behavior described in this section.
(2) The person or persons makes repeated telephone calls or makes repeated contact by means of
an electronic communication device with the intent to annoy another person at his or her place of
work, totaling more than 10 times in a 24-hour period, whether or not conversation ensues from
making the telephone call or electronic contact, and the repeated telephone calls or electronic
contacts are made to the workplace of an adult or fully emancipated minor who is a spouse, former
spouse, cohabitant, former cohabitant, or person with whom the person has a child or has had a
dating or engagement relationship or is having a dating or engagement relationship.
(d) Any offense committed by use of a telephone may be deemed to have been committed where
the telephone call or calls were made or received. Any offense committed by use of an electronic
communication device or medium, including the Internet, may be deemed to have been committed
when the electronic communication or communications were originally sent or first viewed by the
recipient.
(e) Subdivision (a), (b), or (c) is violated when the person acting with intent to annoy makes a
telephone call requesting a return call and performs the acts prohibited under subdivision (a), (b),
or (c) upon receiving the return call.
(f) If probation is granted, or the execution or imposition of sentence is suspended, for any person
or persons convicted under this section, the court may order as a condition of probation that the
person participate in counseling.
(g) For purposes of this section, the term "electronic communication device" includes, but is not
limited to, telephones, cellular phones, computers, video recorders, fax machines, pagers or
synthetic telepathy devices.
Section 5. Assault and battery with an electronic or directed energy weapon

Any person or persons who in the course of organized stalking and harassment, commits an assault
upon the person of another with an unauthorized directed energy weapon shall be punished by
imprisonment in a federal prison for two, three, or four years or by a fine not exceeding ten
thousand dollars ($10,000).
For the purposes of this section the term directed energy weapon is defined as any device that
directs a source of energy (including molecular or atomic energy, subatomic particle beams,
electromagnetic radiation, plasma, or extremely low frequency (ELF) or ultra low frequency (ULF)
energy radiation) against a person or any other unacknowledged or as yet undeveloped means of
inflicting death or injury; or damaging or destroying, a person (or the biological life, bodily health,
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
726
77
6of
7of
7
of
of
of
451
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2016
15,
2015

mental health, or physical and economic well-being of a person via land-based, sea-based, or
space-based systems using radiation, electromagnetic, psychotronic, sonic, laser, or other energies
directed at individual persons or targeted populations for the purpose of information war, mood
management, or mind control of such persons or populations; or by expelling chemical or biological
agents in the vicinity of a person.
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
827
88
7of
8of
8
of
of
of
551
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2016
15,
2015

Richmond council passes resolution

supporting ban on space-based
weapons
May 20, 2015

FacebookTwitterMore
9 comments
The Richmond City Council passed a resolution Tuesday supporting a ban on space-based
weapons after a lengthy discussion over whether individuals are being psychologically
and physically harmed by exotic government-patented attacks from high in the sky.
Councilmember Jovanka Beckles, a member of the Richmond Progressive Alliance (RPA),
introduced the resolution, saying it begins to address concerns of a Richmond resident
who claims shes been targeted by remote transmission from space-based weaponry.
Others claiming to have suffered physical and psychological attacks traveled from around
the country to speak at Tuesdays council meeting. One speaker claimed to have been
zapped multiple times right before his testimony at council.
The resolution supports the Space Preservation Act and Space Preservation Treaty
permanently banning space-based weapons, even though the legislation first introduced
by Rep. Dennis Kucinich in 2001 has never gained traction in Congress. It appears that
Richmond is the first municipality in the U.S. to take up this lofty issue in more than a
decade. In 2002, the City of Berkeley passed a similar resolution supporting the ban.
Conspiracy theorists believe the resolution is a step toward ensuring secret weaponry
such as chemtrails, which are trails left in the sky by high-flying aircraft that supposedly
emit a chemical or biological agent, can no longer target unwitting citizens. For RPA
members on the council, the resolution is also an anti-war initiative.
RPA members on council, Gayle McLaughlin and Eduardo Martinez, also voted in favor of
the resolution. Vice Mayor Jael Myrick and Councilmember Nat Bates were the final two
yes votes, although Bates claimed he was confused by the discussion.
Im going to support the resolution for the simple reason that we have voted on a lot of
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
928
99
8of
9of
9
of
of
of
851
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2016
15,
2015

dumb ideas, Bates said.

Mayor Tom Butt voted no, saying he believes the conspiracy theory behind space-based
weapons is above the heads of city leaders and has taken time away from more pressing
city matters such as the budget deficit, potholes, and crime. Butt has complained in the
past about the RPA attempting to hijack council sessions to push a radical agenda
regardless of whether the issues are important to Richmond residents.
The mayor also pointed to a signed 1967 treaty banning the militarization of space.
The other dissenting vote came from Councilmember Vinay Pimple, who pointed out that
supporting a limitation on the ability of the U.S. to defend against attacks from longrange missiles might not be wise.
Pimple disputed what he called knee-jerk reactions from RPA members who depicted
President Ronald Reagans proposed space-based anti-missile program of 1983, known as
the Star Wars initiative, as inherently evil. The Cold War initiative was intended to
defend against USSR missiles during the Cold War and was shelved not for the projects
moral ambiguity but its perceived effectiveness, Pimple said.
The idea behind Star Wars, Pimple said, is you can knock out someones weapons long
before they enter your air space. The U.S. used Patriot missiles to knock out Iraqi Scuds
targeting Israel and Saudi Arabia, he added.
RPA members, however, argued that this issue is not just about war but about the
individuals in the U.S. who believe governments are using futuristic weapons in space for
the purpose of inflicting pain and mind control. Martinez argued that they may very well
be telling the truth. He recalled a science fiction novel he wrote a paper on during college
that predicted truths 20 years in advance.
Its easy for me to see that things which are wrong can happen because we have the
wrong mindset, Martinez said.
Myrick said he supported the resolution because he doesnt support war.
The weaponization of spaceis something I think is extremely immoral and we should
not be as a nation engaging in, Myrick said. Maybe some wars are unavoidable, that
may be true. But whatever we can do to get our country away from that mindset..thats
why I support this resolution.
Amy Lee Anderson, a targeted individual who brought the matter to Beckles attention,
was thankful that the council took up the issue.
No where in the United States, no targeted individual can get this support, Anderson
said. We just needed one person, one city. Because of that, you all our heroes. We are
dying within because the technology is so sophisticated. Its hard for someone who has
no experience to fathom it, its so sophisticated.
Related posts:
1. Richmond councilmember pushes city resolution banning exotic space-based

weapons
2. Dirty bomb drill in Richmond alarms conspiracy theorists, including Alex Jones
Comments
1. Cmon Richmond Standard.your bias is showing!

Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
10
10
29
10
910
10
of
of
of
9of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2016
15,
2015

Stan J. Caterbone
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
scaterbone@live.com
717-669-2163
October 10, 2015
Federal Whistleblower
and
Targeted Individual (Victim)
of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control
Executive Summary
Updated on October 10, 2015
I remain,
Stan J. Caterbone
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL: Stan J. Caterbone, Pro Se Litigant, and the Advanced Media
Group are victims of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control and has been engaged in litigation in both
Federal and State courts seeking financial remedies and a resolution of his Civil Liberties and
his Constitutional Rights. In 1987 Stan J. Caterbone, while managing the financial firm the he
founded, Financial Management Group, Ltd., Stan J. Caterbone became a Federal Whistleblower
when, as a shareholder, he claimed fraud and misconduct within the international arms dealer
and local start-up International Signal & Control, Plc., Some 4 years later ISC was indicted and
plead guilty to the 3rd largest fraud in U.S. history, some $1 Billion and selling arms to Irag via
South Africa. In June of 2015 Stan J. Caterbone became the Movant in the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case No. 5:14-cv-02559-PD for the Habeus Corpus
Petition of Lisa Michelle Lambert. The case is now before the U.S. Third Circuit Court of
Appeals, Case No. 15-3400.
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
11
11
30
10
11
11
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
111
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,


ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP, LTD.,
&
STAN J. CATERBONE
Federal Whistleblower (Federal False Claims Act Violation in 1987 re ISC)
Targeted Individual of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control
and Directed Energy Devices and Weapons
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
copyright 2009
Ya know what, I am beginning to analyze this War on Terror and am having difficulty understanding
it all. To me the most effective fundamental fight against Extreme Terrorism is to reduce the motive; or the
Hatred Against America. No one seems to talk about that subject. How do we reduce that Hatred Towards
America and the West?
See, from my perspective, my situation is very disturbing. I mean we have the United States Torturing Me, a
U.S. Citizen for no good or valid reason. I have warned EVERYONE about using my situation to feed this
HATRED towards America.
Low and behold a week or so ago I have had several Muslims sign up as Followers to my
www.scribd.com/amgroup01 online webspace, which I use to post documents. The following being the most
prominent IKWAN Scope, "The Largest Muslim Brotherhood's Scope on the Web":
http://ikhwanscope.net/main/
There have also been several Muslim individuals who signed up as followers around the same time, a week
or so ago. They have also signed up as followers on my www.twitter.com/StanCaterbone webspace.
You must understand, I am a VERY Patriotic Person and live a very patriotic life - I believe in the
U.S. Constitution and Our Founding Father's vision for America; I support Our Military and our
Troops; I believe in the Rule of Law; I am a Practicing Catholic, and have been my whole life; I
Believe in the TRUTH; I believe in Right v. Wrong; Good v. Evil; and finally I believe in God. What
do you believe in?
Posted on the Yahoo Fulton Bank Stock Message Board, January 7, 2010
Date Updated:
October 10, 2015
Date Completed:
Date Initiated:
July 28, 2009

July 8, 2009
Stan J. Caterbone
scaterbone@live.com
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
12
12
31
11
12
12
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
212
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

UDATE OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2015

In 2015 Stan J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group had to again return to local,
state, and federal courts. Again the obstruction of due process, the local gang stalking, torture,
trespass, thefts, and the like began in earnest.
From the fabricated Petition for Involuntary
Psychiatric Commitment of April 2010 by Detective Clark Bearinger, until January of 2015, Stan J.
Caterbone and Advanced Media Group had been in seclusion and in a state of rehabilitation and
rest due to the forced medication by Fairmount Behavioral Hospital and Dr. Silvia Gratz.
The
psychotropic drugs reduce your motor skills and put you in an extreme state of confusion.
By
the
end
of
the
summer
of
2010
every
social
media
site,
including
the
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com website was taken off-line due to the intimidation and

coercion by Detective Clark Bearinger.
In May Stan J. Caterbone had again endured the Attacks and Torture from the
employees of the Lancaster County Courthouse, and the Lancaster County Government Building.
Then soon after the Residents of Lancaster County engaged in a massive Organized Stalking
Campaign. In addition an extreme Computer Hacking Campaign was initiated and executed in
an effort to again SILENCE Stan J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group.
And Again, the
Lancaster City Police Department took the lead role. As usual Stan J. Caterbone summoned state
and federal authorities for help and assistance, including direct communications with the White
House, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office and
Kathleen Kane, The Pennsylvania State Police, the Pennsylvania General Assembly, several U.S.
Congressmen, and of course the Lancaster County District Attorney's Office.
Since August 1,
2015 the Geek Squad had performed diagnostics and repairs six (6) times due to computer
hacking. On at least 2 occasions the entire hard drive had to be wiped clean and restored.
On June 23, 2015 Stan J. Caterbone was named MOVANT in the 2014 Habeus
Corpus Petition by Lisa Michelle Lambert, Case No. 14:02559 in the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania after filing an Amicus on the case. Judge Paul
Diamond was presiding since it's filing in 2014. However, the Petition was not able to
be granted and the case was stalled on jurisdictional law based on new and compelling
evidence, or lack there of.
The Amicus was filed to cure that deficiency with direct
witness corroboration to the Prosecutorial Misconduct and Innocence of Lisa Michelle

Lambert.
In fact a working theory was filed that suggested that the East Lampeter
Police Department engaged in a strategy of Entrapment that lead to the unfortunate

murder in 1991. This, would of course, allow a wrongful death claim to be filed by the
Show family. The case is now before the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, Case No. 153400. There are three (3) questions that the Third Circuit may rule on; whether to free
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
13
13
32
12
13
13
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
313
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

Lisa Michelle Lambert, or grant her her Habeus Corpus, and whether to grant Summary
Judgment to Stan J. Caterbone in all civil actions in both state and federal courts.
Two weeks later, on July 9, 2015, Detective Clark Bearinger filed another fabricated
Petition for Involuntary Psychiatric Commitment. And again Stan J. Caterbone endured 7 days in
the Fairmount Behavioral Hospital in Philadelphia.
However, this time there was
no
MANDATORY Treatment Program Ordered by the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas.
So Stan J. Caterbone continued filing in the courts for assistance and resolution. In August, in a
desperate attempt to stop the local torture campaign, another Emergency Injunction was filed in
the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas. On August 6, 2015 Stan J. Caterbone went so far
as to undertake a Professional Polygraph Test administered by Bonnie Lee of Polygraph Solutions
of West Chester, Pennsylvania. The test ended up being 4 grueling hours of torture and a scam of
$600.00.
On July 9th , 2015 a Private Criminal Complaint was filed against Detective Clark Bearinger,
Officer Williams, Officer Binderup, and 2 unidentified patrolman.
The Complaint contained
allegations of torture and abuse at every moment of contact.
The Lancaster City Police
Department were so desperate for retaliation from the Amicus filing in the Lisa Michelle Lambert
case, that they actually broke the door in of 1250 Fremont Street in order to execute the
fabricated 302 petition. The Complaint was denied by the Lancaster County District Attorney on
August 8th . The Complaint is now under a Petition for Review by the Lancaster County Court of
Common Pleas.
On August 17, 2015 another Emergency Injunction for Relief was filed in the Lancaster
County Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 15-06985. The Injunction was heard by Judge Jeffrey
Wright, who dismissed it as frivolous. An appeal, MD 1561, is pending in the Superior Court of
Pennsylvania.
In addition, by September 26, 2015 Stan J. Caterbone had been granted Electronic Filing
Privileges in the local, state, and federal courts. This should alleviate the fraud and abuses of the
U.S. Postal Service and the computer hackers.
In 2015 Stan J. Caterbone identifies a trend that suggests that the Lancaster County
community-at-large was subject to either community targeting or community hypnosis.
The
community targeting theory is supported by experts Jullianne McKinney, Cheryl Welsh, and Dr.
John Hall. The community hypnosis theory is supported by direct personal relationships with the
Amazing Kreskin, Samuel P. Caterbone and Stan J. Caterbone.
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
14
14
33
13
14
14
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
414
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

In September of 2015 Stan J. Caterbone begins to digitize a library of approximately 45
audio cassette tapes from his father, Samuel P. Caterbone. The tapes range in date from 1971 to
1996. The tapes prove an identical targeting campaign against both Samuel P. Caterbone and
Stan J. Caterbone.
In addition the tapes confirm that Steven P. Caterbone, brother of Stan J.
Caterbone, was most likely a target dating back to the early 1960's. In addition, the death of
Samuel P. Caterbone on July 20, 2001 was confirmed to be that of murder, not natural causes.
In the early 1990's Dr. Phillip Caterbone, brother, had been solicited by the National
Institute of Health, or NIH in Washington, D.C., for a fellowship to research and catalog a study to
find a genetic marker for depression in the CATERBONE family.
Phil interviewed all living
descendants and relatives of my father, Samuel P. Caterbone, Jr., and took blood samples. I am
alleging that this was a deliberate act to continue the cover story of mental illness to distract and
provide plausible deniability for any linkage to U.S. Sponsored Mind Control.
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
15
15
34
14
15
15
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
515
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

HISTORY
In 1987 Stan J. Caterbone went public with allegations of fraud within International Signal
and Control, or ISC as they were commonly referred.
After discussions with ISC and United
Chem Con officials (an ISC/James Guerin straw company), and as a shareholder of record since
1983 of ISC, Stan J. Caterbone had a meeting with an ISC executive on June 23, 1987, which
resulted in a 22 year legal odyssey. The discussions involved a joint venture with his company,
Financial Management Group, Ltd., or FMG, Ltd., but ended in disclosure of his recent public
allegations of fraud. Four years later, ISC founder and chairman James Guerin, and other officials
and companies pleaded guilty to a $1 Billion Dollar Fraud and export violations including the
selling of arms through South Africa to Iraq and Sadaam Hussein.
However, money, power,
influence and public corruption had been used to cover-up the activities and Federal False Claims
Act violations of Stan J. Caterbone for the next eighteen years. There ensued a total blockade of
all United States Courts for all redress and remedy available in accordance with federal, state, and
local laws.
This included recovery of his business interests; intellectual property; real estate;
personal and business real property; his unblemished and impressive reputation; and his most
valuable asset - the ability to produce income. This might be legally referred to as the Right-ToWork under federal statutes.
Notwithstanding, Stan J. Caterbone has never made a bad
investment or developed a business that did not make a profit over the next 22 years.
This
includes two real estate properties that were illegally seized through foreclosure proceedings.
Since 1987 Stan J. Caterbone has been a prisoner and enemy of the state.
ISC was a
Department of Defense (DOD) Contractor and a partner with United States Intelligence Agencies
since it's beginings in the early 1970's. One of it's first contracts was Project X with the National
Security Agency or NSA of Ft. Meade, Maryland.
In summary, the following are facts and part of the public record regarding
SIGNAL & CONTROL OR ISC:
INTERNATIONAL
Once the third (3rd) largest employer in the County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, with
over 5,000 employees.
James Guerin, founder and CEO was once the largest philanthropist to charitable
organizations in the County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania.
The ISC/Ferranti Scandal was the third (3) largest white-collar fraud within the United
States as of 1992.
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
16
16
35
15
16
16
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
616
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

The following are some of the public officials and politicians associated with ISC:
George H.W. Bush, former U.S. President, and Director of the Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA).
Robert Gates, former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and current
Secretary of Defense.
Bobby Ray Inman, former Board of Directors if ISC, former Director of the NSA, and
currently associated and directly involved with Mind Control Research organizations.
Alexander Haig, former U.S. Secretary of State, and ISC lobbyist and Board of
Directors?
Joseph McDade, former Pennsylvania House of Representative and Chair of the

Appropriations Committee who was later investigated for the United Chem Con
scandal.
Carlos Cardoen/Cardoen Industries, a joint venture partner with ISC and arms
merchant for the cluster bomb who eventually sold to Iraq and other Middle Eastern
Countries under U.S. sanctions.
ISC was credited with the design of the cluster bomb, and has patents filed in the U.S.
Patent Office.
In 1987 ISC completed the merger with the 3rd largest defense contractor of Great
Britain, Ferranti International; who paid $1 billion dollars for ISC and all of it's
subsidiaries.
ABC News/Financial Times aired 3 episodes on ABC Nightline with Ted Koppel
regarding the ISC/CIA defense weapons; technologies; and cluster bombs to Iraq
story and lead into the allegations that then nominee for the Director of CIA Robert
Gates was involved with ISC and the selling of arms to Iraq.
ABC News 20/20 aired a story on the ISC/CIA efforts to sell cluster bombs to Saadam
Hussein and Iraq on February 1, 1991 days after the start of the Persian Gulf War I,
with the initial bombing raid destroying a cluster bomb factory built in Iraq by
Carlos Cardoen.
On July 1st and 2nd of 1987 Stan J. Caterbone solicited the legal counsel of Lancaster
Attorney Joseph Roda for counsel regarding, FMG, Ltd., International Signal &
Control (ISC); Commonwealth Bank, etc., and was billed for his services. Joseph
Roda did absolutely nothing but refute Stan J. Caterbone's claims and would not
believe him.
In Clark v. Guerin (CI-1990-0074 Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas),

Lancaster Attorney Joseph Roda represented William Clark, ISC's in-house legal
counsel, and never mentioned any conflict to Stan J. Caterbone in 1987.
In Clark v. Guerin (CI-1990-0074 Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas), James

Guerin deposited $1.75 million dollars into an escrow account at Fulton Bank,
Lancaster, County.
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
17
17
36
16
17
17
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
717
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,


Christopher Underhill of Harman, Underhill & Brubaker, represented James
Guerin. In 2005 Christopher Underhill represented the Manheim Township Police
Department (05-cv-2288 U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania) CATERBONE v. Lancaster County Prison, et. al.,.

Philadelphia Attorney Joseph Tate represented James Guerin and ISC, and in 2007
Joseph Tate represented Scooter Libby during his federal prosecution by U.S.
Special Prosecutor Fitzpatrick.
THE MANIFEST OF A COVER-UP

Not only did the allegations of fraud within ISC have to be silenced at a time when merger
negotiations were ongoing with Ferranti, but all of the fraud; extortion; public corruption;
burglaries; civil rights violations; anti-trust and intellectual property right violations; lender
liability torts; false arrests; false imprisonments; as well as other civil and criminal activities had
to be covered up and buried in bureaucratic red tape.
uncovered and discovered to this day.
Information and findings are still being
Contrary to popular belief, up until 1996 a grand jury
investigation into ISC was still ongoing. It is not known whether it has closed or not. All of these
activates constitute a RICO crime due to the pattern and organization of the perpetrators. The
pattern and source of the activities can be traced back to 1987, with subgroups changing over
time, but still engaging in the same practices. The following plan of action was followed in order
to perpetrate the cover-up:
Totally discredit Stan(ley) J. Caterbone and any and all allegations in every way
possible.
Fabricate a history of mental illness.

Fabricate a criminal record.
Attach his character and honesty with rumors and propaganda.
Extort and maintain his net worth to $ zero or load him with debts.
Keep him out of any profession and or occupation when and where possible.
Totally isolate him and disenfranchise him from his friends, colleagues, and family
into a life of solitaire.
Somehow persuade the community of Lancaster County to buy into this plan of
action through money, favors, etc.,
Always keep attorneys and anyone remotely involved with the legal community
away at times when efforts for justice are pursued.
When attempts to enter the U.S. legal system arise, isolate, harass, and extort
any monies and/or possessions of value.
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
18
18
37
17
18
18
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
818
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

Change the history of events and the truth.

THE COURTS AND THE UNITED STATES LEGAL SYSTEM
For 18 years, (from 1987 until 2005) it has always been fairly easy to keep these issues
from court dockets and judges.
During these years Stan J. Caterbone had solicited at least
twenty attorneys, some from large firms with national recognition in their respective fields of
specialties. Attorneys from New York City to Santa Barbara and San Diego California were visited
and consulted as well as a group of ex FBI agents who specialized in white collar crime that are
now globally recognized. However, the money and influence of persons and entities that wanted
these issues silence always prevailed. The issues were so complex and convoluted, and involved
such high profile politicians and U.S. agencies, it was far easier to state that there was no case, or
their were no claims that would result in remedy or redress. Between the Republican Party and
the Department of Defense, the CIA and the NSA, there was not an attorney that could not be
influenced. The obstruction of justice and due process in this case is most likely unprecedented in
nature and in malice.
However in 2005 that all changed when Stan J. Caterbone appeared as a pro se litigant
representing himself, without any counsel, in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania in CATERBONE v. The Lancaster County Prison, et. al., or case no. 05-cv2288.
This case is still not settled and has been withdrawn by plaintiff Stan J.
Caterbone in October of 2008 after a successful ruling in the U.S. Third Circuit Court of
Appeals (07-4474) in September of 2008. The case will be continued upon the security
of evidence and the cease and desist of obstruction of justice and due process. On May
16, 2005 at the Federal Courthouse in Philadelphia, Stan J. Caterbone filed the case under seal.
One week later in the United States Bankruptcy Court for Eastern Pennsylvania in Reading,
Pennsylvania, again appearing as pro se, Stan J. Caterbone filed a petition for protection under
the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Code, in case no. 05-23059.
These acts of entering the United States legal system with these issues triggered yet
another round of attempts to keep these cases from the courts and judges - Organized Stalking
with Directed Energy Devices and Weapons, built on a foundation of mental telepathy or total
Mind Control.
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
19
19
38
18
19
19
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
919
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

REMOTE VIEWING; ORGANIZED STALKING; DIRECTED ENERGY DEVICES AND

WEAPONS.
Organized stalking and harassment began in 1987 following the public allegations of fraud
within ISC. This organized stalking and harassment was enough to drive an ordinary person to
suicide. As far back as the late 1980's Stan J. Caterbone knew that his mind was being read, or
"remotely viewed". This was verified and confirmed when information only known to him, and
never written, spoken, or typed, was repeated by others. In 1998, while soliciting the counsel of
Philadelphia attorney Christina Rainville, (Rainville represented Lisa Michelle Lambert in the Laurie
Show murder case), someone introduced the term remote viewing through an email. That was
the last time it was an issue until 2005. The term was researched, but that was the extent of the
topic.
Remote Viewers may have attempted to connect in a more direct and continuous way
without success.
In 2005 the U.S. sponsored mind control turned into an all-out assault of mental
telepathy; synthetic telepathy; and pain and torture through the use of directed energy devices
and weapons that usually fire a low frequency electromagnetic energy at the targeted victim.
This assault was no coincidence in that it began simultaneously with the filing of the federal action
in U.S. District Court, or CATERBONE v. Lancaster County Prison, et. al., or 05-cv-2288.
This
assault began after the handlers remotely trained Stan J. Caterbone with mental telepathy. The
main difference opposed to most other victims of this technology is that Stan J. Caterbone is
connected 24/7 with a person who declares that she is Interscope recording artist Sheryl Crow of
Kennett Missouri. Stan J. Caterbone has spent 3 years trying to validate and confirm this person
without success. Most U.S. intelligence agencies refuse to cooperate, and the Federal Bureau of
Investigation and the U.S. Attorney's Office refuse to comment.
See attached documents for
more information.
In 2006 or the beginning of 2007 Stan J. Caterbone began his extensive research into
mental telepathy; mind control technologies; remote viewing; and the CIA mind control program
labeled MK ULTRA and it's subprograms.
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
20
20
39
19
20
20
20
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
10
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

FAMILY HISTORY
If you listen to the propaganda machine and the community of Lancaster County,
Pennsylvania, including professionals, the family history of Stan J. Caterbone goes something like
the following:
Father, Samuel Caterbone, Jr., Schizophrenic who ran out on his family
because of nervous breakdowns while trying to run a small dry cleaning
business.
He traveled the world looking for the Blessed Mother Mary and
Space Aliens. He ended up living in government subsidized housing broke

and with a severe mental illness.
Brother, Samuel A. Caterbone, suffered from the very same illness has his
father, Schizophrenia, who finally killed himself trying to live in California.
Brother, Thomas W. Caterbone, suffered from the very same mental illness as
his brother, Stan J., Bipolar Mood Disorder, who ran a lawn business and
finally committed suicide at an early age.
Stan J. Caterbone, suffered from Bipolar Mood Disorder, or Manic Depression and
had a nervous breakdown in 1987 trying to compete in the financial services
industry. When he has his nervous breakdowns, he always threatens to sue
everyone in court and is deeply paranoid in thinking the whole world is
against him. He always spends all of his money during his fits of mania and
has delusions about his success as a businessman.
The Family History was formulated back in the 1960's when Samuel Caterbone, Jr.,
father of Stan J. Caterbone, became engaged in a black budget mind control program that began
during his service in the United States Navy as a radioman and air gunner.
Samuel Caterbone,
Jr., was most likely a direct product of MK ULTRA or one of it's subprograms. His brother, Samuel
A. Caterbone, was most likely part of the LSD experiments of MK ULTRA. Stan J. Caterbone is
most likely part of a program sponsored by the Department of Defense Agencies, such as DARPA
or the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). The facts of Stan J. Caterbone's intimate discussions
with both his father and brother over the years before they died, the totality of documents that
were preserved in their estate, including service records; letters; official court papers; high school
documents; and the like - all will prove that they were in fact part of MK ULTRA or one of it's
subprograms.
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
21
21
40
20
21
21
21
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
11
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

The following are the facts and the real record of the family history:
Samuel P. Caterbone, Jr., (Father) served in the Navy from 1943 to 1946 and
graduated with honors from Air Gunners School in Jacksonville, Florida. He was an exceptional
student/athlete while attending Lancaster Catholic High School, participating in the band as well
as sports. He was also his senior class secretary/treasurer. After the Navy, he went on to build a
successful dry cleaning business, which he is credited with inventing a filtration system for the
solvents.
He also developed a very good investment in real estate along the Manheim Pike,
owning several properties. By his own writings and from his personal accounts to me, he was
definitely a remote viewer or data miner for some U.S. Agency with telepathic abilities.
His
viewing is documented to have begun back in the early 1970's. He also suffered from organized
stalking, and was considered an enemy and prisoner of the state. Back in the 1960's, he was a
world traveler, this is documented by his passports. Samuel P. Caterbone, Jr., may have been a
covert carrier for someone in intelligence. Samuel P. Caterbone, Jr., had his mental health history
laced with electro shock therapy. Electro Shock Therapy Experiments is another subprogram of
MK ULTRA. In addition, and especially disturbing is his criminal record with the Lancaster City
Police Department and the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas.
In 1973 Samuel P.
Caterbone, Jr. was convicted of forging a 2 checks from the Caterbone Cleaners, Inc., checking
account.
The one check to Joe the Motorists Store at the Manor Shopping Center was never
entered into evidence, it was for a total of $70.00. The other check was made out to Lancaster
Attorney James Coho for $200.00 with "divorce proceedings" written in the memo. This was his
only criminal record. Samuel P. Caterbone, Jr., was sentenced to one year probation by President
Judge William Johnstone.
However, on August 29, 1973 after nine months, Judge Johnstone
wrote an ORDER releasing him from probation and ordering him to "leave the vicinity of the
County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania". The President Judge of Lancaster County Court of Common
Pleas literally threw my father out of Lancaster County for forging 2 checks from his own
corporation. In 1987 I was arrested for stealing my own files from my own company, Financial
Management Group, Ltd., You can research the life of Candy Jones and Kate O'Brien to learn more
on this topic. Samuel Caterbone, Jr., has left enough writings and documentation to know that his
life fits the model for targeted individuals, complete with economic ruin, isolation, disenfranchised
from family and friends, and of course a fabricated mental illness history. You can view most of
his record online.
On or about May 18, 2001 Samuel P. Caterbone Jr., finally received an
inheritance from his mother's (Mary Caterbone) estate.
The check was for some $70,000.00.
The estate was probated in November of 2000. Some two weeks later, on Memorial Day Weekend
of 2001, he had called me to come to New York City to help care for him.
He was in perfect
health until this time. In a matter of six (6) weeks he had succumbed to lung cancer. As per
Julianne McKinney,
former intelligence officer for the U.S. Army and victim activist of U.S.
Sponsored Mind Control, the weapons are lethal enough to kill and the one thing that I worry
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
22
22
41
21
22
22
22
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
12
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

about is that of dying of cancer (paraphrase). There is no doubt now that my father's death was
a murder, not natural.
Samuel A. Caterbone, (Brother) served in the United States Air Force in 1968 to 1970.
In 1991, Stan J. Caterbone accused the United States Government of using his brother, Samuel
A. Caterbone for part of the LSD experiments on mind control, or MK ULTRA. A notarized letter of
October 23, 1991 was sent certified mail to the California Attorney General on the subject matter,
with a return letter from the California Attorney General on January 14, 1992.
By his own
admission before his death, Samuel A. Caterbone disclosed to Stan J. Caterbone of the "bad LSD"
trips while in the Air Force. Since his death of December 25, 1984, Stan J. Caterbone and others
questioned the classification of suicide, and made allegations of foul play that was ultimately
responsible for his death. Finally in a meeting in Santa Barbara, California with the Santa Barbara
Public Guardian's Office, an office admitted that the death was more likely due to foul plan than
suicide.
Samuel A. Caterbone was also an exceptional student and athlete while attending
Lancaster Catholic High School.
After playing varsity football as a sophomore, he had an
unfortunate accident while deer hunting the following November.
While in the woods in
Bellefonte, Pennsylvania, his hunting pants caught fire trying to stay warm.
It left him in the
Lancaster General Hospital for months, going through painful skin grafts and isolation.
hunting accident interrupted his athletic career and scared his legs for life.
The
The Schizophrenia
diagnosis was a combination of LSD flashbacks and organized stalking and harassment.
Thomas P. Caterbone, (Brother) had an unfortunate transaction at Fulton Bank that set
a course of action that resulted in a suicide. Although diagnosed with Bipolar Disease and Manic
Depression -- embezzled and extorted monies were most likely the reason for his suicide in 1996.
Fulton Bank was involved in a fraud that took $72,000 from a real estate settlement closing and
lead to his total financial ruin and collapse in June of 1995. The funds were never recovered and
Fulton Bank is a defendant for a wrongful death claim in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania in CATERBONE v. Lancaster County Prison, et. al., 05-cv-2288.
FULTON BANK triggered a severe and lethal death blow to Thomas P. Caterbone, and as of this
day has refused to acknowledge any wrongdoing or remorse. Thomas P. Caterbone was also an
exceptional athlete. Playing for Lancaster Catholic High School, Franklin and Marshall College, the
Harrisburg Patriots, and even the Philadelphia Eagles. Tom also coached football at J.P. McCaskey
and Franklin and Marshall College.
Thomas P. Caterbone had a very successful lawn and
landscaping business before joining forces with John DePatto of United Financial Services and
selling residential mortgages.
John DePatto was the former head of Parent Bank, owned by
James Guerin and ISC. Parent Bank, owned by ISC also foreclosed on 2323 New Danville Pike,
Conestoga, Pennsylvania in 1988, which was owned by Stan J. Caterbone. Thousands of dollars
of equity was extorted in the process, despite still being short sold for a profit to Mr. Keith
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
23
23
42
22
23
23
23
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
13
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

Kirchner, an executive of Lancaster Newspapers and former graduate of Lancaster Catholic High
School.
Stan J. Caterbone is a remote viewer (at least one way in), is telepathic, and a
federal whistleblower with an exceptional entrepreneurial record in spite of all of his adversaries
and their assaults. In spite of the U.S. Sponsored mind control and torture, he has endured and
will prevail. Legally, Stan J. Caterbone has been able to preserve his claims, and progress his
legal challenges and claims through both the federal and state court system appearing pro se,
without the aid or expense of additional legal counsel. Some of his claims and briefs will most
likely be landmark decisions in years to come. Stan J. Caterbone was a 2-Sport MVP at Lancaster
Catholic High School, in both football and track. Stan J. Caterbone never received less than a B
grade in his four years of high school and had an 87+ average. Stan J. Caterbone excelled in
computer technologies, taking his first full term course in 1975, while in high school and
continuing into college at Millersville University, graduating with a degree in business
administration in 1980.
Stan J. Caterbone excelled profoundly at building his companies, first
beginning with Financial Management Group, Ltd., then working with Tony Bongiovi of Power
Station Studios and the "Digital Movie"; then building Advanced Media Group, Ltd..
Over the
years, despite the illegal seizures and foreclosures, Stan J. Caterbone has amassed a portfolio of
impressive real estate deals that have always paid off in profits, no matter how or when they
were sold.
The same was true of his businesses.
Financial Management Group, Ltd., was a
$20,000 dollar investment in 1986 and was still sold for approximately $100,000 two years later,
despite the false arrests and the extortion of most of it's real value and equity.
The mental health history and the criminal records were completely fabricated, and a
close review and investigation into the actual court records and hospital records can prove that in
very short fashion.
There are TWO (2) ways to quickly dispute the Mental Health History and
Record:
One - Review the word "Delusional; delusions; etc.,;
every instance of the word
used by mental health professionals, and the false reports by friends and family were associated
with facts, and matters of the official record, the complete opposite of the meaning of the word
"delusional". And they still exist to this very day.
Two - Review the 3 Fabricated Suicide Allegations of the following dates: August
10(?), 1987 at Burdette Tomlin Hospital (Cape May County New Jersey); February 18th(?), 2005
by Kerry Egan and the Southern Regional Police Department; and July 19, 2009 for the 302
Commitment by the Lancaster City Police Department at Lancaster General Hospital.
The Criminal Record is very similar, since 1987 Stanley J. Caterbone has had 31 false
arrests; formal charges and convictions dismissed prior to court proceedings or won on summary
appeals in the County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania; most of which Stan J. Caterbone appearing as
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
24
24
43
23
24
24
24
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
14
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

pro se (representing himself). These have resulted in civil complaints filed in 2008 in CATERBONE
v. The County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania.
THE PUBLIC RECORD

The Public Record is comprised of court filings and exhibits in U.S. Federal Courts;
Pennsylvania State Courts; and the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas. In all some 40,000
pages of documents are now filed and electronically scanned or microfilmed in prothonotary
offices. In addition in both the U.S. Federal Courts and the Lancaster County Court of Common
Pleas there are more than 11 hours of audio recordings; some 3,000 scanned images; and
several video broadcasts of the ISC News broadcasts all stored on a CD-ROM and filed as an
exhibit to some of the law suits filed by Stan J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group, as
plaintiffs. Stan J. Caterbone has over 100 court docket sheet numbers in federal, state, and local
courts.
There are also Pennsylvania Unemployment Compensation records; Department of Welfare

and Lancaster County Assistance Office records; Local Real Estate Tax records; Lancaster County
Tax Assessment records; Social Security Administration Benefits records; Lancaster Catholic High
School transcripts; Millersville University transcripts; all for Stan J. Caterbone, in addition to his
court filings.
For Samuel A. Caterbone, my brother, there are United States Air Force service
records; Lancaster Catholic High School transcripts; Millersville University transcripts; Social
Security Administration records; Santa Barbara County Guardian and Public Defender records;
and papers and documents persevered from his estate.
For Samuel P. Caterbone, my father, there are United States Naval records, Lancaster
Catholic High School transcripts; Social Security Administration records; Lancaster County
Assistance Office records; Local Real Estate Tax records; Lancaster County Tax Assessment
records; Samuel Caterbone Cleaners, Inc., corporate records; Real Estate Deeds and Mortgages;
Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas civil and criminal records; and of course papers and
documents persevered from his estate
PUBLIC WEBSITE ADDRESSES OF INTEREST:

www.freedomffchs.com
https://www.scribd.com
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
25
25
44
24
25
25
25
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
15
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED FOR REVIEW

** It is important to note that as of this writing, Remote Viewing has recently
been commercialized by corporate America, and certain Fortune 500 companies are
using Remote Viewers as consultants for trend analysis and market forecasts. This is
often the evolution of most technologies born out of the U.S. Department of Defense.
Top Secret experiments and the resulting technological advancements can stay
secretive for so long.
This has recently been used in a NBC story of the Television
drama "Medium" this last season.
On July 9, 2008 I had recorded an AM radio live
broadcast on WHAN Coast to Coast with a guest that was one of the leading Physicist
turned Remote Viewer and expert that testified to this same notion.
Dated: July 28, 2009

Stan J. Caterbone
scaterbone@live.com
The following are no longer in service:
www.advancedmediagroup.wordpress.com
www.scribd.com/amgroup01
www.facebook.com/scaterbone
www.twitter.com/StanCaterbone
www.mcvictimsworld.ning.com/profile/StanJCaterbone
http://www.youtube.com/advancedmediagroup
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
26
26
45
25
26
26
26
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
16
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

September 7, 2009
Stan J. Caterbone
Advance Media Group
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, Pennsylvania 17603
Derrick Robinson
Freedom From Covert Harassment and Surveillance
P.O. Box 9022
Cincinnati, Ohio 45209
Phone 1-800-571-5618
Fax 1-866-433-4170
email: info@freedomfchs.com
Re: Is County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania Ground Zero for Organized Stalking and
Covert Surveillance?
Derrick,
My pleasure. Derrick, I was trying to get group rates at our new Lancaster Convention Center
Marriot Hotel last week, just as a little fact finding mission. I have a theory that I would like to
send your way. I thought it would be very fruitful to bring some TI's together for a conference,
unless you think the exposure would be harmful.
I believe that they try new models for harassment; organized stalking and surveillance on me
here in Lancaster. Remember, Lancaster is now one of the most "Watched Communities" in the
country. "With those cameras, the Safety Coalition will operate and monitor 165 cameras across
Lancaster City making Lancaster the most watched city of its size in the nation." See article
attached, Watching you: City to add 105 more cameras.
I believe that Lancaster may be ground zero for some of the models of organized stalking and
harassment that we TI's experience and wanted to get some reaction from Lancaster. Some
history on the Lancaster Convention Center. Dale High of High Industries is the lead partner in our
new convention center/hotel. It is first class all the way. Now in the late 1980's I was a joint
venture partner with Dale High in American Helix Technology Company/Advanced Media Group.
American Helix was a cd manufacturer and I and my company Advanced Media Group was the
CD-ROM division of American Helix. I was one of a handful of CD-ROM manufacturers in the
domestic United States back then. Also in 2005 I filed a civil action against the lead hotel, the
Eden Resort Inn, for trying to block the development and building of the Hotel/Convention Center,
see
attached.
Now, some history about Lancaster and the intelligence community. Back in the 1980's there were
several defense contractors located in Lancaster, the main being International Signal & Control,
which I, of course, blew the whistle on a billion dollar fraud and arms to Iraq.
Click here for an overview of ISC.
Click here to see the Lancaster Newspapers Archives regarding International Signal & Control, or
ISC.
Click here to view the live video of the WGAL-TV News Broadcast of October 31, 1991 the evening
of the ISC indictments. The U.S. Department of Justice and other U.S. Agencies held a Press
Conference in the Philadelphia Federal Courthouse to announce the indictments and $ Billion
Dollar Fraud.
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
27
27
46
26
27
27
27
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
17
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

Click here for Part 2 of the WGAL-TV 8 Broadcast.
Now politically, Lancaster is and has always been predominately Republican. Lancaster is one of
the oldest cities in the country and our courthouse was one of the first in this country. Lancaster
has one of the oldest fraternities of the Masons. Lancaster and the George W.Bush administration
has a close and very "interesting relationship". George H. Bush had a very close relationship with
ISC, and of course the NSA and CIA all had a very "close" relationship with International Signal &
Control, or ISC. The following are some transcripts for Ted Koppel and ABC News Nightline
regarding ISC and Arms to Iraq and the intelligence community. The transcripts are contained in
my Amicus for Case No. 2006-cv-2160 filed in the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division.
Now, Robert Gates, presently the Secretary of the United States Defense Department, and his
relationship to Lancaster. First of all, the attached video is the authentic transcript of Robert
Gates' confirmation hearing in September of 1991 for the Director of the Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA). If you fast forward to approximately 9:00:00 you will see the back and forth
questions from Senator Murkowski to Robert Gates regarding the allegations by several members
of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence regarding his alleged involvement with ISC
and the Arms deals with Carlos Cardoen and the shipping of cluster bombs through South Africa
and on to Iraq. Of course, he denied all of the allegations.
Robert Gates also has relatives that live in Lancaster County, if fact he attended a wedding here a
few months ago, on May 3, 2009 at St. John Neuman Catholic Church in Manhiem Township,
Lancaster County. His wife has a niece that lives in Manheim Township.
Now, I'll give you the ABC News Nightline May 23, 1991 excerpt regarding ISC and the NSA,
National Security Agency:
"It all started legally, if covertly, back in 1974. That's when the National Security Agency, a supersecret U.S. Intelligence unit asked ISC to help complete project X, a chain of electronic listening
posts based at South Africa's Simonstown Naval Station. South Africa was using these posts to
follow Soviet submarine traffic off of the Cape of Good Hope. To ensure secrecy, ISC and the NSA
made sure shipments could not be tracked back to them. They created a company called Gamma
Systems Associates. In fact, this company was nothing more than a post office box at John F.
Kennedy Airport. Gamma was a cut-out. ... But this sanctioned covert operation was stopped in
1977 when President Carter, a strong opponent of South Africa's apartheid regime, told U.S. firms
to stop any military-related business with Pretoria. But ISC continue shipping electronics, some
civilian, some military, to South Africa. The in the early 1980's, South Africa began to intensify its
efforts at ballistic missile development. For ISC, that was a golden opportunity because on of its
top executives was a man named Clyde Ivey, an American electronics expert who has been the
father of South Africa's missile program. Ivey had extraordinary contacts in the nations defense
structure. Begining in 1984, federal investigators say, senior ISC exeutives, including Ivey, began
regular contacts with CIA officials." You can read the rest. The entire transcript of the May 23,
1991 ABC News/Nightline broadcast.
Now remember, George H. Bush was director of CIA. "He served in this role for 357 days, from
January 30, 1976 to January 20, 1977.[22] The CIA had been rocked by a series of revelations,
including those based on investigations by Senator Frank Church's Committee regarding illegal
and unauthorized activities by the CIA, and Bush was credited with helping to restore the
agency's morale.[23] In his capacity as DCI, Bush gave national security briefings to Jimmy
Carter both as a Presidential candidate and as President-elect, and discussed the possibility of
remaining in that position in a Carter administration[24] but it was not to be," according to
Wikipedia.
Now, lets get to Bobby Ray Inman, former Navy, Director of the National Security Agency (NSA),
former Director of International Signal & Control (ISC), and currently part of the Mind Control
industry. The following appears on the Welcome page of my website:
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
28
28
47
27
28
28
28
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
18
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

"S.A.I.C. involvement in 1993 American Para psychological Association meeting arrangements, via
their 'Cognitive Sciences Laboratory'. Science Applications International Corporation is a big time
defense contractor, has held the largest number of research contracts of any defense contractor.
Bobby Ray Inman (ISC Board of Directors) is on its board of directors, among others."
by John Porter, CIA Program on Mind Control copyright 1996. In 1994, after Bobby Ray Inman
requested to be withdrawn from consideration as Bill Clinton's first Defense Secretary, his critics
speculated that the decision was motivated by a desire to conceal his links to ISC. Inman was a
member of the so-called "shadow board" of the company which was allegedly either negligent or
approved the exports." by Wikipedia on International Signal and Control, (ISC).
Now, lets list the former Navy personnel:
George H. Bush, former President of the United States, former Director of CIA.
James Guerin, President and Founder of International Signal & Control.
Bobby Ray Inman, former Director of the National Security Agency (NSA) and Director of
International Signal & Control, (ISC).
My father, Samuel P. Cateronne, Jr.
His father, Samuel J. Caterbone, Sr.
George Noory, of Coast to Coast Radio (just anecdotal, nothing assumed or alleged).
George W. Bush flew with the Navy.
James Cross
I will Finish later and add more.
Next we get to Jim Guerin's attorney back in 1989 through at least 1992. His name was Joseph
Tate, of Philadelpha. This link will take you to a document regarding Joseph Tate, James Guerin
and Joseph Roda, Esq., of Lancaster, my former attorney who said I fabricated everything back in
1987. The document contains a letter of September 12, 2005 from Special Prosecutor Patrick
Fitzgerald regarding Scooter Libby, Former Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff. the letter
involves Scooter Libby's Grand Jury Indictment for leaking Covert CIA Operative Valerie Plame
and eventually outing her.
Now in Austin Texas in July of 2005 I was detained by 2 Agents from The Defense Intelligence
Agency. I was merely visiting a Military Museum, that had old and vintage helicopters and
airplanes. near where my brother, Dr. Phillip Caterbone lived. I was visiting on my way to
California. While inside the museum 2 Agents from the Department of Defense Defense
Intelligence Agency escorted me outside to my Honda Oddesey and interrogated me making me
confirm that I was visiting and staying with my brother. They caused a problem for my brother's
Medical Practice by shaking up one of his secretaries. The reviewed my court documents for
CATERBONE v. Lancaster County Prison, et. al., Case No. 2005-cv-0288 filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The demanded that I stay off all military bases
before releasing me.
In 2006 I was telepathic with an older NSA executive on many occasions who wanted to meet me
at the Clipper Stadium who told me he wanted to rent a facility in Lancaster for a training
exercise. I told him to to and see Dale High and the High Group for space at the Greenfield
Industrial Park. He said he was retiring and that our discussions were keeping him a few weeks
longer than expected. We had intimate discussions of my history and the Chesapeake Bay Area.
We also discussed Sheryl Crow, and he told me his wife was a fan. I turned him on to her new
album, Wildflower, and he said she liked it. We had to disengage because he was being harassed
by other telepathic assailants.
My former secretary (Susan Bare) at Pflumm Contractors, Inc., where I was controller and was
hired to rescue the company from near bankruptcy in 1993, told me that her husband, Ross Bare,
who grew up just some 10 or so doors from me, worked for the NSA. She disclosed this soon
after I hired her in 1994 or 1995.
I will finish later and add to this allegation. This is a work-in-progress.
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
29
29
48
28
29
29
29
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
19
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

Stan J. Caterbone
scaterbone@live.com
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
30
30
49
29
30
30
30
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
20
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

AFFIDAVIT
BE IT ACKNOWLEDGED, that Stanley J. Caterbone, Financial Management Group, Ltd.,
FMG Advisory, and and all affiliates, Pro Financial Group, Ltd., Advanced Media Group, Advanced
Media Group, Ltd., Global Entertainment Group, Ltd., Power Productions I, Radio Science
Laboratories, Ltd., of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, the undersigned deponent, being of legal
age, does hereby depose and say under oath as follows:
I am now convinced that the situation surrounding my litigation and all factors attributed
to my financial and professional demise bore out of the fact that my Father, Samuel P. Caterbone
was a victim of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control, in the truest sense of the words.
The
whistleblowing activities of 1987 either were a coincidence or I was set up in the very beginning
by Pennsylvania State Senator Gibson Armstrong (former stock broker) in 1983 when he solicited
me to purchase the ISC stock. The preceding would have been the perfect cover story for my
demise; that I was involved in a fraud. Following this analysis would lead one to conclude that
the collateral damage from the activities of my financial ruin always left my fellow businesses in
financial ruin, for example Robert Kauffman and Michael Hartlett, partners, and the shareholders
and affiliated professionals of Financial Management Group, Ltd., Tony Bongiovi and Power Station
Studios, Jim and Lynn Cross as Cross Microwave Consultants, Dave Dering, Scott Robertson, and
James Boyer as American Helix/High Industries, Ralph Mazzochi and Gallo Rosa Restaurant;
Pflumm Contractors, Inc., Mike Caterbone's AIM Wholesaler's Business, Dr. Phillip Caterbone, D.O.
And associated Primary Care Practices of Austin, Texas, Sam Lombardo and Ralph Mazzochi as
S.N. Lombardo Associates for Lancaster Avenue Project, Sheryl Crow Singer Songwriter, my
immediate family, friends, and relatives.
Following this analysis would lead one to concur that the legal and financial remedies
would only be reconciled by the above named parties enjoining my civil litigation. This AFFIDAVIT
is to be considered a legal and binding document to accomplish that remedy.
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
31
31
50
21
30
31
31
31
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
41
50
51
70
51
51
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Saturday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
October
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
10,
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2016

Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
32
32
51
31
32
32
32
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2016
15,
2015

Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
33
33
52
32
33
33
33
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2016
15,
2015

Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
34
34
53
33
34
34
34
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2016
15,
2015

scaterbone@live.com
Stan J. Caterbone
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
ILLEGAL NO TRESPASS NOTICES AGAINST

STAN J. CATERBONE AND ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP
Violations of Public Accommodations Law re Discrimination
and Anti-Trust Violations with False Statements to Authorities
December 6, 2015
Work-In-Progress
Community Stalking and Organized Libel/Slander Campaign Strategy Issue a few every
year to support false arrests; false imprisonment; fabricated mental illness history. In addition to
isolate by prohibiting entrance to major entertainment venues with good live music. Prohibit from
defending against the lies and slander in public to a minimum. Also, destroy history of strong
Christian values and church attendance on a weekly basis by keeping away from church. The
Millersville University Graduate Studies No Trespass Notice was accommodated by the denial of
entitled benefits of LETA Job Training Education Course of the Paralegal program at HACC during
the same time period.
1. David Pflumm Properties by David Pflumm Served by State Constable in June of

2005, original not signed by David Pflumm
2. Eden Resort Inn, by Drew Anthon, Owner Sent via 1st Class Mail in 2005.
3. Barley Snyder, LLC Lancaster Office, by Shawn Long, Esq., Attorney representing
Fulton Bank in 2006 Sent via 1st Class Mail
4. Lancaster Newspapers, Inc., by Steve Weaver, Manager in 2006, No Notice,
Corraborated by Jack Buckwalter, Chairman and CEO and George Warner, Atty with Barley
Snyder, LLC, No Formal Notice, allowed to reenter in 2015.
5. Ruby Tuesday, Manor Shopping Center, Lancaster, by Manager and Lancaster City
Police in 2006, No Formal Notice, allowed to reenter in 2015.
6. Alley Kat Restaurant and Bar, Lancaster by Bartender Ms. Santinello, Brett Stabley,
and Lancaster City Police, No formal Notice in 2006
7. Village Nightclub, Lancaster by George in 2008, No Formal Notice
8. Marion Court Restaurant, Lancaster, by Security Personnel, corroborated by Michael
Geesey, in 2008, No Formal Notice, allowed to enter in 2015.
9. Valentinos Cafe, Lancaster, by Jeanine, Bartender,in 2008, corroborated by John
Valentino, Owner, No Formal Notice
10. Brunswick Hotel, Lancaster, by Staff Employees, in 2008, No Formal Notice
11. Lancaster County Library and Duke Street Business Center, by Executive Director in
March of 2009, by 1st Class Mail
12. Anne Bailey's Restaurant and Bar, Lancaster, by Manager in 2009, No Formal Notice
13. Millersville University Graduate Studies and Millersville University, Millersville, by
Lori Austin, Judicial Affairs, via Certified Mail in June of 2009.
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
35
35
54
35
35
35
of
of
ofof
51
51
of
51
70
51
51
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
13,
17, 2016
15,
2015

14. TGIF Friday's, Lancaster, by Manager, in January of 2010, No Formal Notice
15. Lucky Dog Restaurant and Bar, Lancaster, by Robert Donnelly, in January of 2010, No
Formal Notice
16. Saint Mary's Catholic Church, Lancaster, by Don Spica, Usher and Lancaster City Police
Department in Feb of 2010, No Formal Notice
17. O'Halloran's Bar, Lancaster, March 25, 2010 by Male Staff Employee. No Formal Notice.
18. Fulton Bank, Fulton Financial Corporation, March 26, 2010 by Susan Follmer, Security
Officer.
19.Lancaster General Hospital, Gary S. Gehman, MD, May 25, 2010, for recording Dr. Brian
Sullivan of Abbeyville Family Health re U.S. Sponsored Mind Control and posting on my
Wordpress Blog.
20.Tobias Frog Restaurant and Bar, August 8, 2015 by Owner of Establishment, reason
was for complaining of harassment and stalking.
21. Millersville University, July 9, 2015, served notice by Millersville University Police
Chief Pete Anders, for negotiating a civil rights complaint with Assistant to the President,
Debra Hoeckler
22.Village Nightclub, July of 20015, by George..........., Owner, tried to enter several times,
with no reason and no written notice.
23.Lucky Dog Bar, August of 2015, met Abby and Keagan Pflumm outside, went inside and
was told by bartender to leave and not come back.
24.Barley Snyder, LLC Lancaster Office, receptionist Ms. Woods refused to let me
communicate with Attorney George Werner, who in 2011 entered appearance in 05-2288
for Fulton Bank in U.S. District Court.
25.Wennerstrom Property Management Company, June 2015, went to complain
regarding harassment, threats, etc., at 1252 Fremont Street and told to leave building.
26.Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board, Northwest Office Building, November 23, 2015,
Harrisburg, PA, Delivered COMPLAINT re Bars and Restaurants in Lancaster engaged in
Discrimination, Stalking, Harassment, Assaults, etc., Would not allow access to Legal
Counsel, and female who took complaint would not provide ID.
27.Southeast Medical Facilities and Brightside Church Office, February 2016, Would not
issue pain medication and filed a Private Criminal Complaint with the Lancaster County
District Attorney, no opinion as of yet.
28.U.S. Federal Facilities per the National Security Agency Interrogation of March 9, 2016
at the NSA Headquarters in Ft. Meade, Maryland. Handcuffed and Interrogated for over an
hour and finally let go and told not to continue on to Washington, D.C. And said I was no
longer permitted to visit any U.S. Federal Facilities.
Dated: March 15, 2016
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Caterbone
of a TI
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Executive
Summary
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
36
36
55
3636
of
of
of51
51
of
51
7051
Tuesday,
Tuesday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
13,
15, 2016

Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
37
37
56
36
37
37
37
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
27
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
38
38
57
37
38
38
38
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
28
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
39
39
58
38
39
39
39
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
29
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

! "
"
$% &
!
" #
%
"&#
(
'
!
(
,
"
"
")
"
""
-
)
!
! "
!
'
%
" !
"
!
)
+
!
" *
"
"
,
,
,
*
%
*
(
%
!
/"0
1
1 ,
"
"
4
!
"
"
!
!
#
.
.
&,,0
%
1 ,
2"3
!
)
** ! "
&,,..$/
&,,
%
&,,
%
&
, "
"
00
"
!,
"
6
7
7 , !
&,,-
8,
:
(
9
,
$;$
! " ,
, ,
** !
;
5
$
!
&,,@
"2
&<;=
>
1
,
.
&,,=
$
,
>
A
1 B3
.+
&,,=
1 B3
2
>
%
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
40
40
59
39
40
40
40
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
30
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

<
1
1
* "
!
"
C#
"$
"
<
*
&, ,
24
#9
; "
&,,@(&,,= A
3
24
5
!
%
&,,0 4
! %3
"
"
!
&,,
%
!
4
'
5
4
D
%
%
"
""
,! "
0 =
0 =9
9
00&9 00
:
9
&,,-
&, , $
!
%
!
D
%
%
=
F
!
))
+
/4
),
"
0 =
/
$
G
3
%
00
3
3
"
%#
$
$
&, ,
&,,4
!- "
.
&,,@
,
*
&,,<
E
&,,
-) !
/ 4
24
/
$
D
&, ,
D
$
&,,-
&,,0
%
D
!
D
D %
7F !
>
!
D
$
A
8F
$
%
;
D
.
%
&,,3
E
$
*
00=; 00
$
5
! 7
0 =
00
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
41
41
60
40
41
41
41
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
31
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

)
A
24
$;$
00
(F
&
%
B
5
00 9
" * <
00=( 00 9
:#
> ) "" ""

$
;3
#, " !
&,,-
"
"
"
0 =
&, ,
/
.
$
B
3
3
=
0 =
) "
.
&,,1
0 =
24
" "
3
"
&,,@
" E
""
B
$
<
&,,1
.
&,,-
,-(&&
2
=
@,
"
&,
3
&,,!
&,,@
&,,@
0 =
@, 1
&,,@
9
!
@,
#" !,
0 =
" "1 ,
"
"*
":
" E
F
&,,-
!
B
/
!
"
00=( 00 9
B
:
9
$
'
.
&,,1
9
0 =
&, ,
/
.
00 9
/
&,,9
&,
( "
!
.
00
$
!
&, ,
F
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
3
7
8
!
&,,
&, ,
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
42
42
61
41
42
42
42
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
32
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

&
, * "
&&
*#
"
&:
;!
&<
:
%
$
&, ,
$
&,,-
!-
,
5
%
"
>
$
$
< !-
24
? "
;
>
&,,0
B
&,,%
(
$
&, ,
&-
A
.+ $
&@
! :
&,,$
: , *
&, ,
* @
&,,@
"
E
3
&,,
"
&,,0
7 "!
7 "
0 =
*
&=
) "
":
)"
&,,@
"
&
&0
!
< ")
+
9 &,,@
:
9
&, ,
&,,
00
:,
!6
"
"
" .
9 &,,0
0 = "&#
, *
&,,@
/
" F
0 =
;A
0 =
F
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
0 =
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
43
43
62
42
43
43
43
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
33
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

!
3
"

6
0 =
0 =
.
.
#
$
"2
J +
!
$
.
I $
$
.
'
00&
+$;F
D
"$
&,;&,
3
A
00
'
$ 24
"1E1# $
K
E
A
>
L
F
F
B
F
+
0=,K
A
$
$
1
+
>
1
$
>
B
!
3
F
1
00
) % 3
&,,-
!
>
! A !
00,K
1 B3
>
F
F
& 1
F
8
! 4
'
A
! 4
A
0=,K
F
00,K
0 ,K
0<,K
3
/
>
%
&,,
) %$
D 1
"
$
0 <9 F
0@,K
0@,K
$
2!
A? D!B
#
*
$
7
+
00
D 18
.
E
$
M 1
00= E
0 =
%
0 ,K
$
0 =
M
00
!
&,,9
(
9
!
1
,-(
$ !2B+EF2
(&&
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
44
44
63
43
44
44
44
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
34
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

") !
"
7!
N
.
!
5
F
(
(
5
G
*
A'
, ?
*
? 1
!,
A
(
> "
!, '!
,
B
A
" " * #" !, " "
$C
* #" !, D
73
8
* 7
,
"
"
&
"
#
.
"
#(
5
7
9
'
5
%
7A
8 !
8 !
'
!
7D .2
O
% 8
'
7
'
(
(
%
%
4
K
K
M %
%
K
'
7E
(
8
"
%
'
%(
(
(
4
;
(
7
7
87
(
(
8
8
- 7 > !,
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
45
45
64
44
45
45
45
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
35
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

* , "
1"
!
!
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
.
.
&
B
B
B
B
B
@
E
@
E
&. @
DD
@
. DD
"
@
& DD
@
. DD
@
& DD
@
$ DD
@
DD
@
E
DD
@
EB& DD
@
EB DD
@
& B DD
@
DD
@
& DD
@
DD
@
& DD
@
DD
B@
)
B@
!
!
!
))
)
*
!
")
1
3
1
"
)
)
, "
*"
"
, "
!
*
"
")
"
7
"!
"
*
!
*
")
!
6, "
1
5
)
>
' "
*
, "
1 ,!
, "
)
!
"
"
!
!
1
"": !
1 , 1
"": !
"
1
"": !
!
"
! * !
)
*
"E
DD
")
E DD
%
,
!
DD
!"
, "
"
"
"
1 ,"
DD
*)
PPPPPPP "
>7
%#
'?
Stan J. Caterbone
# PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
"
Stan J. Caterbone
# PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
"
June 19, 2015

PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
Pennsylvania
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
$
Lancaster
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
19
PPPPPPP
15
June
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
&,PP
Stan J. Caterbone - I was a notary from '94-'98

PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
F
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
SJC
I
.
I
&, ,
Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
46
46
65
45
46
46
46
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
36
of
41
Don't Know When
24
$
$
Q &, , "!
I
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
THE ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
47
47
66
46
47
47
47
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
37
of
41
Page 35 of 41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
06/10/2007

Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
THE ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
48
48
67
47
48
48
48
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
38
of
41
Page 36 of 41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,
06/10/2007

Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
49
49
68
48
49
49
49
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
39
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
50
50
69
49
50
50
50
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
40
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

Advanced
Stan
The
Stan
Killing
J. Caterbone
J. Media
Medi
Caterbone
of aGroup
TI
Grop
Group
Executive
- Electromagnetic
Executive
Press
PressSummary
Executive
Release
Release
Summary
Summary
Weapons
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
51
51
70
50
51
51
51
of
of
of
of
51
51
of
50
51
70
51
51
Page
41
of
41
Tuesday,
Thursday,
Tuesday,
Friday,
Tuesday,
March
Friday,
March
December
15,
March
2016
May
15,
3/15/2016
2016
11,
13,
17, 2015
15,
2015
2016
Saturday,
October
10,

Recorded-DefenseNews Story by Joe Pitts ELECTROMAGNETIC Weapons and Founder of The Electronic Warfare Working Group For Securing Weapons of The Future July 7, 2008 With Karen Stewart

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Recorded-DefenseNews Story by Joe Pitts ELECTROMAGNETIC Weapons and Founder of The Electronic Warfare Working Group For Securing Weapons of The Future July 7, 2008 With Karen Stewart

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania

5:15-cv-03984-JCJ Notice has been electronically mailed to:

5:15-cv-03984-JCJ Notice will not be electronically mailed to:

ASIA & PACIFIC RIM

MIDDLE EAST & AFRICA

Online Show Daily

Securing EW's Future

Asia & Pacific Rim

during Operation Allied Force over Kosovo in 1999, I

at large about the need to invest in EW technology and capabilities.

our EW capabilities will again face a period of neglect once current

Congressman Joe Pitts & Electromagnetic Weapons

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Joe Pitts recognized as conservative 'inspiration' at GOP gathering in La...

Congressman Joe Pitts & Electromagnetic Weapons

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Joe Pitts recognized as conservative 'inspiration' at GOP gathering in La...

Congressman Joe Pitts & Electromagnetic Weapons

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Joe Pitts recognized as conservative 'inspiration' at GOP gathering in La...

Congressman Joe Pitts & Electromagnetic Weapons

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Congressman Joe Pitts & Electromagnetic Weapons

Sunday, May 22, 2016

& * . '' % &

Congressman Joe Pitts & Electromagnetic Weapons

Sunday, May 22, 2016

January 23, 1997

Ms. Christ ina Rainville

Congressman Joe Pitts & Electromagnetic Weapons

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Com m ission Agent , Howard Eisler.

Congressman Joe Pitts & Electromagnetic Weapons

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Congressman Joe Pitts & Electromagnetic Weapons

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Congressman Joe Pitts & Electromagnetic Weapons

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Congressman Joe Pitts & Electromagnetic Weapons

Sunday, May 22, 2016

I n Sept em ber of 1987, in t he Report t o t he Board of Direct ors of Ferrant i

Congressman Joe Pitts & Electromagnetic Weapons

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Court tightens rules in whistle-blower cases : National-World : Albuque...

Home Business National/World Business

Court tightens rules in whistle-blower cases

WASHINGTON The Supreme Court made it harder

The court ruled 6-3 that James Stone, an 81-year-old

SHARE THIS STORY [?]

Rockwell must pay the entire penalty anyway. The only

Ten most e-mailed stories from abqtrib.com:

Add your comments

Bill Richardson Log

Congressman Joe Pitts & Electromagnetic Weapons

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Los Angeles Times: Archives

MEMBER SERVICES SIGN UP

JOBS CARS HOMES

Start a New Search | Back to Results

About the Archive

Congressman Joe Pitts & Electromagnetic Weapons

Sunday, May 22, 2016

Los Angeles Times: Archives