Tag Archives: psychiatrists

by Ramola D/Posted 3/1/2017

The truth is, we in the Western democracies are no freer than our counterparts elsewhere in the world. In fact, serfs in feudal England or slaves in ancient Egypt served masters no more evil than some of those we deal with today. The only difference is that the ruling classes today hide their crimes and attitudes better. They can’t drag “do-gooders” out of bed at 2:00 am and have them thrown into some hellhole to be tortured to death. Here, in a “democracy”, they have to use satellite spying and harassment technologies, media feedback, political maneuvering, conspiracy, etc. As a result, none will be questioned, let alone caught and punished. Instead, while opponents are silenced and discredited, “their” attitudes permeate society, drawing others to accept that invasions of privacy, drugs, corruption and all manner of criminal conduct are to go unquestioned, as an acceptable part of life. Their delusions and our apathy must be challenged.  —Paul Baird, Surveillance Issues

Paul Baird, B.Ec., LLb, is a Privacy and Human Rights Campaigner from Australia with a background in Law and Economics, who has worked for the Australian Tax Office, ANZ Bank, the State Chamber of Commerce, and Roads and Traffic Authority amongst other responsible positions. In 1990/’91, he wrote the novel “In the Year 2252,” widely distributed in draft form and covertly banned. The full story behind all responses and retaliation to his futuristic science-fiction novel which critiqued elitist crime may be found on the Case Study page of his website, Surveillance Issues, where he discusses covert electronic surveillance, monitoring, and assault technologies.

Covert Electronic Assaults Protect Organized Elitist Crime

Ramola D: Paul, first thanks so much for agreeing to do this interview. Your website is rather iconic in that it’s one of the oldest, most authoritative, reliable, and revealing about these covert programs of high tech remote brain surveillance and directed-energy weapon use on civilians—that appear to have been going on now for more than 3 decades, perhaps earlier even.

Interestingly, people from around the world—including the USA—can relate to what you describe: the programs of covert targeting, uber-surveillance, CO-INTELPRO, and 24/7 assault with undisclosed energy weapons and neuroweapons are very similar. Marshall Thomas names it the New Monarch program, many relate it to the gradual unrolling of a rather sinister high-tech New World Order. Even more sinister than what’s being revealed to those of us being targeted, it seems.

You state quite unequivocally that these covert assaults are being run by governments on citizens to protect organized crime.

“The US Patriot Act, for example, protects governments and connected criminals from criticism and/or detection and prosecution. Under this act, anyone whistleblowing or fighting the system on a major concern is arbitrarily deemed to be unpatriotic (when it’s the criminals they criticise who betray us). They can then be listed (by a senior politician or at the request, through them, of a connected criminal) as a security risk and harassed covertly; using secret technologies….This leaves them neutralised and possibly even silenced on the issue they originally raised. This, along with various research aspects, is the purpose of the exercise.” Surveillance Issues

Can you tell us more about that assessment of what has been and still is going on globally with these programs—just as much in Australia as in the UK or US or India or Canada? (And many other places, worldwide.)

Paul Baird: Thank you, Ramola. Yes, I’m afraid this sort of thing goes back as far as the end of World War II and the military/NASA/CIA employment of Nazi scientists through Project Paperclip. I recall an autobiography by a man named Kaufmann that was from the ’70s, I think. There are also victims on my help files who are quite old now and they say this has been going on for most of their lives.

Anyway, we’ve seen MK ULTRA and other programs exposed, and Ed Snowden was recently allowed to blow the whistle on mass surveillance (I suggest that was to condition the public to the surveillance state). However, The “New Monarch Project” you refer to remains relatively unknown and hidden. With over 5,000 devices covered by The Inventions Secrecy Act, 20,000 satellites in play and countless supercomputers, there may well be, as you say, worse to come.

The NSL thing seems to have fizzled out but the monitors have no interest in curbing terrorism, but rather use it as an excuse to oppress their detractors: writers, activists, whistleblowers and such. As fomer CIA director John Brennan boasted: “The CIA controls terrorism”. That then justifies the alterations to the Constitution and other law, which limit human/democratic rights, and excuse the covert oppression of the innocent by the guilty, who abuse their power/position/celebrity.

Lucrative elitist crime like trafficking (drugs, weapons, humans), as well as pedophile networks, false flag operations, and more are hidden/protected as true critics are attacked with weapons that could wipe out terrorism and crime in the right hands.

Ramola D: National Security as excuse, you’ve noted, for increased surveillance and repression, is actually a means to hide crime.

“…bogus National Security laws are also an obvious attempt to hide military/agency crimes that the public should know about.”

In other words, you are saying these laws have been made just to protect ongoing crimes while pretending to care about the safety of citizens and the nation. Could you expand on that?

From Surveillance Issues:

For example, the US government just passed the National Defense Authorisation Act, 2012, giving the President (and others) the power to target and silence anyone questioning State corruption. When this is done openly in other countries, the US is the first to condemn such evil, yet when they are guilty of the same, they do it in secret and no-one dares to criticise lest they join the ranks of those they persecute. So much for gov’t of the people, for the people, and by the people. The criminals who do such things abuse their authority, betray our trust, and secretly mock the democratic ideals they publicly support. They don’t serve us, they simply help themselves and their criminal associates. By using stealth, they can feign ignorance and hide their true nature from most.

For example: In the USA, over 300,000 NSL’s (National Security Letters) have already been issued. These allow the agency-targeting of innocent civilians whose objections to corruption/crime in high places have been deliberately skewed or misinterpreted as a threat to powerful people. Once placed in a program, people can be abused and experimented on, from a distance (using satellites/high tech.). This effectively silences and discredits them while providing agency researchers with guinea pigs for experiments in control, brain function, dreams, health, robotics, and much more. Post 9/11, $750 billion per year has been spent on satellite weapons used for human experimentation/targeting. Most of this has found its way from gov’t coffers to about 80 defense contractors who are also culpable for the crimes against humanity that are addressed on this site.

Paul Baird: Criminals try to hire their own kind, exclusively. That’s the same for a bank robbery, running a TV propaganda campaign, or a country. All entering public life or key roles are surveillance- vetted. Where blackmail, bribery, and fear don’t work, the person is usually rejected or worse. Those remaining have non-official cover.

The worst group are the MSM.  William Colby, ex-CIA Director, said: “The CIA controls everyone of significance in the major media”. That sums up the core of the problem with relaying the truth on many important matters. The control of the flow of information and public perception is crucial to their plans.

Ramola D: Your website, www.surveillanceissues.com, pretty extensively details what happened with the sci-fi novel you wrote—which met with some quite extraordinary agent acclaim and sounds like it might have become a bestseller had you continued with publication—which apparently excited the ire of criminals in high places who unleashed this high-tech targeting on you. Do you want to address a bit how long it’s been going on, and why you think it continues? (Not in any way to have you try to find reasons for this obvious atrocity and crime—which bears no excuse–but to hear your own thinking on the subject.)

Paul Baird: My web site is worth a look. Most of what I’ve learned is there. I don’t want to dwell on my own situation, only to use it as the example that I clearly know the most about.

The published feed off the unpublished. I think most know that. Covert censorship is rife. They may not know that. My novel “In the year 2252” was covertly used, banned, mocked, and abused by many in Hollywood, and the personal surveillance I endure led to much covert harassment/feedback. The book criticised elitist betrayals, the space program (an obscene waste of money directed secretly at surveillance and other weapons for human manipulation, when so many are starving, etc.), the NWO, drug proliferation, etc., etc.

From Surveillance Issues:

“Before a second draft was prepared, it was clear covert censorship would prevent any possibility of publication… I was already under 24-hour-a-day surveillance and was fielding feedback from corrupt sections of the entertainment industry, especially the media.

The reasons for their objections are many. Although the fictional novel was ultimately to be placed in a “virtual reality” setting, the submitted draft drew too much attention because it was critical of many things which criminals in high places do to get what they want and control others. Corruption, drugs, war, media deception, and all manner of immorality were openly attacked in the novel. I also lobbied on privacy laws.

No media player would want the general public becoming fully aware of the invasions of privacy and crimes which journalists and agency officials commit. Remember, I lobbied heavily on privacy laws for years with [ex-Prime Minister] John Howard himself supporting my views, in writing.

“Ethic” Rather than “Ethnic” Cleansing”

Ramola D: One of the most outstanding aspects of your experience is that you have spoken to and communicated with hundreds of people who variously worked for Intelligence agencies, the military, elected politicians, journalists, neuroscientists, neurologists, and in the process learned a great deal about the way the very real “system” of covert political repression works, what’s behind it, and what chance the average person has, of exposing it, or affecting it.

Do you still think it is next to impossible to stop or expose this system?

Paul Baird: I never thought it was impossible just difficult. Equally difficult struggles have taken longer. We just need to persevere and trust in God.

From Surveillance Issues:

AFP (Australian FBI)(NH) – Head of surveillance unit: “Even if a head of state or a Prime Minister was to wade in on these matters, they would be out of office that same day. That is what you’re up against here”. When I asked who was primarily responsible for these crimes– spy agencies, the military, politicians, or journalists–he answered: “Well, they all have ready access”, meaning all of the above. With this, he confirmed my earliest observations that this was elitist/class crime directed by criminals in high places at those who challenged them in some way.

US Embassy in Canberra – Chief US spy in Australia: Standing on the lawn outside (they would not have me in the building), and looking skyward, then panning his hand across the city skyline below, he bragged: “I know everything that happens in every office in this city. Everything. Understand?” I wrote to every Federal MP and told them what he had said. None responded. All are clearly compromised by the surveillance.

…The overall message is that this is politics first and foremost: political psychiatry, political oppression, political crime. Science is employed but politics is the reason for choosing the targets.”

As for what it’s all about: After 26 years on this, it has become clear to me that this is more about politics than anything else–suppression, oppression, experimentation, and eugenics.

In fact, my personal view is that this is a new “silent holocaust” (Look up the term on Wikipedia–I added the third definition: “‘Ethic’ rather than ‘Ethnic’ cleansing whereby whistleblowers, activists, and writers critical of a government or the powers that be can find themselves the subject of programs designed to persecute, oppress, and indirectly prevent reproduction….”).

Those with gene trait combinations that indicate they may challenge the Powers That Be (PTB) (or those that have already done so in some way) are placed in a sort of electronic, mobile concentration camp and harassed/stressed so that none (or few) reproduce from that point. It is extermination by natural attrition: the removal of those traits from the gene pool by stealth.

And that 60% that will not question authority at all (the CIA estimate) will grow while the 1% that stick their necks out will dwindle. Whether that succeeds or not, I believe that is their thinking….One arm harasses the targets so their complaints mirror mental illness (paranoia, schizophrenia, etc.), while the other observes the results, pretends it’s natural, and approves the necessary social engineering. I believe this helps sell it to those who know but acquiesce.

From Surveillance Issues:

NASA Inspector-General’s Office: After admitting that they knew all about NASA’s role in delivering payloads into space and the capabilities of the satellite technology in question, and being asked what could be done to stop them, I was told: “Nothing. I suggest you pray”. This was repeated, as I was clearly incredulous. It was said with resignation and certainty as the only solution. This, more than any other comment from any other source summed up the difficulty of the situation faced by all targeted persons.

Bogus National Security laws have enabled Big Brother to monitor everyone and harass many, any that challenge the status quo.

Ramola D: Many you spoke to revealed a great deal about the true nature of surveillance—which we still don’t read about in The Guardian or The Intercept or The Washington Post. (In fact, we read about it primarily at Surveillance Issues, World CACH, ICAACT, US CACH, The Everyday Concerned Citizen, Mind Justice, Targeted Individuals Canada, Mind Control in America, and other informative websites like I Want to Know and Educate Yourself, covering classified technologies and covert operations, often run by those actually being wrongfully, covertly, or remotely radiation-/neuro-targeted and assaulted, worldwide.)

As part of your own experience, when you were first hit, in 1991, you record communications from various politicians, including a letter of support from ex-Prime Minister John Howard, which told you many were aware of your high-tech surveillance and harassment, yet they could not help, their “hands were tied.” You’ve since understood that many policemen and politicians are aware that people are being assaulted with these remote technologies—yet won’t help; how do you read that?

Paul Baird: To be clear: John Howard’s letter of support, which can be seen on my web site, came before he was PM. I did not talk with or meet John Howard; he sent me a supportive letter, that’s all. However, I did speak with members of his staff. After he was PM, his aides told me it was awkward and his hands were tied, as did aides in other Ministerial offices. It is awkward because acquaintances and foreign politicians are involved. I discovered that those targeted people with federal police complaint files had them marked “Politically Sensitive” for the same reason.

Media Treason & Complicity In Covering Up Covert Global Neuro-Weapon and EMF Weapon Use on Populations

Ramola D: I am especially interested in addressing the part that Media plays in covering up the worldwide usage of neuro-weapons and directed-energy weapons on the populace.

Obviously, such a gigantic cover-up could not have been pulled off without Mainstream Media playing a very active role—in not merely suppressing this information by not covering it, but by pandering to their CIA/DOD overseers in distorting, denying, degrading the information out there on it, in the process deliberately discrediting those targeted persons and those being non-consensually experimented-on today who speak out.

We see evidence of this malicious campaign today in publications such as The New York Times, The Washington Post, Mother Jones, The Daily Beast, Rational Wiki, Wikipedia and other mainstream rags. But most—not all—alternative media also refuse to acknowledge the very existence of this crime. You’ve stated, not just about this but crime in general, “By owning/controlling the media, criminals avoid open challenge.” What have you learned about journalists regarding this particular cover-up?

Paul Baird: Yes, as you say, the CIA-controlled MSM as well as the marginalised media, even publications like Nexus, refuse to run anything but the most derogatory items on TIs. The New York Times, Washington Post, and other misinformation strongholds, in particular, have attacked some of our better campaigners after luring them into an interview situation. They run with some mass hysteria line and ignore that all the targets have done something to annoy the PTB. Personally, I would never even talk with these snakes and this is the first interview I’ve ever given, and that’s only being done because I’m convinced that you understand the issues and are totally sympathetic.

Look, as ex-CIA director William Colby admitted: “The CIA controls everyone of importance in the major media”. They’re not going to rat on themselves, nor will they help an agency-target or anyone attempting to expose crimes of the corporate/military/political conglomerate. Those entering the MSM sort of sell their souls on matters like this and are brainwashed into believing it’s justifiable, and that they couldn’t do anything about it anyway. They’re all scared when confronted on this. It’s also all covered by bogus National Security legislation, so they lean on that as another excuse when there aren’t any real excuses, just criminal delusions fostered by elitists.

And sections of the media don’t just acquiesce on all of this and attack those trying to highlight it, they actively take part in harassing TIs. In fact, in my own case, and that of others who’ve been targeted by the entertainment industry villains, the attacks can be overwhelming and brutal….I see the MSM media as evil traitors and criminals.

Marginalised journalists and MSM execs, presenters that do not approve told me that surveillance results can be handed over with a “Find a place for this on tonight’s news/current affairs” -type instruction. Surveillance frequencies can be handed to stations. Direct computer to teleprompter connections can be arranged. The target is oppressed and discredited if they tell anyone, but this practice is as old as eavesdropping and predates all the technologies that aid today’s elite criminal. Again, insiders don’t care for the truth, only ego, income, and celebrity.

Hearing Voices, the Neurophone, and What Neurologists Know

Ramola D: I’d like to focus a bit on the issue of hearing voices, which many of those being assaulted with covert and classified technologies report, often as “synthetic telepathy” or the military term,Voice to Skull or V2K. Evidence for this military technology has been provided on FOIA request, and can be seen in patents.

Reporting such technologically-induced voices as evidence of covert neuroweapon assault to local law enforcement or physicians, still, today, ends with the target being taken to a Psych Ward and shot up with neuroleptics and anti-psychotics, essentially being disbelieved, dismissed, and discredited as mentally ill, schizophrenic, and hallucinatory.

This is absurd, because there are many known and patented technologies today to induce voices in people’s heads, such as the Frey effect, the microwave hearing effect, and bone conduction—which whistleblowers and scientists have also spoken about, and some of which are beginning to see coverage in mainstream media–but the Neurophone predates them all, and was used as a Voice of God weapon during the Iraq war, according to many analysts. What is so important about the Neurophone?

Paul Baird: Neurophone technology is the basis for developments that see many targeted people fielding personal “broadcasts” from Spy Central. From ignorant police and medicos to complicit journos and MPs, any discussion of this can lead to the complainant being institutionalised.

The device was invented in 1958, and was classified soon after. The developments from direct to remote, to vehicles, to satellites which deliver it via laser (slower sound riding faster directional light over the insignificant distance from a geo-synchronously-orbiting Deeper Space satellite to the Earthly target) followed.

It was used by spies for silent communication (no touching ear pieces, etc.), to drive Iraqi soldiers out of bunkers, to fire up and delude Manchurian candidates, and to discredit and/or institutionalise many political targets. It is subtly referred to in many songs.

It is the only term in our repertoire that cannot be denigrated, misrepresented, covered with other meanings or used elsewhere. There are countless pages of web site listings on the word, yet it still remains out of all dictionary listings, because the psych’ branding of sufferers as mad is central to the oppression of the righteous. On top of that, the reaction I get from perps/Government infiltrators in our midst is out of proportion. If others knew of it (even audiologists etc.,) it would become known world-wide, and the secrecy and misuse over 50 years would come out.

The education of people as to the existence of Neurophone technology and its development is one way we CAN break through. Other terminologies can be attacked. Other devices don’t have such specific names and cannot be actually bought from a real inventor who is still alive.

Ramola D: You have spoken with several neuroscientists on this subject, how have they reacted, when told of these technologies to remotely induce voices in people’s heads? I would think it’s very important to have psychiatrists communicate with neuroscientists, and vice versa, so psychiatrists begin to understand that hearing voices can no longer be considered symptomatic exclusively of schizophrenia.

Paul Baird: My experiences talking to brain experts indicate that they see all of this as interesting and say things like “Where can I get hold of these technologies”, that’s if they aren’t already involved. In other words, the humanitarian aspect is lost on them and all they see is New Science. They are part of the problem, not the solution. That’s not to say honest, caring ones don’t exist, and cannot be found, just that it would be difficult with the “Year/Decade/Century of the Brain” brigade.

My preferred target, based on positive feedback and confessions from the profession, would be NEUROLOGISTS. Many know. Some sympathise. Any that say they’re not interested (especially in a device like a NEUROphone) are liars. Any and all neurologists would be interested and they, in turn, could be used to convince others. The extraordinary efforts and manpower used to stop me telling an entire conference room full of neurologists is evidence enough for me…This avenue, like Net films, is a concern to “them” because it may work.

Challenging the inexact science of psychiatry with neuroscience is what I’m on about too. Neurologists know. If they would just relay that, then the psych’ profession could not ignore it.

Ramola D: When you say Neurologists, I presume you don’t mean Neuroscientists (as above/brain researchers)? (Correct me if I’m wrong.). And are you serious, have you actually met brain researchers who professed immediate interest (in technologies that could remote-target brains)? That would suggest that a majority of researchers are Not focused on the humane or ethical aspects of brain research? That seems huge in itself–can you elaborate?

Paul Baird: I use Neuroscience to mean the branch of medicine/science dealing with the nervous system and the brain. Its practitioners are neurologists. I see neurologists as just one of many groups that deal with brain disorders. Neuroscience is the broader field they operate under and that can include psychiatry, pharmacology, biochemistry and so on. And, yes, I’m always serious on the topic of covert harassment…The flippant “Where do I get it?” type responses are there but I don’t even recall the names, as once I hear that sort of inhumane response, I dismiss the person; I’m looking for compassionate, knowledgeable people, not corrupt or uncaring, would-be criminals. The names of those honest neurologists who knew or quickly accepted the truth are logged, but must remain concealed unless and until they choose to come forward; though some are briefly mentioned on my web site.

Ramola D: So generally speaking, one would think all neurologists today should be interested in learning about what TIs are experiencing? And a Neurophone would be of interest to all, you’d think? Did you want to elaborate on that experience of being stopped from telling a conference full of neurologists about the Neurophone?

Paul Baird: The Neurophone is a device that allows non-verbal communication as signals directed at the body to travel the nervous system and register in the brain–by-passing normal hearing mechanisms. It is attuned to the individual bio-electronic resonance frequency of the target, and so is not heard by others in the signal’s path. For any neurologist to say they neither know of nor care about knowing of such a device would be clear evidence of corruption or knowledge. 

Indeed, for any specialist, be they neurologists or psychiatrists etc., to say they’re not interested in any device that allows signals to travel the human nervous system must raise suspicion of complicity. Like a corrupt cop who says he has no interest in learning of a new crime technique, it would be more than suspicious. The Psych’ professionals are almost all corrupt, many are involved but not the neurologists.

Sometime in the early ’90s, I attended a huge Neurologists’ convention at the Sydney Hilton. Expecting to be unable to speak directly to the attendees, I brought flyers in envelopes addressed to each attendee and posted them on the giant notice board. The names and permission to do this had been given to me by the organisers, who later told me that when I left, many men in black suits filed in and took one each. None of them were conference attendees who remained in the hall at the time. Consequently, not one received my posting. When I started contacting them individually, I found that many knew of the research, the Neurophone, the brain-wave scanning and brain-wave interpretation software.

Example 1: One admitted he had been harassed for inventing his own Neurophone, and offered to use hospital scanning equipment to scan targets–people who were being interfered with by remote technologies. The hospital equipment could only be accessed for official research so 40 targeted people would be needed as volunteers to be able to call the testing a research project and thus gain access to the oscillating scanners. He warned that if the monitors interfered with brainwave signals during scanning, which they could easily do, that he would be obliged to report anyone whose brainwave patterns matched those of known criminals on file. The risk was assessed by both of us as too high so we told no one.

(Personally, I believe that part of the framing we suffer includes bogus brainwave results that they fudge). The neurologist was later offered a job at Sydney University’s Centre for The Mind which studies creativity, facial expressions, and such, and is supported by Richard Branson, Peter Adams, Baz Lurman,The Dalai Lama and others. At this point this neurologist’s attitude was corrupted, and he claimed that not everything about such human research is black and white but grey. Potentially one of our greatest supporters, and a man who had offered so much hope over so many discussions, had been compromised and was lost to us.

Example 2: Another neurologist shared that illegal human research (non-consensual) had been going on for years. She said they used to hide brain-wave scanners in computer screens and wall cavities in neurologists’ offices, and would illegally scan patients’ brain-waves for research. Today, she said, the US military scans brain-waves from satellites, and does most of the research themselves. She feared for her job/life and told me to never use her name, though I could repeat what she had told me.

Challenging the inexact science of psychiatry with neuroscience is what I’m on about too. Neurologists know. If they would just relay that, then the psych’ profession could not ignore it.

The Criminal Silencing of Critics with Deadly Weaponry, Discrediting, and Psychiatry

Ramola D: Psychiatrists and doctors are being used to name victims mentally ill (schizoid or paranoid or both) if they report hearing voices or covert harassment on the street, or airplane/helicopter stalking, being followed, being swarmed in stores, etc.

Dr. Seth Farber recently wrote about this in his article, “The Psychiatric Metanarrative, Targeted Individuals, and the Deep State: A Response to The New York Times”, saying that psychiatrists didn’t have to be wittingly complicit, they were generally oblivious of covert agency actions, and could just be expressing the innately authoritarian and conformist attitude of Psychiatry, which is eager to name all deviations from a norm they subjectively designate as sign of mental illness.

In essence though, psychiatrists are co-operating with the State in diagnosing victims as schizoid and helping to cover up this Crime-With-Technology. In the US and Europe, victims can be committed to institutions by such psychiatrists. Have you spoken with psychiatrists and neuropsychiatrists, what have you learned?

Paul Baird: Yes. Most scientists have no interest in ethics or human rights. Some others have organised groups to look into that. Professional prostitution or a “guns for hire” approach is common across many professions. Over 60% of people will now do whatever they’re told for money or advantage according to the CIA. “It is appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity.” Albert Einstein.

Psychiatrists’ bread-and-butter diagnoses include schizophrenia; only an honest, intelligent, brave one with little ego would accept the truth. Voices in the head are their favourite money spinner–and who supplies much of that money? The government, elite employers, etc.

It is very dangerous to speak to psychiatrists, especially if they’re corrupt. Even the best ones will accept stalking, harassment, and victimisation scenarios but draw the line at hearing voices broadcast from Spook Central.

Ramola D: You’ve stated that this is class warfare, where people in power use criminal tactics of silencing potential critics with deadly weaponry, and Media helps by ruthlessly suppressing and ridiculing targets’ testimonials, while also attacking them with the information gained from constant surveillance, “Surveillance Results”–could you expand on that?

Paul Baird: The elite all know. MPs, celebrities, “businessmen”, senior military personnel, etc. They salve their consciences on the conspiracy of silence by rabbiting the CIA line that it’s a matter of National Security. They know who’s in the wrong but just don’t care. Remember, the CIA sifts and places people for the shadow government, selecting from that 60% I keep referring to. For example: A rep’ of the top security firm here told me that the “Word is out to wash our hands of you”–the Pontius Pilate approach. Having all sold their souls with their silence and complicity, the elitists do what they can to discredit the innocent. The prince of lies controls their hearts and minds.

From Surveillance Issues.com:

Legal Aide: “It’s common for corporate criminals to covertly harass and blacklist people and many of them wind up on the street. They enjoy seeing that as they present as hopeless/mad. I’m only using this job as a stepping-stone and have a family. If I try to help any of those I know they did this to or spill the beans, my career will stall.”

Lawyer/Partner: “We’ve discussed it and would dearly like to help, but if we do, “They” will come at us from the side; we’ll lose all clients from any connected source, and that means we’d be out of business.”

Neuro Surveillance: Celebrities and Public Figures Both Controlled and Complicit

Ramola D: You’ve said that celebrities and public figures are also controlled by threat of use of these technologies against them. Many are also used, via Surveillance Results, via television, radio, film, to further harass targets. What do you think public figures know about all of this and why won’t they help?

Paul Baird: As for what celebrities know: This is again what I’ve brought to the table time and time again, but no-one wants to hear it. I’ve been hit by these people for decades and met some of them, some others who work for them, and many others who’ve been similarly hit. Most celebs are chosen, through agency vetting and syndicate approval, and are in that 60% I told you about. They have no editorial control, especially the journalists, and just present what they’re told to BUT they know of the targeting and, over time, if they hit the same targets, they’re in on the joke/crime.

The whole “don’t trust public figures” thing is so hard to relay in the age of celebrity worship that it’s frustrating. There are fence-sitting celebrities who don’t really approve of all this surveillance and oppression, but see it differently to you and I; as a sort of necessary trade-off. So many subtly refer to V2K and mind-reading technologies. With many, many songs mentioning “voices in my head” and “reading minds”, with the colloquial references used as covers if and when they are asked.

What am I saying? It’s back to that 60% thing again. 60% of people will do as they’re told, so the selections are made from that pool of talent, and the other 40% are shunted out.

In the case of public figures, Satan, through his minions, exacts the surveillance price from celebrities and they accept it because: that’s what they do for a living, and if they don’t do it, some lesser talent will take their place and do it anyway. Pretty much the same defence you’d get from hired assassins, give or take some large egos.

As for the price they pay (covert surveillance above the papparazzi thing being a big part of it): they pay a price, but their silence on the matter means that others also pay that same price with nothing to counter-balance it; all of us are also monitored, etc., because they remain silent. So we all pay, and only they benefit.

I say we all stand up and tell, and to hell with the monitors and their technology; it’s undemocratic, immoral, and criminal, and no government has a mandate to do it or allow it to be done.

The Few Exceptions: “Too Afraid to Do More”

Ramola D: So: people in public office and in prominent positions in media are generally corruptible, or they would not have attained their office. This brings us to the present, to all the implications of Pizzagate, the dark stories of blackmail and pedophilia propping up people in public office. Have you met or know of any exceptions, and what is your feeling about corrupt people in power today—have things changed, do we have a greater chance of exposing them?

Paul Baird: Yes, I’ve met some exceptions; that’s where a lot of my information came from in the first place. However, they will not go public as their careers/lives may be in jeopardy. Around the time I was talking to PM Howard’s people, the chief AFP (Australian Federal Police) surveillance expert told me that even if the PM were to try to help a targeted person, that he would be out of office that same day; one way or another. Such is the power of those that foster this system of oppression.

The honest/brave ones that helped a lot were mainly State and Federal Police, ex-spies and such — a few ex-politicians, TV presenters, TV/radio execs, and presenters were honest and supportive, but they were too afraid to do more than that.

Could Pizzagate and Pedogate Help Expose High-Tech Targeting?

Ramola D: What do you think about the connections of high-placed criminals to Pizzagate today, and the exposure of pedophilia/Satanism, etc.? Ted Gunderson and others have spoken about child trafficking and abuse, and many researchers have written about Satanism in the security and Intelligence agencies. Any chance, you think, that the exposure of this evil will help expose high-tech targeting as well?

Paul Baird: There’s always a chance, I suppose, but I tend to think that pedophilia in elitist circles is so out of control that it’s spilling out into the public arena. So many celebrites are caught up in rings or personal situations that there are two LA law firms that deal with nothing but celeb’ pedo’ cases or sexual-harassment-type matters. I personally see how we protect our children as a gauge of how well society is progressing. At the moment we are in a very sick, disgraceful place.

“The Ability of Government to Classify Crime is What Must be Fought.”

Ramola D: Going back to classified crime: I would think any victim of such “classified” assault on their bodies and brains would agree with this statement of yours:

“Classifying” information and calling it a matter of National Security negates the need for the criminals involved to even create excuses for their conduct. The ability of government to classify crime is what must be fought.”

Yet this is crime that malingers in shadows, that is systemically being protected and covered-up. How can such crime be exposed, and how can the classifying of such crime be fought?

Paul Baird: That’s the big question, isn’t it. Exec. Order 13526 is supposed to outlaw the classifying of matters to hide crime, yet it happens every day.

Sec. 1.7. (Executive Order 13526) Classification Prohibitions and Limitations.

(a) In no case shall information be classified, continue to be maintained as classified, or fail to be declassified in order to:

(1) conceal violations of law, inefficiency, or administrative error;
(2) prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency;
(3) restrain competition; or
(4) prevent or delay the release of information that does not require protection in the interest of the national security.

To stop it, we need advice from National Security experts. However, the governments employ most of them, creating a conflict of interest in much the same way that the MSM makes sure it uses all media lawyers to create the same conflict. Those few experts left charge too much for targeted people to afford and, as we all know, you only get the justice you can afford. The elitist criminal will always price you out on civil matters and hide on criminal ones. That’s why 98% of crime (mostly white-collar crime) goes unpunished.

Ramola D: Finally, several initiatives supported by your extensive writing and reportage and run by Dr. Nick Begich and Lynn Surgalla of the US Psychotronics Association made great headway in 1999 at the European Parliament and UNIDIR (United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research) in creating legislation banning the use of weapons to remotely manipulate humans. Yet they were not enforced, and were indeed fully ignored by the US Government. What can we do today to once more bring this vital issue to international attention?

Paul Baird: The European Parliament passed The Resolution on the Environment, Security and Foreign Policy, A4-0005/99 on Jan 28th, 1999. This called for a world-wide convention to ban the use of all weapons for human manipulation. UNIDIR passed a similar resolution. Both were ignored by the media and the US gov’t. (UNIDIR 2002 Media Guide to Disarmament.)

The European Parliament and UNIDIR, in recognising our concerns, did mention Weapons of Mass Destruction but grouped it all into a category called “Weapons for Human Manipulation” and that’s what they wanted banned.

The point I often make about the US, which all countries know rules the planet but they dare not spell out how, is that UN Weapons Inspectors and various “Inspector Generals” etc. are nigh on impotent when it comes to the US stockpile of Weapons of Mass Destruction and covert, classified weapons. It’s as if all other countries are potential villains but not the country in the best position to be just that, and which commits more crimes against humanity than any other. This exclusion from scrutiny is one of the ways you can tell how tightly the US fist holds the reins of power worldwide. Equally, they can bolster and expand their National Security laws to cover concealing, spying, harassing re. the entire planet, but anyone else that tried that would be denounced as criminals by the CIA-controlled Media.

Again, National Security laws and the inability of UN Weapons Inspectors to study evil, classified technologies are, for me, two of the biggest obstacles we face.

With the MSM controlled by the CIA and the US government clearly behind all of this, only public education, through the marginalised media, can get the result we need.

Ramola D: Any other thoughts on how collective humanity can end these horrific elitist criminal practices of covert EMF weapon and neuro-tech assault?

Paul Baird: Can I just emphasize that despite the various other angles to all of this–the oppression, the experiments (AI, Dream Studies, Mind Control, Brain Studies, etc., etc.) that there is clearly a Eugenics angle as well. Much like their Nazi predecessors, these people not only want to disable us and put us in a mobile concentration camp and run their evil experiments, they also want to remove all trait combinations from the gene pool that lead to the make up of those who provide resistance to their evil operations–curiosity. persistence, honesty, spirituality, etc. I know of no targeted person that had children after the stressful harassment started, and most would see their offspring would also suffer if they did. Like Poles, gays, Jews and others during WWII, today the ethical, compassionate, and law-abiding are also in danger of extermination.

Only by exposing these practices can we end them. We need to work at finding ways to let the general population know that they live not in democracies but totalitarian/fascist states and (that they must work) to restore true democracy.

Finally, the answers lie with the marginalised media and articles prepared by people like yourself, Ramola. If enough people can learn of these atrocities through such writings, then pressure can be brought to bear on the powers that be to stop what is effectively a silent holocaust: the remote incarceration, torture, experimentation, and extermination of people of integrity who have the temerity to challenge elite crime.

With much gratitude to Paul Baird for this singular interview, conducted over a long period and several emails. Please visit Surveillance Issues for more information.

Please share widely. Re-posting with permission only, please contact Ramola D, thanks.

RELATED:

Paul Baird/Surveillance Issues: Covert Oppression Using Classified Technologies

Memorandum to President Donald J. Trump on Domestic US Torture Programs Running Under Cover of Surveillance

Intel Agency Crimes: False Flags, Lies, Media Control, & Mind Control Psy Ops

Dr. Katherine Horton to All Americans with Integrity: Global Nazi Extermination Program Underway–Why You Need to Help Rescue Electronic Concentration Camp Victims Now!

Bigger Than Snowden: A Spotlight on Whistleblowers/Electromagnetic Weapons Are Being Used to Torture and Subjugate Countless American Citizens

Seth Farber, Ph.D: The Psychiatric Metanarrative, Targeted Individuals, and the Deep State: A Response to The New York Times

Ex-CIA and MI5 Agent and Whistleblower Carl Clark Reveals Covert Electromagnetic Torture of Civilians by Intel Agencies in US/UK/Europe/Asia with Directed Energy “Non-Lethal” Neuroweapons

Open Season on Targets: Blacklisted Individuals, Extreme Abuse in Targeting, Secretive Lab-Rat Exploitation, & Massive Establishment Cover-Up

In the Name of National Security? Secret, Classified Human Subject Experimentation and Research in 2015: Where is the Public Outrage?