NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/alt/activism/19774

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-22 | 9.5 KB

Xref: sparky alt.activism:19774 talk.politics.misc:65126 ca.politics:10478
Newsgroups: alt.activism,talk.politics.misc,ca.politics
Path: sparky!uunet!well!pfrankli
From: [e-mail] (Paul Franklin)
Subject: Bobbie Riconosciuto part 4
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 18:32:50 GMT
Lines: 168


Date: December 12, 1992
Place: Public Forum, Louden Nelson Center, Santa Cruz, California.

Bobbie: I didn't know that they don't have to read you your
rights anymore.  I didn't know any of these things.  I didn't
know that men and women were put in holding cells pretty much
together.  I didn't know that male guards were allowed to be
involved in some of the things that they are involved in with
female prisoners.  I was placed in protective custody.  Someone
in the state of Washington who was a part of the pool of people
who was chosen to build a case against Michael sent the Napa
County District Attorney a receipt for $2900 worth of plane
tickets out of the country, for my children and I, in my name, so
I was considered an extreme flight risk.  I tried to tell the
"Look, we're homeless (and) have been for a long time."  The
Justice Department already took everything that we had.  They
even took my son's stuffed animals, they took Elizabeth's video
tapes when they went through our house before.  The took every
picture that I had of Michael and these children together.  They
took every picture of Elizabeth that I had and they made it a
part of an open court record.  If that isn't a threat, what is?
     Michael and I have been very careful with that five-year-old
child to make sure that she had as normal a life as possible.
She didn't do anything.  None of my children did anything.  I
didn't do anything except stand together with Michael against
something that's very wrong.
     Our rights in the country are gone.  Michael did not have
any rights.  We did not have the right to unlawful search and
seizure.  They spent four days in my house.  They went to my
house with machine guns, knowing full well that if they had their
way the only people there would be me and my four children.  They
spent four days in that house and on that property doing what
they wanted, before they ever had a search warrant.

Dave: If I may just interrupt briefly, Bobbie, that is why Rae
has the Navel Intelligence agents attached to her, one of whom,
by the way, was sitting next to her earlier in the evening.  It's
precisely to prevent people in Gunther's control structure trying
to prevent that kind of direct pressure on Bobbie, and by way of
integrating this with the lecture, and this is sort of a, like
they say, a picture's worth a thousand words, this is a good
example of the development, the ultimate cultivation of the
historical process which I've been developing.  People think of
criminality as something that's inflicted in an innocent
population by a handful of, or relative handful of (muffled)
interlocutors, people who are wrong doers.
     What people don't think about and really do not anticipate
is what's happened in the United States as a result of the
implementation of fascism, of the corporate state during the
course of the cold war - what happens when the State itself
becomes criminal, when the criminality is coming not from your
local Mafia or something like that, but when it's the local D.A.,
backed by the government, and with the acquiescence of Congress.
When the State itself becomes criminal, becomes lawless, there's
no protection.
     There's an interesting anecdotal footnote to the process
that Bobbie is describing - I'll turn things back over to her in
a second.  I started a new job a couple of months ago, and in the
course of this job I was contacting retailers for neon signs,
because I work for a business that's shopping around for a neon
sign, and we contact our local business and a couple came over,
they ran this business, and they were showing us their signs, the
various kinds of neon signs they designed, we were going through
this, and after going through this I went back and was doing some
paperwork, and I heard them talk to my boss, and they were
talking about a number of things that were going on with the
campaign and they started talking about George Bush's father
having been involved with deals with the Nazis during World War
Two, and I said 'wait a minute, it's like they've been listening
to One Step Beyond."  I went over and introduced myself - they
were wide eyed - it turns out they had been loyal listeners,
religious listeners for more than ten years, and they had in fact
gotten this information off of my program.  Anyway, the footnote
to that is that several days later, the woman came back, and they
were having problems - you'll appreciate this Virginia - with the
courts.  They were involved in a lawsuit for something to do with
their business, I don't know what, but it turns out the attorney
who was representing them had in fact sold out to the opposition.
He was selling them out and he was in cahoots with the judge.
What the woman was asking me was, to whom could she turn?  When
her attorney is crooked, and when his criminality is in cahoots
with the judge who is hearing the case.  I told her to contact
Harry Martin, and maybe through Harry, Virginia, because I really
don't know what to recommend.  In other words, she came to me,
asking me what could she do?
     It reminded me of a case a couple of years ago where a woman
who was under mind control, who was being subjected to
microwaves, was talking to psychiatrists about what could she do
to get out from under mind control, and the psychiatrist referred
her to me.  (He said) "The only person who could help me was Dave
Emery."  Now this is not to blow my own horn, but it's to
indicate how far down we've gotten to when a psychiatrist is
referring a patient to a political researcher for therapy, the
situation is far gone.  This woman came to me, I couldn't tell
her what to do, because when her attorney is in bed with the
judge, and they're both crooked, where are you going to turn?
Again, when the state becomes criminal, when the state becomes
lawless, all bets are off.  Virtually everything we take for
granted has changed.
     Every so often, on my radio program, I read a passage from
"They thought they were free," by Milton Mayer.  It's a series of
interviews with people who lived in Germany during the rise of
Hitler describing what the process was like.  This one University
professor says "Well, the thing that makes it so insidious is
that everything appears the same: the holidays, the cinema, the
shops.  Everything looks the same and everybody's happy and
everything seems the same, but things change gradually, bit by
bit, and you don't notice the change because it's gradual.  Step
B is not so much worse than step A, so if you don't protest at A,
why protest at B.  Step C is not much worse than step B, so if
you don't protest at B, why protest at C, and so on, all the way
to Z.
     That's the situation we've gotten to in this country, when
the president of the United States can be murdered and nobody
gives a damn about it, then you've reached the state of official
lawlessness which, in the end, will overtake everyone, the lives
of private individuals.  When you have a situation like Bobbie
and her children are undergoing right now, where the criminality
is coming from the criminal justice system itself, you have
reached the ultimate in what was intended by the establishment of
the corporate state and fascism, which has come to the United
States during the Cold War.  This is the culmination of the
process that I was beginning to delineate historically, and here
we have it experientially.  This is what you get to when the
crooks are the very people that are supposed to hold lawlessness
in check, and that is the source of the lawlessness, and that is
totalitarianism.  That's what we've got.  Go ahead Bobbie...

Virginia: Can I say one thing?

Bobbie: Certainly.  You've been my mouth piece for as long as I
can remember because you've helped me...

Virginia: (Muffled statement) Anybody that has read the INSLAW
report released by Jack Brooks House Judiciary Committee
September [tenth] of this year will know that Michael
Riconosciuto is exactly who he says he is and is attested to by
the House Judiciary.  Unfortunately there seems to be a hang up.
What normally takes thirty days to publish, which is the
supplemental report to the House Judiciary Report, which is the
independent confirmation, that's the police report that places
Mr. Brian on the Indian reservation...

Dave: You might want to explain who that is.

Virginia: Earl Brian is a so-called doctor, not really, but the
Government made him a neurosurgeon overnight, coming back from
Vietnam, actually went into some Vietnam fort where he, Mr.
Riconosciuto, was to launder the money from our heroin trade in
Vietnam out to the Nugan Hand bank in Australia.

Dave: That is a form of neurosurgery, if you look at it in the
overall strategic sense.

Bobbie: And to be quite honest, he also does know how to do that
and did make a film at one point showing how to dissect someone's
hand while they were still alive for the purposes of
interrogation.
(to be continued)

     The right thing to do is never the easiest thing to do.  The
     moral, ethical, and most compassionate imperative from within
     your heart may in fact be the most difficult.  To be informed is
     important, to tell others is even more important, but without
     tangible action, our efforts are meaningless.

     Paul Franklin