http://www.newsmakingnews.com

TED GUNDERSON  - MIKE RUPPERT HAS A MESSAGE FOR YOU AND BARBARA HARTWELL IS TELLING EVEN MORE ABOUT THE MKULTRA CONTROVERSY

Contents.

Click. MIKE RUPPERT RESPONDS TO GUNDERSON'S ACCUSATIONS

Click. MORE ON THE MKULTRA CONTROVERSY 
by Barbara Hartwell

Click. TED GUNDERSON'S RESPONSE TO BARBARA HARTWELL. Ted L. Gunderson Analysis of the Barbara Hartwell Article Entitled, "Time To Set the Record Straight."

Click. BAY  AREA  OBSERVER  DEMANDS  RETRACTION FROM  TED  GUNDERSON by Virginia McCullough

Click. BARBARA HARTWELL'S LETTER TO THE EDITOR ABOUT "TED GUNDERSON'S RESPONSE TO BARBARA HARTWELL."

Click. TED L. GUNDERSON, IN YOUR CASE, EVEN BAD PUBLICITY IS GOOD PUBLICITY by Kate Dixon

TED GUNDERSON TAKES ON THE "LADIES"!  GUESS WHAT? THEY TAKE UP THE CHALLENGE!

© 2000 Virginia McCullough. All Rights Reserved. Use only with written  permission. 
 

In Ted Gunderson's article A Response to Barbara Hartwell he states the following in paragraph 6:

Virginia McCullough oversees a web site that includes a section she has titled the "Gunderson Dump", in which she sets out to establish that Ted is a double agent working for the Bad Guys.  Kate Dixon and Virginia McCullough may be the same person or possibly two different individuals, both working on McCullough's web site.

I have never thought that Ted Gunderson was a capable investigator and I have often wondered why the FBI ever employed him, but this time he goes too far in his lame assumptions.  I cannot allow him to make blatantly false and ignorant statements on the world wide web without demanding a retraction.  Because Ted is arrogant, I will not ask for and do not anticipate an apology.

Ted, consider this my written demand that you retract the statements "Virginia McCullough oversees a web site.......".  The web site you refer to is the work of publisher Kate Dixon.  I also demand that you retract that "Kate Dixon and Virginia McCullough may be the same person......".  Certainly a writer, such as Ted L. Gunderson [with Roger McGovern], who wrote How to Locate Anyone Anywhere - Without Leaving Home knew or should have known that Kate Dixon and I are two VERY different people.  She is the publisher of newsmakingnews.com, Ted, and I am a free lance journalist that publishes on her web page.

PLEASE ACKNOWLEDGE THE PRECEDING IN WRITING AND ISSUE A FULL RETRACTION IMMEDIATELY, TED.  I am certain that as a researcher who prides himself on his thorough investigative abilities and, as a author, who appreciates journalistic accuracy, you will be most happy to correct your lies about me.

Thank you, virginia.mccullough@netzero.net

Virginia McCullough © 2001

From: Barbara Hartwell <babs7@ulster.net>
To: Editor@educate-yourself.org <Editor@educate-yourself.org>
Date: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 12:29 PM
Subject: Ted Gunderson Response to Barbara Hartwell

Barbara Hartwell, Legal Defense and Research Fund
PO Box 832 Woodstock NY 12498 
websites: http://www.ulster.net/~babs7/  http://www.homestead.com/barbarahartwellsurvivor/

Dear Mr. Adachi:

You will be receiving a commentary from me in the near future in reference to the report you published by Ted Gunderson.   http://educate-yourself.org/tgresponsetobarbarahartwell26mar01.html

But for now it is important that I make it clear that you have published misinformation regarding myself, in your "Editor's Note" which I hold you directly responsible for. It is one thing for you to publish Ted's testimony regarding me. It is quite another for you, as an editor, to make false assumptions and then state them as if they were facts. For instance, I never "became convinced that Ted was a double agent". I have never stated such a thing to anyone --publicly nor privately.  Nor did I ever "join in with others striving to discredit him". These are lies, Mr. Adachi. And you are merely publishing your personal opinions about a situation you know nothing about.

You don't know me; therefore your allegations are based on nothing but hearsay and uninformed speculation. I will refute them based on facts and the testimony of credible witnesses; rather than the erroneous suppositions and spreading of misinformation which evidently define your concept of "journalism".

I also notice that you don't state your name when writing the "editor's note". Yet you make a point of insisting that others state their names right up front when sending e-mail to you. I had to go to the home page on your site to find out your name.

Perhaps if you adopted a more professional approach--like maybe checking your facts and establishing the credibility of your sources-- before writing your editorial commentaries-- you might have some credibility as regards the subjects you write about. But as far as I am concerned you have no credibility whatsoever. I'm sure that other discerning individuals --especially those who know me and are familiar with my case-- may come to the same conclusion without having to hear it from me. However, I do find it necessary to state my position up front, in advance of writing a more detailed commentary, in order to minimize any potential damage to my reputation which may result from false allegations which are the product of your own ignorance.

This letter will also be posted on other websites and forwarded by e-mail to other concerned parties. And if you have even a shred of objectivity, or journalistic integrity, in the interest of fairness you will post this letter on your own site as well.

Sincerely,
Barbara Hartwell

Click to read my article which prompted Ted Gunderson's "response". Click.

TED L. GUNDERSON, IN YOUR CASE, EVEN BAD PUBLICITY IS GOOD PUBLICITY.  
by Kate Dixon 

On April 3, 2001, the publisher of NewsMakingNews, Kate Dixon, had the opportunity to review Gunderson's latest internet posting (Click to read). Gunderson infers that Dixon who personally compiled the Ted Gunderson Data Dump from open internet sources, is not nice to him.  Gunderson states:

Following Bells’ retirement announcement, there was a nationwide campaign, by numerous persons to discredit me. For example, one Kate Dixon set up a web site to smear me.  She referred to me as a "right wing freak hater," claiming that I  “orchestrated this hit on Art."  She further said that: "Gunderson's conduct was designed to destroy Art Bell."  She referred to me as a "powerful big creep. 

In fact, Dixon didn't refer to Gunderson with the precise words Gunderson quotes above. Regarding Gunderson's allegation that Dixon called him a "powerful big creep", it may be that Gunderson is thinking of Bill Clinton whom Monica Lewinski referred to as a "big creep."  I think the very extensive pricey ($16 Million Dollar) Starr Report to the Congress establishes that Monica did not refer to Bill as a "powerful" big creep.  "Powerful" is a word that apparently particularly pops into Gunderson's mind when he uses the phrase "big creep" in reference to "smears" against his ex-Special Agent in Charge FBI self. 

 However, Dixon did  ask a pertinent question at the beginning of the Gunderson Data Dump:

Who is this "former" FBI agent who shows up every time a woman and her children are in peril because of Satanists or child molesters? And has Gunderson ever provided professional investigative services which assisted a prosecutor to convict a pedophile, drug dealer or con artist of a crime after trial by jury? 

Gunderson never answered this first question posed by the Data Dump.  Gunderson's success rate (or lack thereof) in tracking down Satanist ritual abusers and kidnappers and bringing them to justice in a court of law is something he could certainly publish.  But alas, no cigar.

NewsMakingNews has a new question for Gunderson, because a new entry to the Data Dump has been suggested by so many people who have known him over the years.  WHAT IS YOUR CONNECTION, GUNDERSON,  to DR. JOLLY (JOLY) WEST?  Gunderson, how many times have you referred your clients to Joly?  Have you discussed your own situation with Joly?  Now that Joly has died, are you in contact with any of Joly's successors in his particular field of psychiatric expertise - government mind control experiments in California.

The 3/26/01 issue of Spotlight Magazine (which I am sure Gunderson may have read) reports:

"...McVeigh (Timothy) was visited a number of times while incarcerated by Dr.Jollyn West.""...confirmed by...Ted Gunderson before McVeigh's trial.  ....Gunderson discussed the visits with aides to West at his (West's) office at the UCLA Institute of Psychiatry and NEURO-PSYCHIATRICS in California. Those aides confirmed that West was working with McVeigh....Earlier, in 1964. West was assigned to interview and study Jack Ruby, the man who killed Lee Harvey Oswald, the alleged assassin of  JFK." (Is McVeigh a victim of mind control?) West died in Jan 1999 . His  comrade in mind control-the father of the CIA's mind-control program 'MK-Ultra'. (Dr. Sidney Gottlieb, died a few months after West)."

Finally, Gunderson, may I ask you one last question for you before the new and improved Dump is finalized?  In what capacity were you working for the FBI, if at all, or for any other agency, at the time of the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy? Do you know where or for whom Ray Lavas, a friend of yours, (are you and Ray the same man?) was working when Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated.  Did you and Mr. Lavas ever work at the Ambassador Hotel?

Gunderson, thank you, thank you, thank you, in advance for providing answers to the above questions.  I would also like to know when you are next going to speak here in Northern California, because I wouldn't want to miss that event.  II understand you may be discussing Satan again, and I wouldn't want to miss the all that sizzling fire and brimstone!

Virginia McCullough oversees a web site that includes a section she has titled the Gunderson Dump, in which she sets out to establish that Ted is a double agent working for the Bad Guys. Kate Dixon and Virginia McCullough may be the same person or possibly two different individuals, both working on McCullough’s web site.]
 
By Ted L. Gunderson

March 26, 2001
http://educate-yourself.org/tgresponsetobarbarahartwell26mar01.html
 
 
Barbara Hartwell has informed me many times that she is from a CIA family and probably as such is the victim of the CIA MK Ultra mind control program (whether she thinks so or not). For a period of time, she showed signs of breaking out of the grasp of the CIA.  So what did the CIA do?  They planted Kurt Billings, a CIA mind control victim/ programmer, in her lap.  Let me explain.
 
For one thing, Billings and Hartwell have a lot in common. They both purport to have relatives in the CIA and in my opinion they are both victims of mind control attempting to recover.
 
On October 13, 1999, Mr. Art Bell, the famous talk show host, made a sudden announcement that he was permanently leaving the air and this would be his last radio show.  He said he was retiring because of a personal matter concerning his family and that he couldn’t discuss it, but hoped his audience would understand and respect his wishes for privacy. He returned to his radio show a few weeks later. He then revealed more information about his sudden retirement stating that it was done out of concern for his son Art Bell IV and made references to myself and David Hinkson as being responsible for making unfounded defamatory statements about him concerning pedophilic accusations. For the next several months, Bell would from time to time mention the names of Gunderson and Hinkson and their pedophilic accusations against him over his radio show threatening a lawsuit would ensue. That lawsuit was launched in May 2000 and on April 1, 2000, Bell once again announced that he was permanently retiring from radio at the end of April.
 
Bell was now willing to reveal more details about his son’s case. Art Bell claimed that his son had been kidnapped, transported across state lines, and raped.  Mr. Bell claimed that on December 9, 1997, Dave Hinkson, a guest on my radio talk show airing out of radio station WWCR in Nashville, TN, publicly divulged information about Art Bell being a child molester which resulted in pain and distress to him and his family.
 
I personally made no allegations about Mr. Bell or his son on my show or anywhere else. I don't know Art Bell, I have never met him, and I had no desire to portray any negative image of him. As far as my involvement regarding the lawsuit, there was absolutely no substance to Mr. Bell's charges against me. For a transcript of my radio talk show involving Hinkson, see http://educate-yourself.org/nwogundersonsmear1may0.html.
 
Following Bells’ retirement announcement, there was a nationwide campaign, by numerous persons to discredit me. For example, one Kate Dixon set up a web site to smear me.  She referred to me as a "right wing freak hater," claiming that I  “orchestrated this hit on Art."  She further said that: "Gunderson's conduct was designed to destroy Art Bell."  She referred to me as a "powerful big creep."
 
In addition, Mr. Bell's attorney appeared on Good Morning America on May 13, 2000 making numerous statements on the air claiming that I had accused Bell of being a child molester.  I have never made any such statements. There were interviews with Bell in People’s Magazine and US Magazine about the lawsuit and Mr. Bell appeared on EXTRA, the television show, on June 7, 1999 repeating the story that he left the air because of alleged pedophilic accusations by Hinkson and myself. I believe this national publicity was not a  coincidence.  It appeared to me there was now a well organized campaign against me and radio station WWCR.
 
Realizing that there was no real substance to Mr. Bell's allegations against me, my attorney filed for a summary judgment to dismiss.  Affidavits from Mr. Kurt Billings, his wife, Lee Ann Billings, and one Robert Ghostwolf (a frequent guest on Bell’s radio show I later found out) were filed with the court a few days before the oral arguments for summary judgment were to be heard.
 
Billings and his wife claimed that in November/December of 1999, they were in Las Vegas at a rented house  of Brice Taylor (real name, Sue Ford).  They said that I was present there and when Art Bell's name was brought up, I had said that Art Bell was a child molester and that he raped his own son. They also claimed that I said that Art Bell had been indicted for these crimes.
 
The truth is, although I never brought up the subject of Art Bell, Kurt Billings and his wife did, and repeatedly asked me questions about the Art Bell lawsuit.  I stated the case was in litigation and I could not discuss it.  Due to their urgent questioning of subjects I did not initiate, nor cared to discuss, I surmised that they came with an agenda.  Brice Taylor, who was present during the conversation, submitted a statement to the court attesting to the fact that she was witness to the Billings' questioning of me and heard me say that I could not discuss the Art Bell case. However, her statement arrived too late to be considered by the judge during the oral arguments.
 
Mr. Ghostwolf's affidavit claimed that in February 1997, he saw me at a Las Vegas seminar and that I stated that Art Bell is "not a f------ American, okay and I'm going to take this son-of-a bitch down."  (I never use the F--- word.)  Ghost Wolf further claimed that I stated Art Bell was involved in child pornography and he, (Art Bell) has a dark past.  I don't even know Robert Ghostwolf and I have never met him. I wouldn't know Robert Ghostwolf if he was standing in front of me.
 
Billings’ and Ghostwolf's affidavits were fabricated.  There is absolutely no truth to either of them.  During the oral arguments the judge said she was suspicious of the affidavits, but she could not ignore them and ordered that the case go to trial.  It was at this time that I realized that the affidavits and probably the lawsuit was designed to discredit me and destroy my name and reputation and destroy radio station WWCR.  It was also apparent that Mr. Bell was after the almighty dollar.  Instead of a trial, which the Art Bell group knew they could not win, there were several mediation meetings between the attorneys which resulted in a confidential, out of court monetary settlement for an undisclosed amount of money paid to Mr. Bell by the insurance company which represented me for liability claims. I was asked by the insurance lawyers to sign a non-disclosure agreement in order to learn of the terms of the settlement, but I refused.  I told my attorney the lawsuit against me was unjustified and I would not allow myself to be blackmailed.
 
Mr. Bell subsequently returned to the radio with a new lucrative contract.
 
Are the Billings, Robert Ghostwolf, Kate Dixon, government informant Stu Webb (who claims I am a drug dealer), Debbie Nathan, Mike Ruppert and others on the internet, part of a conspiracy to discredit those of us who love America and are successfully exposing an evil element within our government?   Is Art Bell's radio show part of the conspiracy and, if so, is he spreading disinformation as a disruptive tactic to cause confusion among his thirteen million listeners?  I don't know, however, this lawsuit and the ability of Mr. Bell to orchestrate anti-Gunderson and pro-Bell publicity on national television, in national weekly magazines, and the obvious orchestrations of false information to the courts through the phony affidavits a few days before the oral arguments makes me wonder.  The timing of these affidavits was such that I did not have opportunity to present a rebuttal.  Is it possible that Art Bell, the American hero, could be a contributor to a deceptive and fraudulent situation like this?
 
The court pre-trial depositions revealed that Brain Lepley (the alleged rapist of Bell’s son) did not deceive Art Bell IV, as the oral sex act between the two was consensual and that Bell Jr. was of legal consenting age.  Lepley was tried and convicted, but the case was subsequently reversed by the appellate court.
 
Back to Barbara Hartwell.  The next time I heard about the Billings, they were involved with Barbara Hartwell and the result was that Barbara began publicly criticizing Brice Taylor and myself.  It appeared to me that Barbara was being reprogrammed and/or influenced by the Billings, after all, Barbara had never been critical of me or Brice Taylor before.  In fact both Brice and I spent time on the phone with Barbara from Brice's home in Las Vegas trying to help her when she was upset.  I have no animosity against Barbara.  I love her and always will.  It is sad, but I believe she is another victim of the Billing's disruptive tactics.  I further believe the Billing's were planted on Barbara as a follow up to their continuing campaign to discredit my reputation.  Up until then, Barbara had always defended me.  But for a time after this, Barbara was part of the campaign against me.  She has stopped this and apologized to me.  I believe the Billings are also victims and are merely doing what they have been programmed to do. I also believe the Billings are not culpable because of their own MK Ultra programming.
 
I suggest that Brice Taylor is being targeted due to the books she has written about her mind control victimization and the public stance she has taken over the years to expose mind control and ritual abuse.  We have lectured together over the years; I share documentation and Brice shares her story.  We also appeared on Ch. 13 News in Los Angeles on November 9, 2000 to expose mind control.  Since then, numerous negative articles have been written in an attempt to discredit both of us.
 
As for what I stand for and against.  I believe in God and my country.  I have never taken drugs nor do I sell them.  I have never been involved in criminal activity of any type as I am a law abiding citizen and as the former head of the FBI, Los Angeles; a public servant dedicated to service to the public.  Through my investigation of the Dr. Jeffrey R. MacDonald case (See the book Fatal Justice, where my involvement is documented) I have successfully exposed large scale drug operations out of SE Asia during the 1960's and 1970's. I worked with attorney John DeCamp in exposing pedophiles, prostitution, pornography, satanic activity and mind control, in the Nebraska Franklin Case (See The Franklin Cover-Up by John DeCamp, available at Amazon.com).
 
I was the sole person responsible for initiating the archeological dig that was successful in finding and documenting the tunnels under the McMartin Pre-School in Manhattan Beach, CA.  (The children at the pre-school said they were taken down through the tunnels into a chamber where they were subjected to satanic-like rituals with adults).  I have been working with Noreen Gosch for years in regard to her son Johnny's kidnapping and she has written about my involvement in her new book (Why Johnny Can't Come Home; Kidnapped while delivering Newspapers. Forced into Pornography, Prostitution, Mind Control and Espionage, by Noreen Gosch, available on website listing below).  I authored a 52 page report in June, 2000, further elucidating developments in the Franklin Case and in the Kelly Ford case, called The Rusty Nelson-Kelly Ford Report (see  http://www.johnnygosch.com/gunderson_report.html )
 
During the past 20 years, I have given presentations all over the country, alerting the public to the reality of satanic abuse, ritual abuse, mind control, and it's use in pornography, prostitution, and espionage and have taken a public stand (in spite of threats to my reputation and life) for the victims and the children.  During the late 80's and early 90's, I was a member of the L.A. Women's Task Force on Ritual Abuse in Los Angeles.  Upon discovering the problem of ritual abuse and mind control as wide spread and prevalent, I have done all that I can to help the victims and to alert the public.  Along with Brice Taylor and others, I publicly present information on these subjects every time I have the opportunity.  We are all dedicated to exposing and eradicating these horrific abuses.
 
Although there have been allegations of profit made in the sale of books and videos, the only profit any of us working toward ending this abuse have received, is the reward of helping others.  If one understands the workings of those attempting to keep this abuse covered up, then it can be understood why those of us at the forefront of exposing this issue are experiencing attacks to our reputations and at times to our very lives.  The enemy knows how successful they can be at disempowering those who are delivering the truth when they attempt to publicly destroy the reputation and credibility of those who are divulging their highly guarded secrets.
 
A FBI Supervisor has bragged that the government has informants and provocateurs in every Patriot group in America.  One of the roles of the provocateur is to spread disinformation about those who criticize the government.  I have been accused of being a homosexual, a disgruntled former FBI employee, a mental case and most recently a drug dealer.  Anyone who is not discerning enough to recognize the tactics of the enemy and who does not realize what is happening behind the scenes is uninformed and a victim to his own ignorance.
 
Please understand.  We have the greatest country in history.  I am not anti-government.  Many of the problems we have in our country do not relate to the government, but to a few individuals who are entrenched in key positions in the government, where they are continuing their corrupt and criminal activities.
 
I’ve been forced to defend myself against duplicitous accusations leveled by the Billings, the Ghostwolf's, the Stu Webb's, the Mike Rupperts, the Debbie Nathan's, the Kate Dixon's, and the other disinformation specialists arrayed against me, but I prefer that we all show sympathy and pray for them.  We need to stay focused on solutions.  We need to put our differences aside and join together to solve these problems.  As for me, I will continue on the path to which God has called me.  Proverbs 31:8  "Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute.  Speak up and judge fairly; defend the right of the poor and needy."
 
It’s time for America to wake up.
 
Ted L. Gunderson

MIKE RUPPERT RESPONDS TO TED GUNDERSON'S ACCUSASATION.

Dear Kate:

Since I see that Ted Gunderson has taken a swipe at me too and accused me of being a "disinformation specialist" let me just take a minute to respond in support of all the brave women who have taken him on. And truly, a minute is about all the time that his pitiful message is worth.

I would also hope that at some point journalist Cheri Seymour - whose great book "The Last Circle," describes in detail Gunderson's relations with Michael Riconosciuto and the openly exposed CIA operative Robert Booth
Nichols - might join the ranks of those nailing Gunderson for his rather comical actions. I have a copy of an envelope, given to me by Seymour, wherein Gunderson's own handwriting discusses his participation in a drug transaction. Her documentation of Gunderson's connections to weapons, drugs and Promis software and illegal activities at the Cabazon Indian reservation is above reproach.

As to Gunderson's reference to me let me just state that Gunderson was the Special Agent in Charge (SAC) of the Los Angeles FBI office in 1978. It was then that I went to the L.A. Office of the FBI seeking help when, as an LA Police Officer, my life was in danger after discovering that the CIA was dealing drugs. Under Gunderson's direction the L.A. office took the public position that I was crazy and refused me any assistance even though I had a tape recorded death threat in my possession and an attorney at my side verifying my allegations and the documentary evidence I presented.

I did not know until 1999 that it was Gunderson who had been running the LA office in 1978. I even appeared on his Las Vegas radio show in 1997. But that was before his bizarre behavior revealed him to be what is now so obvious to so many people. It is strange that he never mentioned to me that he had directed the Bureau's efforts against me in 1978 even though FOIA documents clearly indicate that he knew damn well who I was in 1997.

As to my status as a "disinformation specialist" then, he ignores the fact that I was made unemployable and arrested by LAPD in 1980 or that, after having been homeless for nearly three years, The "LA Herald Examiner" wrote two front-page Sunday stories on me in 1981. That means, I guess, that Ted is saying that I went to all this trouble 20 years ago so that I could be in a position to trash him today. Forget mind control, the question is does Ted Gunderson have a mind at all.

My newsletter, "From The Wilderness" is now read in 17 countries, by 16 members of the US Congress and by professors at 10 universities in North America and Europe. Although belated, I would like to add my male voice to support the brave women who have told it like it so obviously is. My hat is off to all of you. Beyond that however, no one really takes Gunderson seriously anyway.

"By their fruits ye shall know them."

Mike Ruppert
Publisher/Editor
"From The Wilderness"
www.copvcia.com

Barbara Hartwell
Legal Defense and Research Fund
PO Box 832
Woodstock NY 12498
websites: http://www.ulster.net/~babs7/
http://www.homestead.com/barbarahartwellsurvivor/

MORE ON THE MKULTRA CONTROVERSY

As regards the controversy which began when NEWSMAKINGNEWS published a letter written to MKULTRA researcher Kurt Billings by Martin Cannon, I would like to respond to the most recent additional viewpoints posted on the site. I have also received e-mail from Martin Cannon which I would like to comment on. And lastly, it is important to me that I further clarify my own position regarding some issues that have been raised in the continuing public debate regarding MKULTRA.

Let me start by thanking Kenn Thomas, editor of Steamshovel Press -- a researcher whose writings I have enjoyed for years-- for taking the time to write to me with his astute comments regarding Martin Cannon. Kenn Thomas's letter to me was then passed on to subscribers of TopView, by John Quinn, with John's additional editorial comments (insightful and humorous, as always ) and finally, forwarded by Quinn to be posted on NewsMakingNews, adding some new, albeit well-known, voices to the NewMakingNews debate.

Kenn's observations show that Mr. Cannon has a history of pointing an accusatory finger at other researchers, including Kenn himself, asserting that they are "liars" among other insults; and of instigating smear campaigns against those who fail to meet the requirements of Cannon's own very particular and  stringent research standards.

It is clear that journalists Thomas and Quinn agree on a primary point: Cannon's approach to dealing with those he perceives as deserving of his cynical, hyper-critical scrutiny -- researchers and writers who fail to merit his seal of approval-- are targeted for nasty name-calling and a putative slander campaign. From what I have seen, Cannon's accusations are mudslinging of the lowest sort and do not have much --if anything-- to do with establishing truth or raising the generally accepted standards of research, per se. In fact I was not surprised when Kenn Thomas independently made very similar observations to my own, in additional messages to me.

Here, some selected excerpts. Thomas writes:

" Cannon's perception that mind control research has been taken over by religious fundamentalists reflects his own intolerance, but more importantly it masks his inability to come up with new research on the topic. Instead, he wants to do some literary parlor game finessing the history of conspiracy documents. A higher standard of evidence, indeed --thousands of people working over thirty years haven't come up with a high enough standard of evidence to prove the obvious fact that conspirators killed JFK. Again, it's a false dialogue inspired by the CSICOPS."

"Cannon's name-calling continues in this letter [ an e-mail from Cannon to Virginia McCullough ] as does his fantasy that he has some kind of role to play as a "Phil Klass" of conspiracy research. Calling Sherman Skolnick an old fool, saying that I have an attraction for 'skanky hos' --this really gets us closer to the truth now, doesn't it ? I think most people will see it for what it is, the language and attitude of despicable, immature people. It has nothing to do with "establishing truth" but with ego venting and factionalizing conspiracy researchers with false dialogue."

As for Kenn's observations, I couldn't agree more.  And... "skanky hos" ?  Say.... What ? Clearly,  the insults Cannon hurls at others who are totally undeserving of such invective, have nothing whatsoever to do with "truth" or reality in any sense of the word, much less  "research standards".

Talk about sleazy smear tactics...It would appear that Cannon's own debauched psyche is the repository from which he draws the projections which he fires at others.

As regards more derisive comments Cannon has made about yours truly, as well as researchers John Quinn, Sherman Skolnick, the late Jim Keith and again, Kurt Billings, I'll get there momentarily.

But first I feel it is necessary to address some statements made by Virginia McCullough. In her latest editorial commentary, Lobs Lob More Shells in the Cannon War, Virginia describes her interactions with me by stating:
"In April 2000 Barbara Hartwell first contacted me wanting me to cover her allegations of MKULTRA abuse. She also expressed fear of a man named Ted Gunderson who had allegedly contacted her for speaking engagements."

It's important to me that I state my own point of view and that I make a few corrections.  In fact, it was Virginia McCullough who initiated contact with me.  My first contact with Virginia was an e-mail from her, complimenting me on an article I had written, The Scapegoat Syndrome, published by John Quinn of NewsHawk, with a preface written by John. My article focussed on refuting some false allegations made about John Quinn/NewsHawk by a man named Habib Peter Kawaja ( Desert Storm War Crimes Commission website) and his crony, journalist Carol Valentine. In a nutshell, I was able to refute these false allegations re NewsHawk by citing dated, published testimony and editorial comments by John Quinn and photographic evidence. ( You may read this article on my website http://www.ulster.net/~babs7/ )

I subsequently wrote back to Virginia, thanking her for her interest in my work. I then perused the NewsMakingNews website, for which Virginia had sent me the link , finding the articles written by Virginia and others very much along the lines of my interests.  Shortly thereafter, in an e-mail to Virginia, I mentioned my connection to Ted Gunderson. This was only a few months after I had broken off my association with Ted, primarily because of his allegations that Kurt Billings was a " CIA plant " --an allegation I told Ted I strongly disagreed with. (For more info re that situation, please see my article: Time to Set the Record Straight, published by SteamShovel Press: http://www.steamshovelpress.com/index.html  and Conspiracy Planet: http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/ )

But I never at any time expressed to Virginia -nor to anyone else- a "fear" of Ted Gunderson. Anyone who knows me would probably find such an idea laughable. I don't know why Virginia has assumed I was afraid of Ted, but it simply isn't true.

What I did express to Virginia -in private communications- was that I was in fear for my life, due to serious threats and "warnings" issued to me by perpetrators of criminal activities; and intimidation tactics which had been used against me and certain of my associates, and which had a direct connection to my going public with my history of CIA mind control abuses. This was the primary reason I wanted to make my case even more public and was trying to find journalists open-minded enough to listen to my testimony.

I also explained that I found it very necessary to find out the truth regarding Ted Gunderson. I said that I was open-minded and willing to listen to anything anyone had to say, and to review any evidence anyone could provide, in efforts to resolve the dilemma I found myself in as a result of having invested a degree of trust in Ted prior to my serious disagreement with him. Virginia made very clear to me her opinion of Ted Gunderson; and I understood from the git-go that she regarded him with contempt, to say the least.

It's true that I had asked Virginia, as a journalist, if she would be interested in information about my case as a survivor of MKULTRA. I requested that at least initially, any information I shared with her  --aside from that which I had already made public-- be kept confidential and "off the record". This has been my standard policy when discussing my case with journalists or investigators, since I feel the need to exercise caution and discretion about what I reveal, given that I do not want to place myself, family members or others at unnecessary risk; and because if I speak publicly about certain sensitive issues or name names, it could work against me by compromising my credibility, unless and until I have substantive evidence to back up my claims.

I was surprised --and somewhat disturbed-- when shortly thereafter, I found my case posted on the Ted (Ex?) FBI (?) Agent Gunderson Data Dump. Of course, the fact that Ted had been working on my case had already been made public, as Ted and I had spoken together at conferences and in electronic media interviews. Although I was not particularly happy about my case being posted on the "dump", I knew that there was no breach of my confidence or legal rights involved and that NewsMakingNews had a right to use the link to my previously published material if they thought it to be newsworthy.  I understood that my personal feelings were not relevant to the larger public issues, nor should they be.

The " Barbara Hartwell link " posted by NewsMakingNews on the Ted G. "dump" was to a "security letter" I had posted on Mind Control Forum, dated Oct. 13, 1999. Ted was frequently mentioned in this letter, along with other former gov't employees and ex-military personnel, such as ex-CIA agent Gene "Chip" Tatum, with whom I had --publicly as well as privately-- discussed my background and involvement in CIA black ops, under mind control programming; and who were able to attest to the general veracity of some of my testimony -especially regarding the types of drugs which had been administered to me; the types of programming to which I was subjected and operations in which I had been utilized; the abductions by gov't agents and the nature of the attempts by CIA and other gov't agencies  to "neutralize" me --various harassment and intimidation tactics, as well as attempts on my life-- after I broke out of these black ops and related mind control programming.

I have not as yet  been able to collect the necessary "official" documents to verify my claims, but those --such as Gunderson and Tatum-- who were willing to publicly endorse my credibility, did so knowing that there was a dearth of hard evidence. They were simply willing to say that based on my anecdotal testimony and some detailed knowledge I had about these black ops, that they believed, in light of their own "insider" knowledge, that I was a credible source of accurate information. They never claimed to have "hard" evidence about my case, any more than I myself ever made that claim.

The letter of April 12, 2000, which Virginia wrote to me, and which she has posted on NewsMakingNews, contains her own opinions without necessarily reflecting mine. For instance, she says: "I don't know if you still believe in the Mark Phillips/Cathy O'Brien scenario or not...."  The thing is, I never "believed" in anything to do with O'Brien/Phillips. I had never mentioned these people to Virginia before she wrote the letter and in fact I don't even know them. In my e-mail reply to Virginia, I explained that.

The only contact I ever had with them was initiated by Mark Phillips, in June of 2000, when he tried to discredit my testimony by publishing a critical commentary in response to a report about computer hacking,  harassment with high-tech weaponry, and intimidation tactics used against my webmasters, which I had posted on American Patriot Friends Network. To paraphrase the main point in Phillips's argument: Barbara Hartwell was making a mistake by publicizing the persecution and harassment being directed at her. If I would only hush up, insisted Phillips, I would not continue to be harassed. Phillips also made it clear, by implication, that  he did not believe my claims about being a CIA black ops/mind control survivor were credible . He claimed that he and O'Brien were "experts" on mind control and seemed to think this was justification for offering his unsolicited advice, which he indicated was coming from a concern for my well-being. I gave Phillips a piece of my mind (no pun intended) by telling him to mind his own business; and that I did not appreciate his presumptuous, arrogant attitude toward me, considering the fact that he does not know anything about me, nor about my background --except what he may have read on the Internet, or heard through the grapevine.

Since I'm on the general subject, I might as well mention what any reasonable, perceptive person who has ever been targeted for this sort of harassment should know: Guys like Phillips have their own agenda, one that could not possibly benefit any mind control survivor. Attempting to silence mind control survivors when they talk about harassment can only mean one thing: Those who try to foist such advice on the targeted individuals are part of the cover-up; those who have something to lose if the truth comes out.

And I must say that Phillips's M.O. seems suspiciously similar to that of Cannon: They both demand that hard evidence and documents be provided by victims/survivors/researchers when speaking out on any issue. For most of us, hard evidence is hard to come by; and for some of us, waiting for such evidence before offering anecdotal testimony might be like signing our own death warrants.

Virginia as well, mentions the "proof" of mind control which I failed to provide. I had tried to explain to her --as I have explained to many others-- that one of my greatest sources of frustration is that I have been able to gather very little hard evidence of the MKULTRA abuses which were perpetrated on me. The reasons may be familiar to other survivors. The agencies involved in the human rights violations take great pains to make sure no documents are readily available to investigators, survivors or their advocates. It costs money to do a thorough investigation or to hire someone for that purpose. I am financially destitute -- and have been ever since I broke out of the black programs; so poor that I can't even make a phone call out of my local area. I have no resources which would allow me to travel in search of documentation, nor for any other relevant  purpose. But I will say that I will be more than happy to share any documentation I do get with NewsMakingNews or any other journalists because publication of this documentation can only help my case.

Although I have made several attempts, over the past seven years, I have not yet found an attorney who would touch my case with a ten foot pole, not necessarily because it doesn't have merit. Rather, the attorneys I spoke with were fearful of the consequences to themselves; or were told in no uncertain terms to back off; or did not want to be bothered with a case in which there was little chance of remuneration. Most lawyers, very simply, and understandably, do not want to find themselves in a showdown with the CIA or any other corrupt and powerful government agency. Considering the fact that my own life has been all but destroyed by these very agencies, I can't say I blame the lawyers for not wanting to get involved. And so, most of us are left to fend for ourselves and to investigate our own cases as best we can.

Speaking strictly for myself, my primary motive for wanting to collect hard evidence for my own case is that I want to see justice done for what these criminals have done to me, my family, my friends and any other innocent people who were victimized by mind control and other related abuses. Without enough hard evidence, I can't file a lawsuit. I should make it clear that I don't otherwise feel the need to "prove" my claims to anyone else; whether they be journalists, researchers or the general public. They are free to read my testimony, do their own research and draw their own conclusions. As many of us --the survivors-- know all too well, once we go public with our testimony, we will be met with a certain degree of incredulity; if not derision and hostility by people who don't want to believe that our government could commit such violations against its own citizens; or by those who have a vested interest in continuing a cover-up. As for witnesses: Most of the witnesses I had have been intimidated and will no longer even speak to me; much less come forward with testimony which could help my case.

Getting back to Virginia's recently published letter to me, and referred to in her editorial commentary, Virginia wrote:  " I assumed Hartwell got the message [ the letter ] because shortly thereafter she sent me an email telling me that her friend Kurt Billings was helping radio talk show host Art Bell in his lawsuit against former FBI agent/Satanist theorist Ted Gunderson. She contacted me and requested that I send her and Billings a significant amount of documentation on Ted Gunderson which I gladly did."

Why Virginia says she had to "assume'" I got her message, I don't understand. Because in fact, I answered Virginia's letter immediately, thanking her for taking the time to write out her thoughtful and detailed comments relating to mind control; Gunderson; O'Brien; Phillips; Taylor/Ford; etc.

I had asked Virginia to keep my e-mails to her private and confidential, so I won't go into further detail. But I will say that I did not request information on Ted Gunderson because of the Art Bell lawsuit, which was a separate issue entirely; one that I won't comment on here since I did not become directly involved, though I was aware that Kurt Billings had at one time been in contact with Art Bell's lawyers in connection with the case.

Virginia made the offer to send the hardcopy documents to me and the main reason I wanted them was so that I could have some documentation to work with which might be able to verify --or contrariwise, reveal the flaws-- in some of my own research. And of course, so that I could develop a more informed opinion about what I believed to be the truth about Ted Gunderson.

I received by post, from Virginia, a box of hardcopy documentation. Some of it was said to come from Michael Riconosciuto's files and some --but not most-- of the documents were connected to Ted Gunderson. Many of the documents and newspaper articles addressed other issues such as Promis/Inslaw; the death of Danny Casolaro; the IBCC; defense contracting firms connected to Riconosciuto and others allegedly part of the "Octopus", etc. 

But even though I greatly appreciated that Virginia sent me the documents, that did not necessarily make it any easier for me to gather evidence about my own case. If I was unable to reciprocate, by making "proof a two way street" it was because it was not in my power to do so. I'm sorry if Virginia feels that I did not honor my part of what she apparently considered a "quid pro quo" deal. I have been working for years trying to collect documentation regarding my involvement in MKULTRA and other black operations.

As any survivor of one of these projects knows, it can be next to impossible to get our hands on evidence in the form of hardcopy documents. I don't even have access to my own childhood medical records !  "Coincidentally " all my records and those of my siblings, were destroyed in a fire which consumed the office of the family physician a number of years ago. One of my family members cannot even get access to her own medical records from NIH (National Institute of Health) --notoriously hand-in-glove with CIA in its involvement in the medical and genetic-engineering aspects of black projects. And for that, I do have some evidence and am working to collect more.

I have family members employed by CIA and NIH and predictably, I haven't spoken to any of them in years, not since I broke out of the black programs. It seems they don't want anything to do with me, and I don't have to guess why. They've even stopped sending Christmas cards ! I love my family and feel hurt by their attitude, but there's not much I can do to change things on that front so I just have to live with it and pray that someday they will see fit to break through their denial and indoctrination and see these agencies for what they really are.

Now, back to Martin Cannon. I should say that I have read some of his articles on the Internet and I give him credit for being a talented writer. I won't go into a long-winded analysis of his research or viewpoints; I will only say that "debunking" seems to be a major thrust of his writings. For the most part, even when their criticism is directed at me, I try not to waste time arguing with the debunkers. When necessary, I simply publicly make my position clear and do my best to correct any false allegations they have made.

Many debunkers--especially those focusing on the field of psychic/paranormal and UFO research-- have over the course of the past twenty-some-odd  years set their sights on me and my colleagues. But being caught in the crosshairs of the debunkers' starlight scopes doesn't really bother me.  At times, the debunkers and nay-sayers have actually provided an element of comic relief and entertainment, in what has otherwise been a somewhat grim scenario. But then, I have developed a thick skin and don't much care what anyone thinks of me. When I find misinformation or disinformation being disseminated, I try to correct it as best I can and move on to more important things.

In an e-mail sent to Virginia McCullough by Martin Cannon and copied to me, Cannon writes in the subject line:
" Final (I hope) response to the cranks ". It comes as no surprise to me that Cannon thinks I am a "crank". In fact, coming from someone of Mr. Cannon's ilk, I can only take it as a compliment.

Cannon writes: "Let's all be clear on one fact: I did NOT ask for, or expect, that private letter [ his letter to BIllings] to be published. Well then, why did he forward his "private" letter, written to Kurt Billings, to NewsMakingNews ?  I think that's a rhetorical question, and one y'all reading this don't need me to provide the answer to.

In reply to my statement that Kurt happens to be a good friend of mine, Cannon quips: "Loyalty is admirable, even when misplaced."  On this point, I would have to question whether Mr. Cannon can even fathom the objective concept of loyalty, much less presume to comment on the loyalties of others.

Cannon continues by presuming my ignorance of law: "Babs should read more about libel law.....I can recommend a few other books if she wants to escape her current state of ignorance."

Very gracious of him, but he seems to assume much, while knowing little, regarding the level of my ignorance.
He assumes --falsely-- that I know nothing more than a few excerpts from books which I merely quoted as sources in order to illustrate my point: That Cannon's allegations were potentially libelous, since they were clearly made with intent of malice against Kurt Billings. I would hardly have included a lengthy legal brief --who would want to be bothered reading it ?

Cannon claims his malicious comments about Billings to be "protected speech...all protected speech".
Cannon further states that  "Kurt Billings is a public figure.....The courts have long given people wide latitude in offering opinion on public figures."

In fact, whether or not Kurt is designated as a "public figure" would come from an opinion issued by the court in a preliminary hearing, before any such libel case could be litigated-- and NOT from Mr. Cannon. And in fact, Mr. Cannon's personal opinion is irrelevant in any legal sense.

In my humble opinion --despite my "ignorance"-- I think it most likely that Kurt Billings would be deemed by the court to be what is known as a "limited purpose public figure".  Which changes the rules for "protected speech" considerably. But hey, what do I know ? According to Mr. Cannon: "Babs knows zilch about the law."

But there's more: According to Mr. Cannon I am not only "ignorant" I am also "fascistic" due to his presumption that my "inability to recognize"  that in his "private" (?!) communication to Billings, he had a "right  to negatively react to any author's work"...."He is a public figure. I have in private, attacked his published writings. What is wrong with that ? "

Well, I guess Mr. Cannon sees nothing wrong with that, but in an ethical --even if not in a legal sense-- I'm sure there are many people who would beg to differ. But then no one could accuse Cannon of being an ethicist.

According to Cannon, yours truly, Barbara Hartwell, is not only an ignorant, fascistic crank, she is also a "gullible fool" along with John Quinn, Sherman Skolnick, Kurt Billings and doubtless, others too numerous to mention. Well, at least I'm in good company. Thank you Mr. Cannon, for the backhanded compliment though I'm sure you did not  not intend it as such.

Finally, back to Kurt Billings. In the same letter to Virginia McCullough Cannon states: "Kurt Billings makes a living lying to the public. Perhaps he does not lie deliberately --nevertheless he lies. "

Now I have some things to say about Kurt Billings, which I probably should have said in my original response to Martin Cannon's letter. Better late than never. In fact, I have never seen Kurt Billings speak anywhere in public  without a fistful of documents or heard him on a radio program without quoting directly from government documents, technology patents or newspaper articles as his sources. Kurt's presentations are impressive because speculation plays no role in the information he presents. As far as "lies" ?  I've never heard him lie about anything.

And if Mr. Cannon ever took the trouble to watch one of Kurt's videotapes, he might realize that the tapes Kurt sells to earn his living contain detailed information about mind control programming; the classified, unclassified and declassified technologies and hi-tech weaponry deployed by gov't agencies in implementing mass mind control, as well as the specifics of certain projects such as MKULTRA and some of its subdivisions. In fact, I have never met anyone who was as knowledgeable on the combined technical and psychological aspects of mind control, with just a few exceptions, such as Michael Ash, a clinical hypnotherapist, robotics engineer and a survivor of the Montauk Project.

I defend and support Kurt not just because he is a friend, and not just because I have loyalty to my friends. Kurt is one of very few people who had any real understanding of my own experiences with mind control, or of the family background I come from. Kurt's background is strikingly similar to mine....CIA all the way.

And lastly, Kurt may be a Christian, but he does not attempt to impose his religious beliefs on others. In his public presentations he states that he is a Christian, but leaves it at that. The thrust of his presentations is information. Information which is needed for the general public to understand the massive violations of human rights which are instrumental in all government mind control programs. I for one, would like to see more mind control researchers come forward with the quality of information and evidence Kurt presents.

Mr. Cannon may wish to spend his time debunking the research of others and starting petty disputes about the existence of the Illuminati and the New World Order, Satanists, long-dead philosophers, religious figures, scam artists and what not. But for the rest of us, there's real work to do: Like bringing forth every piece of information, documentation and testimony we can get our hands on. And doing all in our power to make our research public.

People like Kurt Billings, Kenn Thomas, John Quinn and Sherman Skolnick have better things to do than wage war with debunkers and intellectual snobs like Martin Cannon. And I for one am very glad that they do.

-Barbara Hartwell

"I never gave anybody hell. I just told the truth and they thought it was hell."....Harry Truman