The FBI Regularly Attempts To Portray COINTELPRO Targets As Terrorists When The Bureau Cannot Prosecute These People Legally
U.S. Television Reporters & Politicians Are Being Used As Unwitting Targets Of Mind Control Experimentation, Subjected To The Remote Neural Monitoring Of Their Brains Without Realizing It - Is The National Security Agency Conducting This Non Consensual Human Experimentation Via Its Signals Intelligence EMF Scanning Network?
"Scientists Successfully Implant Chip That Controls The Brain Allowing Thoughts, Memory And Behavior To Be Transferred From One Brain To Another Brain" - This Swedish Website was removed from the Internet, however, the cache version has not yet been removed so copy its text and paste it into a file on your notepad while you can - Do you want someone else's thoughts to be electronically implanted into your brain? The NSA has been perpetrating this crime against this author and myriad other American citizens for decades without having installed a brain implant - The NSA is able to do so having already catalogued the unique frequencies of our brains within its vast computer database
"Coercing witnesses and informants is standard operating procedure for prosecutors across the country. What’s unusual in Auerhahn’s case is that he was caught concealing information about it and lying in court.
As details about the case of Whitey Bulger began to come out in the late 1990s, the public got a glimpse into the FBI’s dirty work with informants.
Two 'top-echelon informants' Bulger and Flemmi -- were literally given a license to kill in return for providing information against rivals. The FBI not only let them carry out assassinations, it provided them with information about potential witnesses against them—it gave them the hit list.
FBI agents helped their 'informants' ship tons of illegal drugs into Boston, tipping them off against police and DEA investigations. And in return, Bulger and Flemmi provided the FBI with 'information' against their competitors — that is to say, helped them build federal cases against people they themselves wanted to get rid of.
In some cases they committed murder, fingered other people for it, and the FBI and federal prosecutors put those people away. Was it a question of a few 'rogue agents' or a corrupt prosecutor here and there?
The FBI gave crime partners, Whitey Bulger and Stephen Flemmi a license to kill in return for providing information against rivals.
Attorney Michael Avery helped win a multi-million dollar law suit against the FBI for knowingly sending four of those innocent men to prison on murder charges. The court found that the FBI had 'suborned perjury'--deliberately coached witnesses to lie--and framed the four men in order to protect its top-echelon informants. As the case came to trial, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ)—which oversees both the FBI and the US Attorney’s Office—defended its agents on the grounds that their actions fell within the boundaries of professional 'discretion.'
Or as Avery summarized the position that the DOJ maintained in a series of briefs submitted from 2004-2007, 'When FBI agents are working with a cooperating witness, they have discretion to work with a witness that they know isn't telling the whole truth.'
Did you get that? According to the DOJ, the government has 'discretion' to put people on the stand to lie under oath. And they can offer them all kinds of 'incentives' to do it.
There’s an important difference between prosecuting racketeering cases and prosecuting 'terrorism' cases.
When Auerhahn came up against Judge Wolf in 2003, the judge’s final decision rested on documents that he required the government prosecutor to produce. And the ultimate reason for granting Ferrara’s appeal and reversing his wrongful conviction was the failure of the prosecutor to turn over 'exculpatory evidence.'
The court decided that even an alleged mafia captain accused of murder has certain elementary rights to due process. Part of that due process is the right of the defendant to see 'exculpatory evidence'(evidence that might show innocence) in a process called 'discovery' — the requirement that the prosecutor provide information to the defendant that is necessary for the preparation of an adequate defense.
In 'terrorism' cases the courts have allowed the DOJ — the same DOJ that has historically asserted its 'discretion' to use witnesses who lie—to refuse to hand over documents in discovery based on 'national security interests.'
This means that the entire seedy process of bribing, coercing and otherwise manipulating informants and witnesses to lie against defendants is now potentially immune from disclosure."
* Excerpted from the following Website regarding another case where the FBI's been accused of fabricating evidence, suborning witness perjury and omitting exculpatory evidence in the trial of a man by the name of Tarek Mehanna, who remains a political prisoner of the United States Federal Government.
Critical Analysis -- "Jeffrey Auerhahn v. Tarek Mehanna: Suborning Perjury and Official Secrets" - The FBI's At It Again Suborning Witness Perjury, Fabricating Evidence & Omitting Exculpatory Evidence
Tarak Mehanna's Official Website