From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Mint robbers were framed in Australia.
Running for justice ...
Mint robbers were framed
June 11 2002
Running for justice ... one of the three Mickelberg brothers, Peter, chases the then CIB chief, Don Hancock, down the street after losing an appeal in the Perth Supreme Court in February 1999. Photo: WA News
A former police officer has admitted that he and another detective lied and faked evidence during the trial of the Mickelberg brothers for the Perth Mint gold swindle 20 years ago.
The West Australian Attorney-General, Jim McGinty, said yesterday that Anthony Lewandowski had given an affidavit to the Director of Public Prosecutions admitting he and the former CIB chief Don Hancock, who was murdered last year, had lied and fabricated evidence to convict the Mickelbergs.
Raymond, Peter and Brian Mickelberg were convicted in 1983 of swindling $650,000 worth of gold from the mint.
Raymond, a former SAS soldier, was released from jail in 1991 after serving eight years of a 20-year sentence. Peter served six years of a 14-year sentence.
Brian Mickelberg had his conviction overturned after nine months in jail. He died in a helicopter crash in 1986.
Raymond and Peter Mickleberg made four unsuccessful attempts to have their convictions overturned - three appeals to the Court of Criminal Appeal, at which Mr Lewandowski and Mr Hancock testified, and an appeal to the High Court.
Mr McGinty said Mr Lewandowski had admitted that he and Mr Hancock had fabricated confessions from the brothers, and had lied at the trial and the appeals.
He had also admitted that Peter Mickelberg was stripped naked and beaten by interviewing officers during the investigation.
Mr Lewandowski had said he had not come forward earlier because he had not wanted to cross Mr Hancock, who died in a car bombing in what police believe was a payback killing by Gypsy Joker bikie gang members after the murder of a gang member in 2000.
Mr McGinty said Mr Lewandowski's belated admission - if it were truthful - would strike at the heart of public confidence in the justice system.
"This is one of the most high-profile police investigations we have seen in Western Australia, and if it was found that convictions were obtained by police fabricating evidence, the ramifications are enormous."
Mr McGinty has referred Mr Lewandowski's affidavit to the royal commission into alleged police corruption, which is due to recommence hearings on July 1.
The robbery on June 22, 1982, was the most audacious ever staged in Perth - an ingenious swindle which saw 49 gold bars spirited out of the impregnable Mint to a mystery hiding place.
Although the evidence against the Mickelbergs was compelling - in particular Ray Mickelberg's fingerprint on one of three fake cheques used to pay for the gold - the brothers insisted from the start that the police had framed them.
They said the detectives, led by Don Hancock, had lied at their trial in the District Court, had fabricated confessions by all three, and had planted the damning fingerprint.
It would have been easy for the police to get hold of a mould of Ray's finger, they said. One of his hobbies was casting hands, in brass, plastic, rubber and perspex.
There were about 20 of the hands in his Marmion Beach home when the police first arrived, and several were taken away for inspection.
In 1989, 55 kilograms of gold pellets, said to have been from the swindle, were found outside a Perth television station, accompanied by a note protesting the Mickelberg brothers' innocence and claiming that a prominent Perth businessman was behind the swindle.
June 11 2002
Running for justice ... one of the three Mickelberg brothers, Peter, chases the then CIB chief, Don Hancock, down the street after losing an appeal in the Perth Supreme Court in February 1999. Photo: WA News
A former police officer has admitted that he and another detective lied and faked evidence during the trial of the Mickelberg brothers for the Perth Mint gold swindle 20 years ago.
The West Australian Attorney-General, Jim McGinty, said yesterday that Anthony Lewandowski had given an affidavit to the Director of Public Prosecutions admitting he and the former CIB chief Don Hancock, who was murdered last year, had lied and fabricated evidence to convict the Mickelbergs.
Raymond, Peter and Brian Mickelberg were convicted in 1983 of swindling $650,000 worth of gold from the mint.
Raymond, a former SAS soldier, was released from jail in 1991 after serving eight years of a 20-year sentence. Peter served six years of a 14-year sentence.
Brian Mickelberg had his conviction overturned after nine months in jail. He died in a helicopter crash in 1986.
Raymond and Peter Mickleberg made four unsuccessful attempts to have their convictions overturned - three appeals to the Court of Criminal Appeal, at which Mr Lewandowski and Mr Hancock testified, and an appeal to the High Court.
Mr McGinty said Mr Lewandowski had admitted that he and Mr Hancock had fabricated confessions from the brothers, and had lied at the trial and the appeals.
He had also admitted that Peter Mickelberg was stripped naked and beaten by interviewing officers during the investigation.
Mr Lewandowski had said he had not come forward earlier because he had not wanted to cross Mr Hancock, who died in a car bombing in what police believe was a payback killing by Gypsy Joker bikie gang members after the murder of a gang member in 2000.
Mr McGinty said Mr Lewandowski's belated admission - if it were truthful - would strike at the heart of public confidence in the justice system.
"This is one of the most high-profile police investigations we have seen in Western Australia, and if it was found that convictions were obtained by police fabricating evidence, the ramifications are enormous."
Mr McGinty has referred Mr Lewandowski's affidavit to the royal commission into alleged police corruption, which is due to recommence hearings on July 1.
The robbery on June 22, 1982, was the most audacious ever staged in Perth - an ingenious swindle which saw 49 gold bars spirited out of the impregnable Mint to a mystery hiding place.
Although the evidence against the Mickelbergs was compelling - in particular Ray Mickelberg's fingerprint on one of three fake cheques used to pay for the gold - the brothers insisted from the start that the police had framed them.
They said the detectives, led by Don Hancock, had lied at their trial in the District Court, had fabricated confessions by all three, and had planted the damning fingerprint.
It would have been easy for the police to get hold of a mould of Ray's finger, they said. One of his hobbies was casting hands, in brass, plastic, rubber and perspex.
There were about 20 of the hands in his Marmion Beach home when the police first arrived, and several were taken away for inspection.
In 1989, 55 kilograms of gold pellets, said to have been from the swindle, were found outside a Perth television station, accompanied by a note protesting the Mickelberg brothers' innocence and claiming that a prominent Perth businessman was behind the swindle.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network
OPEN EMAIL, TO BLOW THE WHISTLE ON,
Brian Scott Palliser, and Partners at hill-lee [at] chch.planet.org.nz
An alleged, practised and an accomplished liar.
Brian Scott Palliser. BA. LL.B., AFNZIM, ACIT (Notary Public)
http://www.whitepages.co.nz/quick/search?key=Brian+Palliser.&lkey= Christchurch.&loc=ALL&x=24&y=20
http://www.yellowpages.co.nz/quick/search?key=Hill-Lee%26Scott&lkey=Christchurch&stype=&search.x=23&search.y=25
Background: On the 13.9.1999, at about 4 pm AUS time a New Zealander Mr. Graham/Graeme Underwood receives a phone call at the Emus Motel, from Brian of 'Horton & Bidwill' Christchurch Lawyers. Underwood since claims 'I am from Christchurch, and have never heard of Horton & Bidwill being lawyers in Christchurch’. An x Tip Top Ice Cream driver claims that Horton & Bidwill were general carries in Christchurch during the fifties and sixties.
The Horton & Bidwill usage, was a word association try on which failed, although extremely, exceptionally cunning. Throw in a name hoping to jog a person’s memory.
Brian your enquiry 'was Julie about regarding a fax she had sent you'. A phone account will be sufficient proof that Brian, and Brian Palliser is one in the same person. Not anticipated any other person in the office would have impersonated you.
Graham/Graeme Underwood redirected you Brian to Pam the overall manager at the Classic. That evening Pam receives a call from Brian of Horton & Bidwill. Christchurch lawyers. Question, ‘Was Julie providing a fax service for H-W, and was there a relationship between them'.
Days later Pam receives a further phone call, the caller claiming, 'it is Scotland Yard here', inquiring about H-W. Incidentally, he has never visited the Classic Motel.
If the caller had said, 'the family’ meaning the Mafia, would make one reach for a scotch. The incoming caller numbers were not displayed, so an off shores call.
Since your behaviour, and if a dozen or so faxes sent to Hill-Lee & Scott in New Zealand constitute Harassment, ‘American slang’ plus an arrival arrest, then it follows; your letter to legal aid dated 20 September 1999, was to besmirch the person H-W.
Your email 18.12.2000 at 11:21 am was in response to an account, is actionable by your identification of H-W in the country of receipt. Quote in part ‘We will be notifying the service provider about the communication’ etc. An account, is now only a communication.
In forty years of reading about human garbage, yet to read where a solicitor has written to a legal aid outfit, attempting to conspire and frustrate, if any applications for legal aid were forthcoming. We await the outcome of a huge legal case that manly concerns the news media at this stage. I understand you TT NZD 98 thousand off shore for your client. Aiding and abetting what you referred to in your letter.
Where such a revelation made in their country, would be deemed, an invasion of their privacy. To breach the privacy of an individual is inherently unfair to that person as no court action was underway and published. We are not bound by any such internet constraints, against guttersnipes of our choosing. Brian of Horton & Bidwill Christchurch lawyers, phoned the Emus Motel on the 13th October 1999.
Julie had faxed Hill-Lee & Scott on behalf of a client. The fax machine used was a business link and not a motel owned fax... Header usually 333, just ask Jack Cowey at,
http://www.whitepages.co.nz/quick/search?page=search&key=Dimension+Colour+Copy&lkey=Christchurch.&loc=ALL&x=24&y=23
A typed copy from the phone records to Hill-Lee & Scott.
6433790392 FaxStreem Calls-Itemized Rate Everyday
14 Sep 99 12:13 pm- $ 0.49
16 Sep 99 07:30 am- 1.10
29 Sep 99 07:44 am- 0.78
01 Oct 99 03:10 am- 0.57
Maurice Gordon Teague visited the Emus Motel on the 6/9/1999. Was just prior to the above date, of the ‘Brian’ of Horton & Bidwill of Christchurch lawyers call on the 13th Oct at 4 pm AUS. Since your email claiming aliases, in another country was located at a web cafes drop tray, this page was already in the public arena, is now circulating. You have proof, from a court judgement, or just an UNMITIGATED fabricator.
Maurice Teague threatens the Emus motel manager, and may have passed on the motel name to Brian Palliser. Your first wife walked with NZD 50,000.00, who saw through you and in to your pocket. Vic warned you to stay away from his inheritance. What did you do, you went and finished of the legal matters for Teague. Guess someone in the office was more knowable than those ‘dogs’ at the revenue department, and slid something past, as it worked for M & M Teague. We both know this score.
There was an email, Hill-lee & Scott to Interpol, was read but lost before downloading, taken as a forgery and frightener. You might as well stand on the beach and tell the waves not to come in.
Palliser you breached the conflict of interest by failing to advise your client, you gave skiing lessons to the Teague's daughter. Holding hands, just look at it 'as thick as thieves'.
A fax setting out your motel phone calls, from the USA to Twin Towns typing then on to Hill-Lee & Scott. A reply to this web service from Hill-Lee & Scott. ‘If any more faxes are received, a formal complaint will be laid with the telecommunications company’. A great pity Vic knocks on the wrong door, and throws away $10,000.00 on your “rats-arse” firm for nothing. Palliser, when you phoned to check on the fax senders, you were in fact working on the harassment fraud.
You certainly have displayed low cunning and in addition, should not to be trusted. A manipulating thug style type. What ever you were injecting, yourself with at work, increase the dose substantially seeing that it will be your only defence. A detective warns Vic 'not to contact Brian Palliser's wife' but we shall. The detectives order to Vic, ties it all in together.
Guess there was, some fear of a reprisal over 'was there a relationship' call to the Classic motel. As read, your only interest was to tell your friends at the central station, a wiretap might be fruitful. A typist gave out the easy way to track. http://www.whitepages.co.nz
It is noted, neither M G Teague chartered accountant of Clarkville, nor their company Mr Mushroom Ltd is phone listed, but his twin brother Ivon with an o Teague is.
http://www.whitepages.co.nz/quick/search?key=Ivon+Teague&lkey=++++Christchurch.&loc=ALL&x=19&y=18
Brian Palliser there is a very fine legal line between an irresistible impulse and an impulse to be resisted. Brian Scott Palliser you have crossed over this line. Pack your bags and leave, as you are not a fit person to be a Notary Public and to practise law. Summing-up, a police informer, nark, stoolie, acted with malice ...
Spam or junk mail is not harassment because internet users have to opt out rather than opt in. An anti-spam activist Glenn Barry said the lawsuit threatened ‘the right to complain and the right to block junk’. A company is suing Mr.J J McNicol for making unfounded complaints by exposing them on the web.
The New Zealand laws do not apply to e-mail from off shore. The sum sought is $43,000.00 Legal fees could reach $US 100,000.00. This is why “stalker” MG & ML Teague was looking for the sender of mail originating inside NZ. Palliser your credibility is zilch.
You Palliser were working hand in glove with Maurice Gordon & Maude Linklater Teague “ swindlers police stoolies and stalkers, practised and accomplished liars’’ and the police.
Will there be a professional collect. If Vic misses his father's funeral, it will be an interesting out come for you if a ‘wet boy' is sent in. Always makes commercial sense to tidy up ones affairs, do you not think.
Faithfully, Z Risk.
27th May 2002
OUR SECURITY FOR WHAT IT IS WORTH.
Use an Internet Cafe and prepare your floppy disk. Use a coin payphone if using another country. The person uses a public library; a computer, with 20 minutes left before the hour, if the library runs on hourly cycle usage.
Alternatively, use a gas station or shopping complex, use a freestanding email service. Unfortunately, they do not copy and paste. On the other hand, write e-mails on a personal organiser. Send a message through cyber space via a mobile phone to a host computer, which in turn can send a message to their destinations. If a computer returns an email by not accepting specific words, just space the letters and resend.
Noted that Gordon Dollimore accountant and 'back yard hick typist, police stoolie’ has changed from BG Services [in the past not Goods Service Tax registered] to BG Services Ltd at 98 Middleton Rd Christchurch Ph Fax + 64-3-348-0535. Voluntarily or an Inland Revenue Service audit.
Julie Newton from the Inland Revenue Service is also a 'police informer'. julie.newton [at] ird.govt.nz
Police informer High Court Sheriff ‘powder poof’. Peter Fantham c/o helen.vermeulen [at] courts.govt.nz End.
A code picked up by a link. Q3c4n3wentDHclcnpropcev5e5 mm0gerwerw w wmgtmvgfsjhitconcitdgkldwcwdfjkdxdaed.Gfjodiormkjierer 11 wnye0wrfiogfrio+15rslwg0iotrwpCTRnehfkuas.fuenacrtbaklncnadvtlcvj.
WORD COUNTS 2,792. 7th September 2001 02:49AM.
L SAYER.
Tuesday, 11 June 2002. Unfortunately, death smiles on us all. All one can do is smile back. When will you smile Brian?
Mir ist etwas zu Ohren gekommen.
Eine relativ aussergewöhnliche Gerüchteküche,
aus der man mir ein schwerverdauliches Süppchen vorgesetzt hat,
ist der Grund meiner Mail.
Unappetitlich ist gar kein Ausdruck!
Ist es möglich auf funktechnischem Wege(in welchen Frequenzbereichen?)
jemanden zu beeinflussen oder zu manipulieren?
Oder sogar zu schikanieren und terrorisieren?
Unter dem Motto:"Einen am Sender?Nich ganz alleine?
Kleine Mannim Ohr?Falsche Wellenlänge?Bohnen in den Ohren?
Auf den Zahn gefühlt(Amalgam)?Mal unverbindlich reinhören?
Der Pullacher Wanzentanz?
Ist das Spinnerei?Das geht doch gar nicht,oder?
Und wenn wie sieht das ethisch moralisch aus?
Zur technischen Seite der Sache gibt es zwar Berichte und Webseiten:
Totalitaer,de - Die Waffe gegen die Kritik
http://www.raum-und-zeit.com/Aktuell/Brummton.htm
http://www.fosar-bludorf.com/Tempelhof/
http://jya.com/haarp.htm
http://www.zeitenschrift.at/magazin/zs_24_15/1_mikrowaffen.htm
http://www.bse-plus.de/d/doc/lbrief/lbmincontr.htm
http://home.nexgo.de/kraven/bigb/big3.html
http://w3.nrl.navy.mil/projects/haarp/index.html
http://cryptome.org/
http://www.raven1.net/ravindex.htm
http://www.calweb.com/~welsh/
http://www.cahe.org/
http://www.parascope.com/ds/mkultra0.htm
http://www.trufax.org/menu/mind.html
http://www.trufax.org/menu/elect.html
http://mindcontrolforum.com/
http://www.trufax.org/menu/elect.html
usw.
usw.
usw.
,aber,das kann doch nicht sein,das soetwas gemacht wird,oder?
Eine Menschenrechtsverletzung sonder gleichen!?!
Ist es möglich,durch Präparation,der
Ohren und im Zusammenspiel mit eventuell vorhandenem Zahnersatz?
Mit relativ einfacher Funktechnik??
In diesem Land?Hier und heute???
Unter welchen Motiven?
Wo ist eigentlich die Abteilung 5 des BND und des Verfassungsschutzes?
Kann es sein,daß es Leute gibt,die dem BND/Verfassungsschutz,auf
funktechnischem Wege
permanent einen Situationsbericht abliefern,ohne es selbst zu merken,im
Kindesalter machbar gemacht??
Werden durch solche inoffiziellen Mitarbeiter,beim BND und
Verfassungsschutz,nach Stasimanier,
Informationen von und über,rein theoretisch, jeden
Bundesbürger,gesammelt?
Gibt es dann noch ein Recht auf Privatsphere? Wer kontrolliert
eigentlich
den BND,MAD und Verfassungsschutz auf Unterwanderung???
In der Mail geht es mir eigentlich um die Frage,ob es kriminellen
Elementen,
aus dem Motiv der Bereicherung,oder Gruppierungen aus ideologischen
Motiven,
möglich ist ,sich Wissen und Technik anzueignen,die zu anderen Zeiten,
aus anderen Motiven(Westfernsehen?),entwickelt wurde.
Und stellt der technische Wissensstand,
der der Allgemeinheit bekannt ist wirklich das Ende der Fahnenstange
dar?
Ist es denn nicht kriminellen Elementen genauso möglich,
ich sage das jetzt mal verharmlost und verniedlichend,
einzelne Personen oder Gruppen mit relativ einfachen Mitteln,
aus welchen Motiven auch immer, auszuspionieren?
Und stellt diese "Ausspioniererei" nicht einen erheblichen Eingriff in
die
Privatsphäre dar?
Ist es möglich einzelne Personen oder Gruppen,
eine Akzeptans einer gewissen Öffentlichkeit(suggeriert?),
die z.B. mit Hilfe von Internetseiten,wie zum Beispiel dem
"Pranger"geschaffen werden könnte,
mal vorausgestzt,zu terroriesieren und oder zu schikanieren,
und das in aller (suggerierten)Öffentlichkeit?Haben die Leute die da am
Pranger,
oder auf irgendeiner anderen Seite verunglimpft,oder gar Verleumdet
werden,
eigentlich eine Chance zur Gegenöffentlichkeit?Ist das nicht Rufmord?
Vor einigen Jahren bin ich per Zufall auf die Seite "Der Pranger"
gestoßen,
damals lief das noch nicht unter dem Deckmantel der Partnervermittlung.
Können sich einzelne Personen,oder Interessengemeinschaften,
aus reinem Selbstzweck,solcher Seiten bedienen,
um unter dem Deckmantel einer fragwürdigen Zivilkourage,
durch anzetteln irgendwelcher Hetzkampagnen,eigene,
ganz persöhnliche Interessen durchsetzen?
Können solche Seiten zur Koordination von kriminellen machenschaften
dienen?
Die Frage,ist es Möglichkeit oder Unmöglichkeit,technisch und
gesellschaftlich,
einzelne Personen,oder auch Gruppierungen,aus einer
kriminellen/ideologischen
Energei heraus,zu manipulieren oder zu beeinflussen,terrorisieren oder
zu
schickanieren,und zwar gezielt.
Zielgruppenmanipulation durch Massenmedien sind alltägliche
Manipulation,
der mansich,mehr oder weniger,entziehen kann.
Wird das Recht auf Privatsphäre,schleichend,tiefenpsychologisch,
durch Sendungen,wie,zum Beispiel "Big brother",untergraben?
Sollte bei einem der Angemailten ein gewisser Wissensstand zum Thema
vorhanden sein,
wäre ich über Hinweise zum Thema froh.
Auf der Suche nach Antworten auf meine Fragen
maile ich verschiedene Adressen aus dem Internet an,
und hoffe aufkonstruktive Antworten und Kritiken.
Über einen Besuch auf der Seite
<http://hometown.aol.de/reinerhohn38259/homepage/index.html>
würde ich mich freuen.
Sollten Sie von mir mehrfach angeschrieben worden
sein,so bitte ich Sie,mir dies zu entschuldigen,
das war nicht beabsichtigt.
Der Grund für meine Anonymität ist die Tatsache,
daß bei derlei Fragenstellerei,
verständlicherweise,schnell der Ruf nach der Psychatrie laut wird.
Was auch Methode hat(ist).
Sollten Sie die Mail als Belästigung empfinden,
möchte ich mich hiermit dafür entschuldigen!
Big brother is watching you?
Excuse please the disturbance!
Me something came to ears.
A relatively unusual rumor kitchen,
from which one put forward to me a heavydigestible soup,
is the reason of my Mail.
Unappetizing is no printout!
Is it possible on radio Wege(in for which frequency ranges?) to
influence or manipulate someone?
Terrorize or to even chicane and?
Under the Motto:"Einen at the Sender?Nich quite alone?
Small Mannim Ohr?Fal Wellenlaenge?Bohnen in the ears?
On the tooth clean-hear gefuehlt(Amalgam)?Mal witthout obligation?
The Pullacher bug wanzentanz?
Isn't the Spinnerei?Das goes nevertheless at all, or?
And if as looks ethicalally morally?
For the technical page of the thing there is to report and web page:
Totalitaer,de - Die Waffe gegen die Kritik
http://www.raum-und-zeit.com/Aktuell/Brummton.htm
http://www.fosar-bludorf.com/Tempelhof/
http://jya.com/haarp.htm
http://www.zeitenschrift.at/magazin/zs_24_15/1_mikrowaffen.htm
http://www.bse-plus.de/d/doc/lbrief/lbmincontr.htm
http://home.nexgo.de/kraven/bigb/big3.html
http://w3.nrl.navy.mil/projects/haarp/index.html
http://cryptome.org/
http://www.raven1.net/ravindex.htm
http://www.calweb.com/~welsh/
http://www.cahe.org/
http://www.parascope.com/ds/mkultra0.htm
http://www.trufax.org/menu/mind.html
http://www.trufax.org/menu/elect.html
http://mindcontrolforum.com/
http://www.trufax.org/menu/elect.html
usw.
usw.
usw.
but, that cannot be nevertheless, which is made soetwas, or?
A violation of human rights resemble special!?!
Is it possible, by preparation, the ears and in interaction with
possibly available artificial dentures?
With relatively simple radio engineering??
In this Land?Hier and today???
Under which motives?
Where is the department actually 5 of the BND and the protection of the
constitution?
Can it be that there are people, which deliver the Federal
Intelligence Service/protection of the constitution, on radio way
permanently a situation report, without noticing it, in the infancy
feasiblly made?
By such unofficial coworkers, with the BND and protection of the
constitution, after Stasimanier, is information collected of and
over,purely theoretically, each Federal citizen?
Is there then still another right to Privatsphere?
Who actually checks the BND, WAD and protection of the constitution for
infiltration???
Into the Mail actually concerns it to me the question whether it
criminal items, from which motive of enriching, or groupings from
ideological motives is possible, to acquire itself knowledge and
technique which were developed at other times, from other
Motiven(Westfernsehen?).And does the technical knowledge status place,
to
that the public admits is really the end of the flag bar?
Is it not to criminal items just as possible, I legend that now times
played down and does nice-end, individual persons or groups with
relatively simple means, to spy from whatever motives always?
And doesn't this " Ausspioniererei " represent a substantial
intervention into the privatsphaere?
It is possible individual persons or groups, one acceptance to of a
certain Oeffentlichkeit(suggeriert?), e.g. by Internet pages, how for
example the " Pranger"geschaffen could become, times vorausgestzt, to
terroriesieren and or chicane, and in everything (the people
suggerierten)Oeffentlichkeit?Haben there at the Pranger, or on any
other page to be reviled, or slandered, actually a chance to the
Gegenoeffentlichkeit?Ist that not character assassination?
Some years ago I am by coincidence the page " the Pranger "
encountered, at that time ran not yet under the cover of the partner
switching.Itself can individual persons, or communities of interests,
from
pure self purpose, such pages to serve, over under the cover of a
doubtful
Zivilkourage, through plot any rushing campaigns, own, quite
persoehnliche interests to intersperse?
Can such pages serve for the co-ordination of criminal machinations?
The question, is it possibility or impossibility, technically and
socially, individual persons, or also groupings of manipulating or of
influencing from an criminal/ideological Energei, terrorizes or to
schickanieren, directed.Target group manipulation by mass media are
everyday manipulation, from which, more or less, can extract itself.
Does the right to privatsphaere, creeping, by transmissions become
deep psychological, how, for example " Big undermine brother"?
If the Angemailten should be available a certain knowledge status to
the topic with one, I would be glad over notes to the topic
On the search for responses to my questions maile I different
addresses from the Internet on, and hope up-constructional responses
and criticisms.Over an attendance on the page
<http://hometown.aol.de/reinerhohn38259/homepage/index.html>
wuerde I are pleased.If you should have been written down by me several
times, then please
I you to excuse me this that was not intended.
The reason for my anonymity is the fact that with such
Fragenstellerei, understandably, fast after the call the Psychatrie
loud becomes. Which also method hat(ist).
If you should feel the Mail as annoyance, I would like to apologize
hereby for it! Big is watching you?
Veuillez excuser le dérangement!
Moi quelque chose concernant des oreilles est venu.
Une cuisine de bruit relativement inhabituelle, dont on m'a placé un
Sueppchen schwerverdauliches devant, est la raison de mes Mail.Aucune
expression n'est peu appétissante!
Il est possible sur un Wege(in funktechnischem pour quelles réponses
fréquentielles?) quelqu'un influencer ou manipuler?
Ou même schikanieren et terroriser?
Sous le Motto:"Einen au Sender?Nich tout à fait seulement?
Petits Mannim Ohr?Falsche Wellenlaenge?Bohnen dans les oreilles?
Sur la dent gefuehlt(Amalgam)?Mal non contraignant reinhoeren?
Le Pullacher Wanzentanz?
Le Spinnerei?Das n'est-il quand même pas du tout va, ou?
Et si comme cela paraît éthiquement moralement?
Au côté technique de la chose, il y a certes des rapports et des
Webseiten:
Totalitaer,de - Die Waffe gegen die Kritik
http://www.raum-und-zeit.com/Aktuell/Brummton.htm
http://www.fosar-bludorf.com/Tempelhof/
http://jya.com/haarp.htm
http://www.zeitenschrift.at/magazin/zs_24_15/1_mikrowaffen.htm
http://www.bse-plus.de/d/doc/lbrief/lbmincontr.htm
http://home.nexgo.de/kraven/bigb/big3.html
http://w3.nrl.navy.mil/projects/haarp/index.html
http://cryptome.org/
http://www.raven1.net/ravindex.htm
http://www.calweb.com/~welsh/
http://www.cahe.org/
http://www.parascope.com/ds/mkultra0.htm
http://www.trufax.org/menu/mind.html
http://www.trufax.org/menu/elect.html
http://mindcontrolforum.com/
http://www.trufax.org/menu/elect.html
usw.
usw.
usw.
toutefois qui ne peut quand même pas être qui on fait soetwas, ou?
Une violation des droits de l'homme séparer ressembler!?!
Il est possible, par la préparation, des oreilles et dans l'effet
avec
la prothèse dentaire éventuellement existante?
Avec la technique de radio relativement simple??
Dans ce Land?Hier et aujourd'hui
Sous quels motifs?
Où le département est-il en réalité 5 du BND et de la protection
d'constitution?
peut il être qu'il y a les personnes qui livrent en permanence le
BND/Verfassungsschutz, de manière funktechnischem un rapport de
situation,
sans le remarquer le -même , dans l'enfance rendu possible??
Par de tels collaborateurs officieux, avec le BND et la protection
d'constitution, après manière, des informations sont-elles rassemblées
et
plus de, purement théoriquement, chaque citoyen allemand?
Il y a alors encore un droit à des Privatsphere? Qui contrôle en
réalité le BND, mad et protection d'constitution sur une infiltration???
Il s'agit en réalité dans le Mail me la question de savoir si lui
éléments
criminels, dont le motif de l'enrichissement, ou de groupements des
motifs
idéologiques, possible de s'acquérir le savoir et la technique qui à
d'autres temps, est autre MotivenEt place-t-il le savoir technique dont
le
public vraiment la fin la barre de drapeau a connaissance ?
Il n'est pas donc exactement la même chose possible pour des éléments
criminels, moi cela maintenant fois verharmlost et minimisant une
légende,
personnes ou groupes particuliers avec des moyens relativement simples,
de
quels motifs aussi toujours, auszuspionieren?(Westfernsehen?), a été
développé.
Et ce "Ausspioniererei" ne représente-t-il pas une intervention
considérable dans la vie privée?
Il est possible personnes ou groupes particuliers, pour certain
Oeffentlichkeit(suggeriert?), celui p. ex. à l'aide des côtés Internet,
comme par exemple "le Pranger"geschaffen pourrait, fois vorausgestzt
schikanieren terroriesieren et ou ,
et qui toute (suggerierten)Oeffentlichkeit?Haben les personnes ceux là,
ou
d'un autre côté verunglimpft, ou on ne pas calomnie, en réalité une
chance au Gegenoeffentlichkeit?Ist qui meurtre d'appel?
Il y a quelques années, je ne suis pas encore par hasard sur le côté
"celui" poussé, fonctionnais alors cela sous la couche de pont de
l'entremise partenaire.
Des personnes particulières, ou des communautés d'intérêts le
peuventelles, d'un autobut pur, de tels côtés servent, sous la couche de
pont d'un Zivilkourage douteux, tracent plus de des campagnes de
précipitation, propres intérêts tout à fait persoehnliche entremêlent?
De tels côtés peuvent-ils servir à la coordination des manoeuvres
criminelles?
Question, est lui possibilité ou impossibilité de manipuler ou
d'influencer techniquement et socialement, particulière personnes, ou
aussi groupements, criminelle/ponctuel idéologique Energei dehors, ,
terroriser ou schickanieren, et ce.Une manipulation de groupe cible par
des masse-médias être la manipulation quotidienne qui peut extraire
mansich, plus ou moins.
Le droit à la vie privée est-il miné, ramment, tiefenpsychologisch,
par
des envois, comme, par exemple "des Big brother"?
Avec un les Angemailten si un certain savoir devait exister sur le
thème, je serais heureux sur des indications sur le thème.Sur la
recherche
des réponses à mes questions je différentes adresses maile d'Internet
dessus, et espère réponses et critiques aufkonstruktive.
Sur une visite du côté
http://hometown.aol.de/reinerhohn38259/homepage/index.html>
je me réjouirais.
Si vous deviez avoir été écrit à différentes reprises par moi, je
vous
demande de m'excuser cela qui n'était pas envisagé.
La raison de mon anonymat est le fait qu'avec telle des Fragenstellerei,
l'appel devient ce qui est bien compréhensible, rapidement bruyant après
le Psychatrie.
Ce que la méthode a également (ist).
Si vous deviez ressentir les Mail comme un ennui, je voudrais
m'excuser
par ceci pour cela!
Big brother is watching you?
June 11 2002
Disgraced former federal MP Andrew Theophanous was today denounced as a greedy, lying bully, who had betrayed Australians' trust, as he was sentenced to a minimum three-and-a-half years in jail.
Victorian County Court judge Graeme Crossley imposed a maximum sentence of six years for bribery, conspiracy and defrauding the commonwealth - crimes a jury convicted him of on May 22.
Dressed in a dark, double-breasted suit, a clearly distressed Theophanous maintained his composure as he left the dock flanked by two prison officers.
The offences were committed between mid-1998 and January 1999 and centred on his dealings with Chinese nationals seeking his help with visa applications, and other immigration matters.
Judge Crossley said Theophanous, 56, had for many years held a passionate belief in the implementation of a liberal or open immigration policy.
But at some point he came to see that given his position as an MP and his prominence in the political immigration debate, there was an opportunity to make money.
Theophanous had been corrupted by the temptation to profit, the judge said.
"Your primary purpose clearly came to be the corrupt enrichment of yourself at the expense in terms of both money and the personal reputations of others," Judge Crossley said.
"You lied without hesitation to senior public servants and at least one federal minister (Immigration Minister Philip Ruddock).
"You lied to parliament, you abused your power for money and even sexual gratification at the expense of one of those you were purporting to help."
The court heard the former Labor MP had sought sexual favours from a Chinese woman anxious to extend her visa to stay in Australia.
Theophanous had offered to discount the woman's fee to $5,000 if she agreed to have sex with him.
The judge said Theophanous "acted like a bully" and had no hesitation in attempting to harm the careers of honest public servants.
Corruption, the judge said, was like a cancer and it was vital that Australians trusted the honesty and integrity of those they elected to govern the country.
"That you have breached that hight trust is an aggravating factor of very considerable significance indeed," Judge Crossley said.
Theophanous will appeal his conviction and sentence.
June 11 2002.
Investment schemes promoted by a man appointed court jester by the king of Tonga have cost the tiny Pacific nation a quarter of it's annual revenues, the goverment has admitted.
The government said in a statement that its Tonga Trust Fund had begun legal proceedings to recover the money.
"During the last 10 months there has been considerable controversy and public debate over the question of whether the money has been lost or not," the statement said.
But it said audit investigations in the United States had revealed that the "funds ... were confirmed to be lost" and "legal action has been commenced in the US against three persons and six companies".
It did not name the defendants.
"Some of the grounds set out in the court action relate to failure to pay or default in payment on a promissory note, fraud, conspiracy, aiding and abetting fraud, negligent misrepresentation, material misrepresentation and omissions in sale of security and fraudulent conversion."
Until now Tonga, one of the world's poorest states and suffering a deteriorating economy, has only said the money could not be traced. The 50 million pa'anga ($A35 million) lost in the schemes represents 40 per cent of the government's annual revenue.
The fund was set up in the early 1990s by the royal family to keep the proceeds of the sale of Tongan citizenships offshore and out of control of the government.
Eventually it made around $A46 million.
The money was in an ordinary Bank of America cheque account when a bank employee, Jesse Bogdonoff, convinced the king he had a better investment strategy. This included putting the money into the questionable viatical industry, which "bets" on the early deaths of terminally ill patients.
(In a viatical settlement transaction, people with terminal illnesses assign their life insurance policies to viatical settlement companies in exchange for a percentage of the policy's face value.
The viatical settlement company, in turn, may sell the policy to a third-party investor. The viatical settlement company or the investor becomes the beneficiary to the policy, pays the premiums, and collects the face value of the policy after the original policyholder dies.)
Most of the money went into a Nevada company, Millennium Asset Management, which was engaged in viaticals and promised a 30 per cent annual fixed return. Smaller amounts went into Trinity Flywheel Power, which Bogdonoff owned, and into a small dotcom company.
For his troubles, Bogdonoff persuaded the king to officially declare him court jester.
Today's government statement said the Attorney General and Justice Minister 'Aisea Taumoepeau would go to the United States to liaise with the law firm handling the court action in San Francisco.
Last week Bogdonoff, 47, told the Mercury News newspaper in San Francisco that he had been cooperating with the Tongan kingdom over the money.
"The fact is I had no intention to defraud or conspire with anybody to defraud anyone," he told the newspaper. "I chose the wrong company but learned that after the fact. I gave the best advice I had, but in hindsight, which is always 20-20, I regret picking the company I did."
The newspaper quoted the lawsuit as saying the "defendants paid themselves and their friends and business associates millions of dollars in charges, commissions and fees, which they did not disclose to the (Trust Fund)."
Two cabinet ministers have been forced out of office over the scandal.